Radio at microwave frequencies (like light) are line-of-sight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_repeater

Getting some snow up here. The elk and deer will be coming down. Put those tags to good use! Stop by if you are in the area.

Rick

I found one EPA study with positive results, a 2010 study in Wyoming. Even those results were minimal: “A number of nearby drinking water and stock wells have low level detections of organic
compounds such as phenols, benzene, and naphthalene. Seventeen of 19 drinking water wells sampled show detections of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons. Two drinking water wells sampled in January 2010 had constituents detected by EPA that exceeded a primary drinking water standard. One well, which was not being used for drinking water during the sampling event, exceeded the primary drinking water standards for lead and phthalate. The other drinking water well exceeded one standard for nitrates. This well owner also had the same exceedance during the Phase 1 sampling and was notified at each incident and was provided with assistance. Four pesticides were detected in 4 private wells at very low concentrations, less than 10 parts per trillion. EPA was able to confirm and quantify the concentrations of some of the Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) found during our March 2009 sampling event. Eleven wells were confirmed to have 2-butoxyethanol phosphate, or 2-BEP, at very low concentrations (less than 5 ppb). The compound 2- BEP is not a constituent typically found in drinking water wells. A USGS national groundwater study using similar detection limits detected 2-BEP in only 1 of around 200 wells sampled. Methane identified in 7 drinking water wells was found to be of thermogenic origin, meaning it originated within the natural gas reservoir. One drinking water well showed methane resulting from microbial activity, known as biogenic methane. Adamantane compounds were also confirmed in 4 drinking wells at low concentrations. Adamantane compounds are commonly associated with hydrocarbon production fluids, and can be found in other products. EPA also performed analysis of the bacteria present in groundwater at some well locations. This
information is indicative of the level of microbial activity in groundwater. The microbial organisms that were identified are not organisms that are harmful to health, but could lead to concerns with odor.”

Finally, in June of this year, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology studied the issue and concluded, “The environmental impacts of shale development are challenging but manageable. Shale development requires large-scale fracturing of the shale formation to induce economic production rates. There has been concern that these fractures can also penetrate shallow freshwater zones and contaminate them with fracturing fluid, but there is no evidence that this is occurring. There is, however, evidence of natural gas migration into freshwater zones in some areas, most likely as a result of substandard well completion practices by a few operators.” In other words, operators that are failing to comply with existing standards, that apparently MIT and EPA deem adequate.

On this issue, Bret, you are quite simply wrong.