[Closed] Frakking?

This is going to be happening in my back yard.

Am I happy about this ? What do you think ?

Anyone want to buy my house? Anyone .....?

Being stressed, angry, worried and upset is futile, as this IS going to happen and there is not one damn thing about it that I can do.

Not a good day for me, but wtf do you care.

Sabotage?

ScottChegg

You do know there were som major reforms to how the industry works after that disaster?

Google the Lord Cullen report if you are interested.

Trail - An industry like that must bring 'opportunities' as well. Employment directly and / or in support sector. Rent your house out to house the inrush of engineers / drillers ?

Not a good day for me, but wtf do you care

But you do want the lights to stay working yes?

trailofdestruction - Member
This is going to be happening in my back yard.

Am I happy about this ? What do you think ?

Anyone want to buy my house? Anyone .....?

Being stressed, angry, worried and upset is futile, as this IS going to happen and there is no one damn thing about it that I can do.

Not a good day for me, but wtf do you care.

The bigger question is, why do you care? You'll have gas to heat your house, clean water, and petrol in your car.

If the water companies are happy then what are you worrying about? If they were worried about it they'd stop it.

Sabotage?

Seems to be working in Nigeria, cut into the pipes, steal the oil, then sue for the mess.

Can it help fill a gap in energy needs until something better comes along - probably.

Not accusing Oliwb of this, but I've heard this argument used so many times to justify unsustainable energy sources (and uses!), everything from shale sand oil extraction through to biofuels. Call me jaded, but something better won't be coming along in time, and these kind of technological 'advances' are just putting off the inevitable - we need to cut down on our energy consumption.

The real debate isn't about fracing it's about nuclear and should we be re-newing it in a time when we're supposed to be reducing our reliance on fossil fuels?

I'm not sure there's enough time to sort out the Nuclear option anymore. I would imagine it's far easier to whack up a few "clean, green, low-carbon" gas power stations than a Nuke job. Could probably convert some of the old coal ones if push came to shove.

Now, I really can see both sides of the argument, and there will be benefits to this, especially with energy security and employment, which is badly needed in the NW.

Just as long as you don't happen to have a drill pad at the end of your village.

Still happy about that ?

I'm not. I'd sell and move tomorrow if I could, but the wife wants to stay for a few more years.

Time will tell how much of an impact this will actually have on the local economy in terms of jobs and money, and the environmental impact.

Until then, I'm working on my escape plan.

Well, I may just have a position at Cuadrilla so I'll do my best to keep it under control..

Anyway, North West Water are clearly not happy with the potential risks and have been undertaking huge studies to check the viability of the drilling. [b]They seem to be happy [/b]and considering we have some of the highest water quality in the world I wouldn't be too concerned. Just glad I don't live there..

Who told you that? I would read the draft water resources plan in April and ask yourself why no new sources any where near areas at risk of fracking activity are being considered.

So it's badly needed, just as long as it's in somene else back yard?

We've got small scale oil extraction in Surrey, and a great big TV mast in Swinley (which is probably far bigger than a land rig), does either bother me?

Who told you that? I would read the draft water resources plan in April and ask yourself why no new sources any where near areas at risk of fracking activity are being considered.

Because they already have enough and there's no point generating potential conflicts and problems however small the risk is? If a gas company wants gas out of the ground and a water company wants water, there's no point the water compnay trying to get water out the same bit of land if it can get at it elswhere.

Now, I really can see both sides of the argument, and there will be benefits to this, especially with energy security and employment, which is badly needed in the NW.

Local employment will be negligible the same as for wind power, everything is done by contractors who just move their people around with the work. When scout moor was built the engineers were all german

Hey, I may yet be proved very wrong. They could drill, have no real impact on water quality, with not much more increase on traffic on rural roads, create jobs in the area, and provide a real boost for the NW economy.

Maybe I'm being very negative, but... I still don't like it, and I'd rather not live right on top of it.

NIMBY.... maybe I am, but that's up to me, no ?

Like I said, time will tell, and there isn't much I can do about it anyway, so it's a bit of a pointless argument Mr. Spoon.

I can see the benefits, just not from my house.

