Half of the UK 'suitable for fracking', report says

[Seth]

Hmm my sympathies are with you, but given the stupidity of businesses here, I would not be surprised if somewhere like Manchester was depopulated by such idiotic negligence.

And that's a problem because...??

[macdoc]

You do realize that "fracking" is nothing new at all. We've been doing it safely for many decades now and nobody took any notice till the Obamanuts and anti-carbon ass-hats fell upon it as a new tactic to discourage oil and gas production not because it's unsafe but because they will use ANY excuse whatsoever, like objecting to the pipeline from Canada, to instill fear and panic in the populace in order to gain support for their ACTUAL agenda, which is putting us all back in wattle-and-daub huts and grubbing for roots with sharpened sticks.

full of shit again.
Just google sour gas problems in Canada - here's one

We'll Frack Alberta's Next Election, Vow Landowners
Drilling accident fuels rebellion demanding halt to hydraulic fracturing.
By Andrew Nikiforuk, Today, TheTyee.ca

Red Deer River, Alberta: Crew cleans up spill after fracking caused oil well in area to blow. Photo: ASRG Alberta Surface Rights Group.

Fracking Contamination 'Will Get Worse': Alberta Expert
Tighter regulations to protect groundwater needed, says U of Alberta geochemist.
Clark's fracking website not enough, says enviro group
US Study Casts Pall over BC's Shale Gas Biz
Despite industry safety assurances, EPA finds hydraulic fracturing fluids in drinking water.

Energy

One of Alberta's largest landowner groups says it will make hydraulic fracturing a major election issue this spring if the Alberta government does not act on its request for an immediate moratorium on the controversial industry practice.

Don Bester, president of the Alberta Surface Rights Group, which represents 1,400 landowners, told The Tyee that if the government doesn't "step up to the plate," the group will hold politicians "criminally responsible" for any horizontal drilling incidents that contaminate groundwater or leak poisonous hydrogen sulfide.

Yes fracking can be done safely, no it's not in way too many areas.
This is the centre of the oil and gas industry....

The City of Dallas in Texas Bans Fracking Within Its Limits

news.softpedia.com › News › Green‎
by Laura Sinpetru
Dec 13, 2013 - The Dallas City Council issued the ban this past Wednesday.

If it's a choice between fracking and coal use then careful fracking is the less harmful choice.

BUT....it's a short term fix.



http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ying-power

[Seth]

You do realize that "fracking" is nothing new at all. We've been doing it safely for many decades now and nobody took any notice till the Obamanuts and anti-carbon ass-hats fell upon it as a new tactic to discourage oil and gas production not because it's unsafe but because they will use ANY excuse whatsoever, like objecting to the pipeline from Canada, to instill fear and panic in the populace in order to gain support for their ACTUAL agenda, which is putting us all back in wattle-and-daub huts and grubbing for roots with sharpened sticks.

full of shit again.
Just google sour gas problems in Canada - here's one

It's you who is full of shit. Sour gas wells are few and far between to begin with, can be controlled and are only dangerous in heavily populated areas (which doesn't include Canada) and tar sands don't produce hydrogen sulfide.

Don Bester, president of the Alberta Surface Rights Group, which represents 1,400 landowners, told The Tyee that if the government doesn't "step up to the plate," the group will hold politicians "criminally responsible" for any horizontal drilling incidents that contaminate groundwater or leak poisonous hydrogen sulfide.

Whoopee. I'm sure they have put the fear of God into the oil industry...NOT. That's because they are blowing smoke up your skirt and are getting all hysterical about things that either have not happened or have been controlled if they do.

Yes fracking can be done safely, no it's not in way too many areas.
This is the centre of the oil and gas industry....

Bullshit. There is exactly zero credible scientific evidence that fracking endangers lives or water sources. There is exactly ONE verified incident of fracking contaminating a water table, and that was a single incident at a single well in Wyoming.

The City of Dallas in Texas Bans Fracking Within Its Limits

news.softpedia.com › News › Green‎
by Laura Sinpetru
Dec 13, 2013 - The Dallas City Council issued the ban this past Wednesday.

