Anti-Fracking Protest?!

[alx]

How about other non oil and gas mining? Do they pay supplementary tax too? Or is that out of the comparison? Does it need to be compared against the industry with the highest suppplementary tax?

I agree in part though, in reality no one knows if it's economic yet, the likelyhood is it'll be economic without the reduction in supplimentary tax if it is economic. They didn't need to reduce the tax to get more interest in UK shale.

Edit: one of the reasons the supplimentary tax will have been reduce is because if shale gas takes off it won't be the same as the rest of the oil and gas industry, high risk, high reward, it'll be low risk, low reward, much like most other industries that don't pay supplimentary tax. A whole different model to the rest of the industry.



Agreed. And I'm guessing most will agree with that. That is why we are taking our time. Just see the time gap and study after quadrillas first frack. We have years before we are fracking hundreds of wells. Plenty of time to study the effects and adjust regulation if need be.



Actually geothermal requires a lot of drilling as well. The area around the initial borehole and track cools down after a couple of years and a new frack needs to be done or a new well drilled elsewhere. The heat transfer from the hot rock to the cold fluid can reduce downhole temperatures in a short time. Iceland, for example, has a lot of experience in this.



Show us the EPA reports and the peer reviewed papers then, not blog posts on anti fracking websites... A single blowout is pretty impressive for tens of thousands of wells... Especially as there have been tens of thousands of wells drilled. The point being is the risk is minimal that fracking fluid is going to pollute the ground water through the fracks themselves. It may happen (with so far no clear evidence) but the risk is so minimal it's like being against nuclear energy because a powerplant may blow up or the blades from a turbine fall off and the whole assembly career through a town centre...

There are undeniably poor practices occurring in the US and there is evidence that some of the gas in the water table has occured due to fracking wells (not from fracks themselves), believed to be due to poor casing design. That doesn't mean we will follow them down that path...

I have to agree - in my opinion fracking can be done very safely. Without meaning to stereotype, I think some certain gunghoness and "act first, think later" mentality by US fracking companies has led to questionable practices over in the states.

Considering the regulations, offshore experience in the north sea and generally more conservative nature of the UK, I wouldn't expect the UK to have such issues.

 

[deuse]

Show us the EPA reports and the peer reviewed papers then, not blog posts on anti fracking websites.

EPA? oh you mean the blog\site that my government setup to con people with?

But hey they did post a pdf of a up and coming power point presentation of the findings in Dimock, Pennsylvania
but barmy Obama told them to take it down for a week or two. But I have found it

http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Dimock%20report.pdf

That is a real copy of the study that will be released soon

"Methane and other gases released during drilling (including air from thedrilling) apparently cause significant damage to the water quality."

Or the Washington post
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-29/politics/40887594_1_cabot-s-fracking-methane

 

[doodah]

Cheaper energy prices. Can someone explain to me how this is going to happen with our energy companies? I can just see the same old argument; prices rise "because wholesale prices have recently gone up" or consumer anger at the lack of prize freezes/decreases "we work on wholesale prices from 1-2 years ago".

 

[Amp34]

EPA? oh you mean the blog\site that my government setup to con people with?

But hey they did post a pdf of a up and coming power point presentation of the findings in Dimock, Pennsylvania
but barmy Obama told them to take it down for a week or two. But I have found it

http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Dimock%20report.pdf

That is a real copy of the study that will be released soon

"Methane and other gases released during drilling (including air from thedrilling) apparently cause significant damage to the water quality."

Or the Washington post
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-29/politics/40887594_1_cabot-s-fracking-methane

Ah, the old "can't trust the scientists/environment agencies because they are in the pay of big oil" routine... Great catch all excuse...

As for the study, looks interesting and I'm sure I will be reading the full release when it's out. However it doesn't seem to state much new. We already know that gas can migrate up the wellbore (discussed earlier). It's less about fracking than poor regulation in the US. For example in the UK you have to case off individual water legs from each other and have to have at least cased off any drinkable aquifier before going into a potentially hydrocarbon bearing interval. That's probably why the PowerPoint was pulled, there*isn't enough information without the report or someone presenting it to make an informed decision.

