Forum menu
Fracking could be the most environmentally sound way of sourcing that gas.
Base your opinion on science and information not the Daily Mail and some NIMBYs
Totally agree with you it is stupid to rule things out. But since it is new technology and we are not 100% clear how it will work in a heavily populated water stressed country that depends heavily on ground water seems to me there is no rush. It is not going anywhere. The real argument is why would/should you do it now? Short term tax receipts to cover a deficit, now that sounds familiar.
Anything carbon based is generally a bad idea to base our future energy needs on. It's obviously polluting CO2 wise plus other unburnt or partial combusted gases. Weather we get it from Russia or not us a red herring, global supply gets constricted and all prices will go up.
I just don't like the scaremonger uninformed nimby rubbish spouted by people who are automatcally against anything and everything. As for those of you gibbering away about wind farms not producing a lot of the time, do you actually live near one. I seven within 10 miles of my house, the closest being a mile away, its unusual not to see the turbines turning. We need more sustainable dispersed energy sources not less, more investment in solar (and subsidies) wouldn't hurt, think of all the acres of commercial buildings that could have them on their roofs.
pollution from vehicles is also a joke, if the government wanted to it could seriously cut emmissions if it choose to reduce congestion. Driving back up the M5 and M6 yesterday was ridiculous due to the stopstart congestion caused by the long term road works. Reduce the impact of them and congestion would ease. Driving into Manchester at the moment is also a nightmare, partly due to bus priority roadworks which are causing congestion now and cause long term congestion as a significant part of the road is handed over to a minority of users.
We still need gas for years to come.
We choose to need their are alternatives they are just more expensive for us /govt/profit but it is a choice.
Fracking could be the most environmentally sound way of sourcing that gas
Ok two point on the science there
1. Could is not a fact it is uncertainty - ie you do not know.
2. It may well be the best environmental way to get that gas [ leading statement] but the best environmental way is to leave the gas there and use other sustainable means.
Base your opinion on science and information not the Daily Mail and some NIMBYs
Have you got any science?
I generally hate the kind of post I'm currently typing... But this thread is exactly why I rarely post here these days. Semi-intelligible codswallop from people who haven't taken the time to learn to type, let alone form an informed point of view.
Should have hit up the grump thread this morning, sorry. Grump.
Edit: and also lots of interesting views too. I need more sleep...
Plenty of oilwells already in the South Downs National Park. Anyone who cycles the South Downs Way will pass two of them without noticing anything (Avington, near Winchester and Singleton, West Sussex).
Not much of an impact from them in my opinion. I highly doubt that fracking sites will be much different. 90 days approx. of HGV movements while drilling takes place then things quieten down while they appraise the well. Production wells generate very few vehicle movements.
Not much of an impact from them in my opinion. I highly doubt that fracking sites will be much different
The photos of fracking sites in the USA would suggest otherwise.
[img]
[/img]
Given that more people turned up at a public meeting against an Indian restaurant in the village than turned up to protest about the new open cast coal operation, I'm expecting tracking near here any day now!
Though tbe coal operation is pretty low key, and we compromised to just a takeaway rather than a restaurant, so win-win 😉
I thought the plan was just to plonk all the Fracking wells in the 'desolate' north? With it all being so grim and horrid, and populated as it is by frightful uncouth trogladites, and communists?
If you live somewhere nice, you probably vote Tory, so therefore there's nothing to worry about
Progress trap.
I thought the plan was just to plonk all the Fracking wells in the 'desolate' north? With it all being so grim and horrid, and populated as it is by frightful uncouth trogladites, and communists?If you live somewhere nice, you probably vote Tory, so therefore there's nothing to worry about
Well you keep moaning about the mines being closed down, and here's an opportunity for some re-industrialisation to remind you of how it used to be. Make your mind up! 🙂
Yellowstone national park dates from 1872. Just saying.
Pumping toxic propellant into the ground. What could possibly go wrong?
Then store the contaminated water, in large reservoirs above ground, until it hopefully evaporates, bunch of gullible fools, this is not the answer to future energy needs, total hype, with serious exaggeration of possible long term benefits by the government.
We choose to need their are alternatives they are just more expensive for us /govt/profit but it is a choice.We still need gas for years to come.
I have 4 log burners (beat that STW!) solar hot water and an air source heat pump. I'm an environmental nut.
However if you want to stop the lights going out, we need gas. I'd rather we didn't... but we do.
Currently we're importing gas from Qatar, Malaysia... everywhere. And this gas is transported in massive carbon spewing tankers. Fracking is taking gas from the UK for the UK. The carbon footprint is significantly smaller.
In the US fracking was largely experimental and unregulated. Here it would be more tried and tested and regulated to buggery.
Finally we've been fracking for oil in Southern England since the late 70's and no-one has noticed or given a toss!
if you want to stop the lights going out, we need gas
We dont but the alternatives are more expensive so we choose gas at a lower financial cost and a greater environmental cost
The carbon footprint is significantly smaller.
using more gas is not actually reducing the footprint but I get your point. IMHO it is like arguing if we double the number of cars but make the new ones more fuel efficient we have reduced the footprint
How much investment is the UK putting into Thorium Reactors?
China and India will have reactors up and running while the UK etc will still be waiting time with fracking crap.
How much investment is the UK putting into Thorium Reactors?China and India will have reactors up and running while the UK etc will still be waiting time with fracking crap.
Because we waited for the privatised energy companies to build any kind of reactors for us? And guess what? Never happened.
That and this fracking is a classic example of the short term make a quick profit attitude that has diseased this country and is sending us backward when trying to compete with our rivals.
As a generally right leaning chap brought up in the Thatcher era, I am coming to the realisation that El-bent may have a point.
Thorium is a load of guff. Indians have been trying to get it to work for years will little success.
Wind farms that do little seem to be springing up all over Scotland because the landlords can offset then against tax. Hilarious that the subsidies the lefty Green movement want are helping the mega rich, didn't see that on coming.
Oh anyone who visits Ikea in Glasgow check out the output from their roof mounted solar panels, pathetic is the word. Failed to meet their target every single month this year.
So while fracking comes with some issues, if done well it could really benefit the UK.
marthall - Member
Fracking is taking gas from the UK for the UK.
So the market is going to completely change as well?
dragon - Member
So while fracking comes with some issues, if done well it could really benefit the UK.
How?
So none of the gas will be sold to europe then?
A few facts on fracking would probably help inform the national debate so we can come to a well-informed decision, instead of vested interests spewing their own self-serving propaganda.
History suggests this won't happen however.
No-one talks about reduce, reuse, recycle anymore. How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?
How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?
Because reducing use of energy doesn't make anyone money they can donate to political parties.
How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?
This is very much part of what we should do!
Because reducing use of energy doesn't make anyone money they can donate to political parties.
Unfortunately true...
dragon - Member
Thorium is a load of guff. Indians have been trying to get it to work for years will little success.dragon
The Americans had a molten salt water reactor running in the 60's before it was shelved because they wanted Plutonium for weapons.
India already has an experimental reactor running. They plan to have a reactor on the grid within the decade. China is throwing the kitchen sink at Thorium and heads will roll there (literally) if they don't have reactors running in 15 years.
Meanwhile the UK will have pumped and burnt all the shale gas, polluted a few rivers and will be in an even bigger mess than today.