Lie. Dallas didn't ban fracking at all, it merely increased well-head setbacks.

If it's a choice between fracking and coal use then careful fracking is the less harmful choice.

BUT....it's a short term fix.

That's what Luddites always say, and they've always been wrong. I remember that we were supposed to be completely out of oil worldwide by 1998...according to the ass-hat alarmists of the 70s. Didn't turn out that way though, and every time some fuckwit predicts "peak oil" or an end to fossil fuel supplies, some oil or gas company discovers vast new reserves of oil and gas somewhere, which makes the fuckwits look like what they are...fuckwit alarmists.

[pErvinalia]

Bullshit. There is exactly zero credible scientific evidence that fracking endangers lives or water sources. There is exactly ONE verified incident of fracking contaminating a water table, and that was a single incident at a single well in Wyoming.

As has been pointed out to you a million times before Seth, a point you keep ignoring (Quelle surprise), is that no baseline studies were done before fracking commenced. Therefore it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to say in some cases whether contamination has occurred.

[laklak]

Who's gonna do the drilling? I want to buy stock.

[pErvinalia]

I probably wouldn't, Lak. That boat has already sailed, and there's probably only rough seas ahead. Opposition to fracking is growing massively, and the politicians, quite strangely, are starting to actually take notice, in some instances. Studies showing problems with fracking are growing as well. I'd say it's too risky a proposition to invest in, given the massive gains have already been made.

[laklak]

Goddamnit, I'm NEVER going to be an oil baron! I was so looking forward to looting the pension fund...

[Seth]

Bullshit. There is exactly zero credible scientific evidence that fracking endangers lives or water sources. There is exactly ONE verified incident of fracking contaminating a water table, and that was a single incident at a single well in Wyoming.

As has been pointed out to you a million times before Seth, a point you keep ignoring (Quelle surprise), is that no baseline studies were done before fracking commenced. Therefore it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to say in some cases whether contamination has occurred.

Dude, they've been fracking for 50 years and nobody, in all that time, in spite of repeated investigations by both government and private industry, has ever been able to provide valid scientific evidence that fracking has contaminated any water supply anywhere, with one single exception as previously noted. The vast majority of complaints about drilling have to do with the aesthetic and sometimes environmental impacts of the drilling process itself. Big, noisy, 24-hour activity near homes with all the attendant visual, audible and olfactory nuisances that come with such industrial operations. Once the drilling is finished however, the ongoing impacts are relatively small, and generally have to do with aesthetics (not wanting to look at tank farms and well-head equipment) and regular well maintenance activities like swabbing.

The other major impact that's now becoming clear is air pollution from release of volatile organic gasses from well-heads and storage facilities. This is a very legitimate and quantifiable concern that's come to the attention of authorities nationwide. In the Denver area, regulations are being crafted to require capture of such gasses because they contribute substantially to Denver's "Brown Cloud" of winter pollution...nearly as much as automobiles according to some sources.

Regulating those emissions is a perfectly valid government activity and it's long overdue, but it has nothing whatever to do with fracking, which is now used as a generalized catchword by anti-carbon zealots who don't actually give a damn about fracking. What they want is the complete cessation of oil and gas extraction, and they will use any hot-button term they can to pander to public fear in order to gain political traction for their ultimate goal.

[Seth]

I probably wouldn't, Lak. That boat has already sailed, and there's probably only rough seas ahead. Opposition to fracking is growing massively, and the politicians, quite strangely, are starting to actually take notice, in some instances. Studies showing problems with fracking are growing as well. I'd say it's too risky a proposition to invest in, given the massive gains have already been made.

What "studies?" Authored by whom, exactly? NRDC perhaps?

The EPA just finished a decade long study of the issue and found only ONE verified incidence of fracking fluids contaminating a water table in the entire US.

[Seth]

Goddamnit, I'm NEVER going to be an oil baron! I was so looking forward to looting the pension fund...

Ever seen "Backyard Oil?" Buncha hillbillies in Kentucky drilling for oil in their backyards...literally. No small number of them are rich now.

