Give us a fracking break!

[AnonSpoilSport]

Guam said:

AnonSpoilSport said:

Why do these new age idiots always seem to have braided hair. Have they all become Rastafarian or is it easier to hide and get away with never washing it? In such case I'd suggest a cull.






Or failing that they could cut the hair back.

Its a portable bug hotel silly

Counter culture, or bacterial culture? Hard to tell.

[turbobloke]

Guam, how about Tory peer Lord Howell's comment that the north-east is a desolate wasteland and should be drilled? Possibly the words used weren't quite as posted but the gist of it is about right. A tad controversial and already getting a lot of coverage.

[Oakey]

You'd think the North east would be pleased. I mean, it's not quite mining but at least it's something!

[McWigglebum4th]

Du1point8 said:

I find it funny that these protesters are probably the same ones that managed to persuade the UK not to invest in Nuclear power 15+ years ago... they were listened to and the UK now is having to import a lot of power from abroad at high costs, unlike the french who went ahead with nuclear and they are now doing very well out of it.

Now that nuclear tech has moved on (but stalled in the uk) many of these protesters are saying the UK should be using nuclear...

Interesting!!

If the protesters had their way, every part of the UK would be covered with wind farms and the fking things would still not produce enough power for our needs.

No if they had their way we would be sat in the dark in a field freezing to death while playing on our latest iphone discussing which resturant we should meet at tonight and which tube train we should take

As their morons

[Oakey]

McWigglebum4th said:

No if they had their way we would be sat in the dark in a field freezing to death while playing on our latest iphone discussing which resturant we should meet at tonight and which tube train we should take

As their morons

[Jonesy23]

I did laugh at http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/big-energy-and-thei...

Especially the bit where a PHer made their views clear:

[shakotan]

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

[Mark Benson]

Jonesy23 said:

I did laugh at http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/big-energy-and-thei...

website said:

As I was walking around the protest site it struck me that these people weren't exactly the hardcore environmentalists I'd been expecting. They were just local people who were understandably upset about their town being exploited as a working experiment for energy companies.

Really? You inexplicably failed to take any pictures of the ordinary locals though, all I see there is the usual dozen or so professional protesters. Maybe the locals were off doing something worthwhile.....

[Oakey]

shakotan said:

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

So what's stopping you?

On another note, I heard about a local guy who is a fracking protestor who has gone down to join this protest. He runs his own business.... doing what? Providing hog roasts. Fuelled by unicorn st I assume!

[Sway]

My layman's understanding is that there shouldn't be any contamination of the water table if done properly - the strata are very well barriered naturally between the gas containing shales and the water containing strata.

However I think it is fair to say that the regulatory environment in the States, particularly in isolated areas, is such that companies don't really put much effort in controlling the application of fracking fluids etc.

Very different in the UK, and exceptionally unlikely that any contamination could occur - and if it did the penalties would be very severe...

[Mark Benson]

shakotan said:

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

You need to read more.

Start with the depth at which the water table lies, and the typical depth at which shale gas occurs. The chemicals used in fracking, if used correctly and within the guidelines will never, ever see the water table.

[jurbie]

Sway said:

Very different in the UK, and exceptionally unlikely that any contamination could occur - and if it did the penalties would be very severe...

This is what I don't get and I do wonder if people really are so ignorant that they think the whole industry would operate under some kind of legal free for all?

Every week there is a mobile car wash that turns up in our company car park and for a few quid we can all get our cars cleaned. The environmental manager has suggested that this practise should stop on the grounds that we don't know what chemicals the car wash man might be flushing down our drains and we as a company would be held responsible for any pollution. I would say this is a fair point and illustrates quite well that there is already pretty good legislation in place and the only time we see serious environmental damage is when that legislation is flouted.

[turbobloke]

Mark Benson said:

shakotan said:

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

You need to read more.

Start with the depth at which the water table lies, and the typical depth at which shale gas occurs. The chemicals used in fracking, if used correctly and within the guidelines will never, ever see the water table.

That's very naughty of you letting accuracy get in the way of total ecobks.

Somebody with pink hair and a dog on string will be round asap.

[andymadmak]

bloke in comment section on Vice said:

Drilling of the well is the only time at which the water table may be disturbed and, at this stage no toxic chemicals are used. Once the drill has passed steel casings are inserted to a depth of 1,000 to 3,000 feet, and the space between the casing and the drilled hole is filled with concrete to stabilize the well and prevent any leakage.

This process is repeated until the reservoir is reached, usually a distance of 6,000 to 10,000 feet. Thus the borehole is completely isolated from the water table. Typical hydraulic fracturing mixture is 95 percent water, 4.5 percent sand and 0.5 percent chemical additives.

