Talk:Uses of radioactivity in oil and gas wells

Concerns about environmental impact
The setion named 'Concerns about environmental impact' is explicitly deals with the United States issues and as such it creates a POV-fork for the Environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing in the United States article. I propose to move and merge this section there. Beagel (talk) 05:07, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that it should be moved. It also needs summarising in encyclopedic language. Martin Hogbin (talk) 10:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ As this information was already included in Environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing in the United States, I just removed it from here. No encyclopaedic information was lost. Beagel (talk) 09:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Reverted text
I reverted recently added text because that subject was already covered, withthe same reference. See the last paragraph of the section. 10:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Should this article be moved?
I think this article should be moved to something more general and explanatory, for example 'The use of radiotracers in the oil and gas industry'. Any thoughts?

I have just realised that we need somewhere to put the NORM found in flowback. It might be best not to put that here in fact. There is no real connection between NORM found in the flowback and the use of radiotracers, except that they both involve radioactivity. Martin Hogbin (talk) 20:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I think the best place for the NORM would be Environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing so that we could use this page for an explanation of how radiotracing is used in the industry. Martin Hogbin (talk) 20:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Re title would 'Uses of radioactivity in oil and gas wells' be better cos 'radiotracers' does not include logging sources. Agree re the placing of NORM, its a waste rather than something deliberately used. I think that the logging issue should get top billing as AFAIK the use of these tracers is pretty rare? All wells are logged with sources however. I worked for 12 years and never came across radiotracers tho I have heard they can be used to identify where frac fluids and cement have gone. That may be something to do with what I was doing however. If you have time MH, could you look over the little 'difficulty' in the editing of the Environment lead please? I have had a lot of well sourced relevant stuff reverted. Kennywpara (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, 'Uses of radioactivity in oil and gas wells' would be a better title. Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I just reordered it, and changed some intro wording to reflect that, and called it 'Radioactivity' in the sidebar. It didnt want to accept its name being changed! I think this is OK. Comments? Kennywpara (talk) 15:39, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have moved it to your suggested title. Martin Hogbin (talk) 20:36, 21 November 2014 (UTC)