Local employment will be negligible the same as for wind power, everything is done by contractors who just move their people around with the work. When scout moor was built the engineers were all german

Which need to live, eat, drink, shop somewhere. And those eating, drinking, shopping, living places employ people.

Because they already have enough and there's no point generating potential conflicts and problems however small the risk is? If a gas company wants gas out of the ground and a water company wants water, there's no point the water compnay trying to get water out the same bit of land if it can get at it elswhere.

I would also envisage that people will stop buying Lancashire produce as a lot of the private groundwater abstractions are for irrigation of food crops

Which need to live, eat, drink, shop somewhere. And those eating, drinking, shopping, living places employ people.

People still talk about the boom years locally, the local economy will be living of that gravy for years 🙄

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/dec/13/gas-energy-bills-renewables

they are proposing fracking where i live on the bristol channel
energy security for me would be to use the immense tides i see rolling in and out twice a day, every day, with almost absolute predictability. but oh no what we should do is use some semi-experiential tech to line the pockets of the petrochemical companies. because after all they have their fingers gripping the balls of our government so tight its important to do exactly what they say.
the post above questioning whether polluting groundwater would even be a problem since we are all on mains is the stupidest thing i have ever read. you seem to think that energy security is more important then food security. i for one would rather sit in the dark with water to drink and food to eat then be hungry and thirsty in front of a ****ing plasma tv.

Who remembers Frak?

[img] [/img]

trailofdestruction - Member

Not a good day for me, but wtf do you care.

Well I care, which is why I thought I'd ask here, knowing there is a diverse range of folk with perhaps some inside knowledge.

I don't trust this Government, I don't trust them because they're arrogant and stupid. I also don't like the way the media is being manipulated, I'm on a real hate with the media and will often take an opposite viewpoint purely because of that.

I've found this thread quite enlightening however, my personal view on power is that they are not considering tide which we have an abundance of and it's regular, having lived a good proportion of my life in the shadow not only of Dungeness Nuclear power, but all the French stations on their coast, I guess it's not done me or mine any harm yet and given it's a known threat it is the lessor evil than digging up resources that will be denied future generations.

I know some people out there care, just a bit upset today.

Sorry, didn't mean to sound off.

Here's the BBC story, which actually appears quite objective.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20707574

this is an interesting article from 2009 showing just how much the government turn tale for a big wad of cash http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/1805031/coal-subsidies-outstrip-support-marine-energy

How do you know they can get it elsewhere?

*Looks at map*

Yep, you're really struggling for water sources in the North West aren't you!

The issue of contaminating the water course and being able to set fire to your water really can't happen here.. there can't be many who get their water from wells or natural sources and the water remains un-treated.

apart from the people that grow all the food we eat or the people who use it to process that food that was grown.

Why do people always think about domestic use first when it comes to utilities? it just doesn't work like that, we live in a world where all our lives are utterly dependendant on the whole.

Yep, you're really struggling for water sources in the North West aren't you!

Its tragic. On recent rides, I've wept as I survey the scorched earth, and parched fields around me. Its heartbreaking!

mrs works in the oil business

she spoke to someone at a confrence from caudrilla who was pretty certain that theyd caused the tremors at blackpool

was pointed out in one of the papers that both gideion and ed davey's constituencies are potential fracking sites, that could be interesting

was pointed out in one of the papers that both gideion and ed davey's constituencies are potential fracking sites, that could be interesting

Picton - I think most people think about potable water first, as it is the most sensitive receptor. Water abstacted for agriculture / process can be of 'lower quality'.

I had a tremour once in Blackpool

The potable water contamination from the fracking process is bollocks, water table and shale layers are seperated by thousands of feet of rock in most cases - they're going no-where near your water supply. There are of course risks associated with spillages from the pad, or when the chemicals are in transit, or whan the produced water are stored at surface, or if the well integrity is poor when it goes through the water-bearing strata - but Friends of the Earth and the rest have got no scientific evidence to support the stuff they spout on water contamination from the fracking itself.