The only mention of fracking is when it says "methane is released during the drilling and perhaps during the fracking process and other gas well work". Well if they haven't case off the aquifer from the gas reservoir what do they expect...

I can't open the other link at the moment so can't comment on that.

 

[thedoc46]

God, go read up on it. He lies. He even admitted he didnt think it was relevant talking about what happened before the fracking started, or the difference between gas etc. how he can think that isn't rellevent.

It iOS a work of fiction and nothing to do with cover up.

I'll take power reviews reserch over any film that he admitted he left important facts out of to make it seem like it was caused by fracking instead of bacterial methane.

And yes I would allow it in my back garden and nuclear as well. Old bury isn't far away and I would have no issue with either, or windfarm, or them making filton a passenger airport.
Family to raise makes no difference.

The risk is absolutely tiny, I would rather they banned diesel and petrol vehicles. That damges mine and everyone else's health far far more than nuclear, fraking etc.

EPA? oh you mean the blog\site that my government setup to con people with?

But hey they did post a pdf of a up and coming power point presentation of the findings in Dimock, Pennsylvania
but barmy Obama told them to take it down for a week or two. But I have found it

http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Dimock%20report.pdf

That is a real copy of the study that will be released soon

"Methane and other gases released during drilling (including air from thedrilling) apparently cause significant damage to the water quality."

Or the Washington post
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-29/politics/40887594_1_cabot-s-fracking-methane

Glaucus, would you care to comment?

It could very well be that the EPA study is BS also. I'm not buying into the its absolutely safe. I very much doubt any of us common folk, are able to interpret those charts. As I said, we really need some scientists and EPA folk to spill the beans. Problem is they're on the payroll. Bit like a doctor selling you those magic slimming pills on TV.

 

[Glaucus]

Not really,
1) they have different safety and environmental procurers as someone has allready pointed out.
2) Who knows the origin of the report.
3) it's at just one site, so even if true this does not mean its fracking in general. Where all environmental procedures followed etc?

This does not detract from the lie that is gaslands. That have been shown to be lies as he knew about what happened before fracking and neglected to say because he didnt think it was rellevent.


And lets not forget in the uk at least (no idea about US) mains water is regurly tested and monitored.

Spill the beans, what happens if there are no beans to spill. You assume there is a 100% chance of cover up and that no other scientists are willing to peer review findings or do there own reserch.

 

[do_ron_ron]

10% of the gas that has been discovered in the north of England so far will be enough to provide the entire UK with gas for 50 years. So yeah, its 'nothing much'

That must be the wildest claim I have heard yet. Anyone else seems to think there may be up to 40 years in the whole country.

 

[willhub]

Protesters want us to ditch things like our nuclear power stations, our nuclear defense systems, fracking, wind turbines etc....

If they had their way we'd be living in the 1970's or earlier.

 

[Glaucus]

Protesters want us to ditch things like our nuclear power stations, our nuclear defense systems, fracking, wind turbines etc....

If they had their way we'd be living in the 1970's or earlier.

More like 0bc, you forgot petrol, cars, coal, GM, fertilisers, concrete etc.

 

[deuse]

Ah, the old "can't trust the scientists/environment agencies because they are in the pay of big oil" routine... Great catch all excuse...

As for the study, looks interesting and I'm sure I will be reading the full release when it's out. However it doesn't seem to state much new. We already know that gas can migrate up the wellbore (discussed earlier). It's less about fracking than poor regulation in the US. For example in the UK you have to case off individual water legs from each other and have to have at least cased off any drinkable aquifier before going into a potentially hydrocarbon bearing interval. That's probably why the PowerPoint was pulled, there*isn't enough information without the report or someone presenting it to make an informed decision.

The only mention of fracking is when it says "methane is released during the drilling and perhaps during the fracking process and other gas well work". Well if they haven't case off the aquifer from the gas reservoir what do they expect...