Sounds safe enough to me.

[Roy Lime]

turbobloke said:

Somebody with pink hair and a dog on string will be round asap.

Somebody who probably has plenty to say about what happened to the miners in the 1980s.

Dreadlocked arse: "The way Thatcher treated the miners was evil."

Normal person: "Ooh look over there, Shale gas - our energy problems are solved."

DlA: "Shale gas! You can't MINE it, you right wing, planet-murdering bd!"

[Mark Benson]

turbobloke said:

Mark Benson said:

shakotan said:

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

You need to read more.

Start with the depth at which the water table lies, and the typical depth at which shale gas occurs. The chemicals used in fracking, if used correctly and within the guidelines will never, ever see the water table.

That's very naughty of you letting accuracy get in the way of total ecobks.

Somebody with pink hair and a dog on string will be round asap.

I'm getting into practice for this evening. Off to the pub with a True Believer - once he's had a few he's usually up for a bit of 'lively debate', always gets the bar going (rural N. Yorks, not a lot of time for AGW theories up here....).

[turbobloke]

Roy Lime said:

turbobloke said:

Somebody with pink hair and a dog on string will be round asap.

Somebody who probably has plenty to say about what happened to the miners in the 1980s.

Dreadlocked arse: "The way Thatcher treated the miners was evil."

Normal person: "Ooh look over there, Shale gas - our energy problems are solved."

DlA: "Shale gas! You can't MINE it, you right wing, planet-murdering bd!"

First accuracy and now logic, it'll never catch on.

[hidetheelephants]

shakotan said:

From what I've read (which is limited), fracking deposits some pretty nasty chemicals into the water table, so is fracking 'really' such a good thing?

Not being obtuse or deliberately arguementative, I'm willing to be educated on the subject, it's just from the information I've seen so far suggests there's a lot bigger negatives to this than positives...

Sway said:

My layman's understanding is that there shouldn't be any contamination of the water table if done properly - the strata are very well barriered naturally between the gas containing shales and the water containing strata.

andymadmak said:

bloke in comment section on Vice said:

Drilling of the well is the only time at which the water table may be disturbed and, at this stage no toxic chemicals are used. Once the drill has passed steel casings are inserted to a depth of 1,000 to 3,000 feet, and the space between the casing and the drilled hole is filled with concrete to stabilize the well and prevent any leakage.

This process is repeated until the reservoir is reached, usually a distance of 6,000 to 10,000 feet. Thus the borehole is completely isolated from the water table. Typical hydraulic fracturing mixture is 95 percent water, 4.5 percent sand and 0.5 percent chemical additives.

Sounds safe enough to me.

What they said.

Edited by hidetheelephants on Wednesday 31st July 16:37

[The Don of Croy]

This Balcombe drama is manna from heaven for our local TV news - they've not had this much hyperbole to spray about since foot 'n mouth stalked the land.

Last night we were treated - I use the word advisedly - to the ramblings of Bianca Jagger, well known energy guru and possibly a scientist to boot (no? then why talk to her...?) who feels she must lend her support to the downtrodden of Sussex (them's that's struggling still with an iPhone 3 and patchy G4 coverage).

The plod married to my hairdresser is loving the overtime, but she's less amused about his long hours waking the bairns during the holidays. First world problem?

This is the price of liberal progressive socialism. Benefit-based 'professional' protestors moving from the Bexhill road widening scheme (current estimate of added cost £3million+) to picket a legal and (so far) uncontroversial drilling site, again with a view to antagonising all and sundry because they have a view which should be heard above all others. Tossers.

[Oakey]

The Don of Croy said:

This Balcombe drama is manna from heaven for our local TV news - they've not had this much hyperbole to spray about since foot 'n mouth stalked the land.

Last night we were treated - I use the word advisedly - to the ramblings of Bianca Jagger, well known energy guru and possibly a scientist to boot (no? then why talk to her...?) who feels she must lend her support to the downtrodden of Sussex (them's that's struggling still with an iPhone 3 and patchy G4 coverage).

The plod married to my hairdresser is loving the overtime, but she's less amused about his long hours waking the bairns during the holidays. First world problem?

This is the price of liberal progressive socialism. Benefit-based 'professional' protestors moving from the Bexhill road widening scheme (current estimate of added cost £3million+) to picket a legal and (so far) uncontroversial drilling site, again with a view to antagonising all and sundry because they have a view which should be heard above all others. Tossers.

Hey, when you've had a privileged upbringing and don't have to actually earn a fking living then you'd need something to do with all that spare time too! And what better way than sticking it 'to the man!'. Well, at least until you decide to take that offer of Paperclip Director at Daddy's company for £200k p.a.