If you can convinced the whole UK to turn down their thermostats and switch off their lights then you won't need fracking, or we could buy more off that nice Russian chap, or we could accelerate drilling in the Arctic before we have the technology to manage spillage in areas made inaccesible by sea-ice for over half the year, or we can keep shipping the stuff thousands of miles across the ocean from really politically stable regions, or we could admit that we really fancy hacking the nice shiney clean white Antarctic to pieces to find more oil and gas... Choices choices choices...

I had a knee trembler in Blackpool once

ill give you a choice helios, use renewable energy sources such as tidal which by the governments own admission will work out a sixth of the price when it comes to the consumer.
all they give a * about is money. dont you get that? this is the only bit of land we can live on and you want to let people who only give a * about money, who dont have to live here, do whatever they want with it? that is unbelievably short sighted in my humble opinion.

[i]Do we really want our energy supplies entirely dependent on the old tiger wrestler[/i]
We mostly import Noggy gas binners.

Do we really want our energy supplies entirely dependent on the old tiger wrestler

It'll be the Celtic tiger [grrr] before too long
We'll be importing cheap wind derived power off Alex Salmond during the night and selling them back premium rate nuclear derived stuff though the day.

Perfect deal!

TedTalk on natural gas.
Towards the end in the question and answer with the host it's mentioned that fracking has been going on in the USA since 1947 and 800,000 trouble free wells have been fracked.
[url=

ok so both of these proposals are on the same site.

tidal lagoon.
power for 100,000 homes for 100 years. no government money required.
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/story-17211411-detail/story.html

unconventional gas extraction
power for 100,000 homes for 30 years. government subsidized (as is all power station run energy generation)
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/Untapped-coal-seams-deep-beneath-Swansea-Bay-investigated-British-company/story-12421127-detail/story.html

call me a nimby if you like but which would you want in a place you love?

call me a nimby if you like but which would you want in a place you love?

Depends where you live and why you love it?

One's all but invisible, the others a 12m high sea wall. One's negligaby going to impact on local wildlife and people, the other's a 12m high sea wall, etc.

And the 2nd isn't gas extraction, it's coal gasification, what we used before the north sea gas was discovered, but done underground rather than in a gasifier.

i live overlooking the site. i love it because of the wealth of natural beauty here. the wildlife, for instance the two porpoise i saw walking the dogs this morning. it is a 12m sea wall, but its underwater for half the day. its designed to act like a natural reef using a waste product that is dumped in the sea anyway. so an underground gasification plant doesnt extract gas does it? its expensive, unpredictable, dirty and wont provide anywhere near the amount of energy. setting fire to coal underground doesnt have a great track record you know.

out of sight out of mind, always the best response.

Fracking and coal gasification are two very different processes.

Fracking and coal gasification are two very different processes.

Never the less which would you think is a better investment? Investment in Renewable energy or investment in non - renewable energy?

The emphasis being on the word non.

We seem to live in a world where people are less interested in long term investment and more interested in making a quick buck and screw who comes next. The arguments against investing in renewable energy are pathetic at best. Yes I am aware that we need energy security but the issue of renewable's has been around as long as I've been alive and instead of running with it we have sat on the fence and now it probably is too late to secure our energy supplies from renewable sources.

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/anyone-wall-mounted-an-ipadnull ]Also can we not highlight the idea of using less energy. Go for a run outside man.[/url]

I just find it amusing that it rhymes with 'clacking'.

Never the less which would you think is a better investment? Investment in Renewable energy or investment in non - renewable energy?

Personally I'd class that as a false dichotomy.

i live overlooking the site. i love it because of the wealth of natural beauty here. the wildlife, for instance the two porpoise i saw walking the dogs this morning

What kind of dogs did they have?

😆

Personally I'd class that as a false dichotomy.

I am aware that we do need to secure our energy. However fence sitting on energy policies from however many different governments there have been in the last 30 ish years has kind of painted us into a corner; where by we can only secure our energy from non - renewable sources for the foreseeable future. Which in my opinion is also stealing from future generations when we could have secured energy for them already.

ScottChegg

You do know there were som major reforms to how the industry works after that disaster?

I know. That's kind of the point really.

How is it possible to have too much safety?