Forum menu
Sigh. Fracking is none of these things. It is actually being used today, albeit in the US, so to call it experimental or unproven is hysterical nonsense.
Would you like fire and toxic chemicals with your water sir?
No ta
Would you like fire and toxic chemicals with your water sir?
Are you referring to the film gasland where the director rigged up a gas supply to a water tap for "dramatic effect" or in other words lied?
But we will still need some energy, so given that, how best to generate it?
We already have a variety of ways of doing so, none of which are stopping any time soon. The issue is the quantity, hence why reducing demand is every bit as relevant.
I'd like to thank all those on STW who've helped to hone my pedantic arguing skills to the point the councillors are quoting my research).
Your welcome and your sentiment was right
it does lead to one being generally more informed on a wide breadth of issues
when we know that technology doubles in its capability every 2yrs.
Could you explain this with say reference to the land speed record, fastest aeroplane, train, highest flight etc
Its a rule of thumb applied to computing that should not be generalised or else we would get 160 % of the gas in only 8 years time.
gonefishin - Member
I should also point out that in the UK it is pretty much unthinkable that the environmental agencies will not be told, and may well have to approve the use of, what chemicals will be used in teh fracking process. There are huge differences between the regulatory requirements in the UK and the US.
gonefishin - Member
...temperamental, experimental, unproven, infantile 'technology' ...
Sigh. Fracking is none of these things. It is actually being used today, albeit in the US, so to call it experimental or unproven is hysterical nonsense.
so you freely admit that the place its been tried or 'proven' it has been woefully unregulated then?
i will concede my reference to moore's law....it was emotive rather than factual and that is the last thing this discussion needs. sorry.
so you freely admit that the place its been tried or 'proven' it has been woefully unregulated then?
Nope, that's not what I said and your use of the word woeful implies that you havent' stopped being emotive.
My point was that you cannot blindly compare what happens in the US, where the technique has been used and there is no real evidence of it being particularly harmful, to what would happen in the UK.
ok so lets put aside conjecture, and we wont speak about water contamination. can you accept that the water shortages in the states are because they have used so much water for fracking there isnt any left in the taps for drinking?
they are shipping it in in lorries so people can have something to drink and wash with. you cant expect me to be completely unemotional, i kinda like water and at present my water bill is more than my gas bill so i want to protect it.
can you accept that the water shortages in the states are because they have used so much water for fracking there isnt any left in the taps for drinking?
No idea, that's the first I've heard of that being a complaint but on the face of it it seems like a valid criticism, although I'd be surprised if that was the only reason. Problems such as this tend to be the result of a combination of factors. For example hasn't there been a heatwave across much of the US this year?
Just from a geological perspective if the fracking is designed to create fissures that will allow the injected liquids to force the gas to the surface, doesn't it have an effect on the water table, porosity of the ground at the level the fracking is taking place, and the possibility it may lower the water table beyond current extraction?
[img] 
[/img]
Done.
look i understand that petrochemical companies have been fracturing rocks with pressurised water for a long time, but what they are doing now is a very different scale of operation. much much deeper, using much higher pressures and using hugely more significant volumes of water.
http://ecowatch.com/2013/fracking-water-scarcity-issues-imichigan/
-this isnt the best example of website (im not a fan of anything with 'eco' in the title any more than if it had exxon in the title) but im a bit pressed for time and you can find your own sources to confirm/ dispute my fears im sure
My point was that you cannot blindly compare what happens in the US, where the technique has been used and there is no real evidence of it being particularly harmful, to what would happen in the UK.
Well that's the point, the industry in the US deliberately keeps the public "blind" of any evidence which is available.
[b][i]“I still don’t understand why industry should be allowed to hide problems when public safety is at stake,” said Carla Greathouse, the author of the E.P.A. report that documents a case of drinking water contamination from fracking. “If it’s so safe, let the public review all the cases.” [/i][/b]
[url= http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/us/04natgas.html?_r=1& ]A Tainted Water Well, and Concern There May Be More[/url]
And of course the industry has very powerful (well paid) allies in the legislative.
[b][i]It details how former Vice President Dick Cheney, in partnership with the energy industry and drilling companies such as his former employer, Halliburton Corp., successfully pressured Congress in 2005 to exempt fracking from the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Air Act and other environmental laws.[/i][/b]
[url= http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-bp-hydraulic-fracturing-gas-fracking-.html ]Gulf oil spill worsens -- but what about the safety of gas fracking?[/url]
can you accept that the water shortages in the states are because they have used so much water for fracking there isnt any left in the taps for drinking?