[pErvinalia]

Bullshit. There is exactly zero credible scientific evidence that fracking endangers lives or water sources. There is exactly ONE verified incident of fracking contaminating a water table, and that was a single incident at a single well in Wyoming.

As has been pointed out to you a million times before Seth, a point you keep ignoring (Quelle surprise), is that no baseline studies were done before fracking commenced. Therefore it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to say in some cases whether contamination has occurred.

Dude, they've been fracking for 50 years and nobody, in all that time, in spite of repeated investigations by both government and private industry, has ever been able to provide valid scientific evidence that fracking has contaminated any water supply anywhere, with one single exception as previously noted. The vast majority of complaints about drilling have to do with the aesthetic and sometimes environmental impacts of the drilling process itself. Big, noisy, 24-hour activity near homes with all the attendant visual, audible and olfactory nuisances that come with such industrial operations. Once the drilling is finished however, the ongoing impacts are relatively small, and generally have to do with aesthetics (not wanting to look at tank farms and well-head equipment) and regular well maintenance activities like swabbing.

The other major impact that's now becoming clear is air pollution from release of volatile organic gasses from well-heads and storage facilities. This is a very legitimate and quantifiable concern that's come to the attention of authorities nationwide. In the Denver area, regulations are being crafted to require capture of such gasses because they contribute substantially to Denver's "Brown Cloud" of winter pollution...nearly as much as automobiles according to some sources.

Regulating those emissions is a perfectly valid government activity and it's long overdue, but it has nothing whatever to do with fracking, which is now used as a generalized catchword by anti-carbon zealots who don't actually give a damn about fracking. What they want is the complete cessation of oil and gas extraction, and they will use any hot-button term they can to pander to public fear in order to gain political traction for their ultimate goal.

Wow, that's was strange to watch. You pretty much just repeated what you said before my reply to you, like that answered the reply. I'm trying to tell you that it's nearly impossible to prove that contamination has occurred when no baseline studies were done. Do you understand what this means? What it means is that the reason no one has proven that contamination has occurred is not because there has been no contamination, it's because there's no record of what state the water was in BEFORE fracking began. Honestly, you could do with getting an environmental education. The amount you crap on about ecology and environmental science without the first fucking clue what you are talking about is spectacular.

[pErvinalia]

I probably wouldn't, Lak. That boat has already sailed, and there's probably only rough seas ahead. Opposition to fracking is growing massively, and the politicians, quite strangely, are starting to actually take notice, in some instances. Studies showing problems with fracking are growing as well. I'd say it's too risky a proposition to invest in, given the massive gains have already been made.

What "studies?" Authored by whom, exactly? NRDC perhaps?

The EPA just finished a decade long study of the issue and found only ONE verified incidence of fracking fluids contaminating a water table in the entire US.

As I said (REPEATEDLY), you won't find studies confirming much at all with existing wells and operations. That's because no baseline data was taken, thanks to shonky environmental laws at the time. You also will struggle to prove it now, as the chemicals they use in fracking are regarded as proprietary secrets and don't have to be reported to the environmental agencies (thanks to law makers being bought off by the gas industry). Anyway, it might surprise you to know that there is a world outside the US. There are increasing numbers of scientific studies in Australia that are showing problems. I'd imagine it is the same in the UK. But we all know that you think there's nothing outside the US, so you just keep living under that rock, Seth.

[macdoc]

Dallas — yes, Dallas — bans fracking in most of the city | Grist

grist.org/.../dallas-yes-dallas-bans-fracking-in-most-of-the-city/‎
by John Upton -
Dec 12, 2013 - J.R. Ewing must be rolling in his grave. The third largest city in Texas will now prohibit fracking within 1500 feet of a home or school.

seems some are confusing peak oil which has been pushed back in time thanks to fracking with AGW which is robust as ever.....

No comment on the sour gas well problems in Canada Seth?? uncomfortable reality??

[JimC]

In Australia, the conservatives have a real problem with fracking, because much of the opposition is coming from rural people, many of whom have a big influence on the National Party, one of the parties in our conservative coalition government.

[FBM]

Invest in solar, wind, wave, etc etc and kick the petroleum monkey off yer backs instead.