Not strictly true or that simple. Aquifers have been plundered with no regard for the future for years across the USA. In particular, beef production takes a lot of water, as do mny other crops. Couple that with drought (80% of US farmers facing water shortage) and yes, in some areas fracking, and it is all the way up a brown creek without a paddle. The combination is what is doing the damage.
ok sorry its from the gardian 'n all but here - http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/31/us-fracking-industry-gas-flaring
the americans, who have 'proven' this tech apparently, are burning off 29% of the gas produced. but that is down from 36% from last year. not quiet the moore's law i posted emotively but hey... you get my point, i like fossil fuel, its really really useful, lets not waste it for a quick (offshore) buck. why don't we wait for them to perfect it before we let them put flares right across the uk and waste so much of our precious fossil fuel?
indecently Afan valley has planning approved, i guess on the plus side, night riding will be a whole lot easier
In answer to the OP.
There isn't one. Mainly due to hypocrisy and nimbyism that nearly everyone in this country exhibits.
"Your area is a prime site for removal of shale gas"
"You can't do that here"
"Ok, then it'll have to be a wind farm, that's nice and green"
"But that'll spoil my view out over the fields"
"We'll it's just going to have to be nucl........."
"Oh my god, that means certain radioactive hell and destruction"
"As I was saying, that means it has to be nuclear, but as your area doesn't have a solid granite base rock, it'll have to go in someone else's backyard"
"We'll, I've always said nuclear energy had a part to play, and I know it's a lot safer these days"
The sad fact is that there are too many vested interests on one level, and a whole other level of people who actually enjoy the political instability that energy uncertainty brings.
The best solution is just to use less of what we've got now until someone comes up with either
A) something better
B) the will to make a decision and carry it through no matter what
Until somebody makes a machine that can turn CO2 + Water into Methane + Oxygen using sunlight we're pretty stumped.
What Still amazes me is you rarely hear anyone having a reasonable chat about slowing the rate of global population growth as a pre-emptive measure...
What Still amazes me is you rarely hear anyone having a reasonable chat about slowing the rate of global population growth as a pre-emptive measure...
You can't do that, where are all those future consumers gonna come from, economic growth, growth, growth darling...
On a slightly less cynical note, I've always been surprised by the lack of will to try to harness tidal power.
If you consider the wattage than surges up and down say, the Severn, estuary on a daily basis, it has to be worth a look.
Again, it will probably result in something bad. Possibly disruption of sand and mud flats for migratory wading birds, or migration of eels or fish.
What i am relatively certain about, though, is that if and when energy prices [u]really[/u] start to rise, some of our more fashionable 'right on' posturings will evaporate.
It is also arrogant to assume that anything we might do on our little island actually matters a damn from a global perspective.
This fracking doesn't seem very nice tbh...
[url= http://http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=high-levels-of-arsenic-found-in-ground-water-near-fracking-sites ]High levels of arsenic found in ground water near fracking sites[/url].
Meanwhile, in Germany, [url= http://http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/germany-utilities-idUSL6N0FV1FX20130806 ]Germany's installed capacity is 178 GW including 75 GW of renewables, data from industry group BDEW shows[/url].
I've always been surprised by the lack of will to try to harness tidal power.
the will is there but the money isn't as the industry is in the early stages of development. The UK is at the forefront and the big boys like Kawasaki are stepping in now so the next couple of decades will see commercial development. Fracking can develop more quickly as the gas infrastructure is already there to deal with the gas, tidal energy requires the technology to be developed and the infrastructure such as interconnectors to be built before it can be fully utilised.
Fracking in the Uk will be quite different from the US as there are much more stringent controls around all the processes involved. I think the biggest problems with fracking in the UK will be the quantities of water involved, both in supply and treatment of waste, the immense HGV traffic and the site specific impacts and remediation. The issue of injecting huge volumes of chemicals into the ground will still be there but here they'll have to say what they are injecting and it will be regulated, unlike the US. Still doesn't make it a good thing!
i hear your despair man 😐it will probably result in something bad. Possibly disruption of sand and mud flats for migratory wading birds, or migration of eels or fish.
ok lets use carmarthen bay in the Severn estuary as an example. i doubt you can find an area in the uk that has more protection acronyms associated with it.
and rightly so in a way,
but there are still planning applications being pushed through by national government (not local mind,-that was overridden) for unconventional gas extraction, covering the whole of the bay!
so that's ok, just not tidal energy?
now this whole area is in the highest risk category from sea level rise in the whole of the uk, so if your going to listen to scientists not journalists it's gone isn't it? ****ed. bye bye scoter ducks.
except tidal lagoons would act as a sea defence yeah? or not? tidal energy is very very predictable, low carbon, and even protects wildlife habitats if implemented properly.........oh but hang, on exxon hasn't got its greedy paws in it.
wake up and smell the dirty little fingers of the people with their fingers in pants of our politicians
im sick of this....
germany produced 6.5X more solar electricity than America in june. have you seen how much more solar gain america has then germany? FFS we are a nation of hi-tech engineers. why aren't we on this gravy train? what has america's oil companies got over our government that we cant go down that road?
i feel exasperated over this issue. the answers are obvious. sorry, rant over
sorry to contradict you bigjim, but the fracking 'recipe' is confidential here in the uk just as it is in the US, i would actually love to know what they are going to be pumping into the ground so i would love you to prove me wrong on this
[img] 
[/img]