I can't open the other link at the moment so can't comment on that.

NO. It was pulled when Obama told lies in Jacksonville and got caught out

They should put more money into getting Hydrogen from water but that would mean the rich won't get richer

 

[willhub]

Ain't hippies trying to stop HS2 as well? Leaving us well behind the rest of Europe in terms of rail travel?

 

[doodah]

Ain't hippies trying to stop HS2 as well? Leaving us well behind the rest of Europe in terms of rail travel?

Country folk too but if reports are to be believed; £32bn > £40bn > £80bn is some what of a price jump.

 

[alx]

NO. It was pulled when Obama told lies in Jacksonville and got caught out

They should put more money into getting Hydrogen from water but that would mean the rich won't get richer

Why? There's already multiple ways it can be done but it's just never going to be an efficient process. Hydrogen isn't a fuel, it's an energy carrier and hence really is a waste of time except for very niche uses - http://phys.org/news85074285.html

 

[Tom_ed1987]

Fracking is the latest buzzword the eco nutters and the generic 'anti establishment' lot have latched on to, probably because it sounds menacing and a bit like a naughty word (they are simple like that). None of them have a clue what it is, what's involved, its history, the potential dangers or the advantages it could bring to the nation. They just want something to protest about and fracking is it.

They interviewed a protestor on The One Show last night - it's particularly hilarious towards the end.
You really don't have much of an argument when you find yourself outwitted by The One Show, and have to resort to calling the BBC facist

 

[-Ad-]

I have to agree - in my opinion fracking can be done very safely. Without meaning to stereotype, I think some certain gunghoness and "act first, think later" mentality by US fracking companies has led to questionable practices over in the states.

Considering the regulations, offshore experience in the north sea and generally more conservative nature of the UK, I wouldn't expect the UK to have such issues.

Exactly.

The US are still fairly 'Gung Ho' in their O&G onshore operations compared to the Uk and Europe, which is also evident in their fracking.

People can whine, complain and protest all they want, but fracking is here to stay and will expand! The government certainly arn't going to start restricting it or even banning it.

 

[deuse]

Why? There's already multiple ways it can be done but it's just never going to be an efficient process. Hydrogen isn't a fuel, it's an energy carrier and hence really is a waste of time except for very niche uses - http://phys.org/news85074285.html

A waste of time now but maybe not next year. We could put more into hydrogen, fuel cells. Well the US has put up $1 billion to start it off.

The thing is if another country cracks it first then we will have to pay loads to get it.

 

[marmalade]

In Excess of 5% of all new fracking rigs leak and due to the nature of geology and the passage of time this rate will rise. As to having 100% control in respect of leaks over the thousands of feet of piping this is impossible. It has been said that the chemicals used resemble washing-up liquid - it would be nice for the Camers family to do their washing up in the chemicals introduced during fracking. These chemicals are highly toxic and once in the ground remain there. In Oz there are enormous problems with our water aquifers once poisoned remain so what do we do? – our water resources are minimal at the best of times and water quality can be a problem. Huge amounts of water are needed for the fracking process. In the US towns are running out of water to to the massive extraction!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aU6DJE9h6uc

Four Corners: The Gas Rush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCMcr27uAg4

Gas Leak! by Four Corners
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayhPNCUoQ7I

In Germany the fracking process has already resulted in pollution and not too far from my land in Niedersachsen We must not forget that there are more lobbyists in Berlin than politicians. Is it to be expected that more care will be taken in the Uk than Germany? Yeh royt!!!

 

[DAnDan]

In Excess of 5% of all new fracking rigs leak and due to the nature of geology and the passage of time this rate will rise. As to having 100% control in respect of leaks over the thousands of feet of piping this is impossible. It has been said that the chemicals used resemble washing-up liquid - it would be nice for the Camers family to do their washing up in the chemicals introduced during fracking. These chemicals are highly toxic and once in the ground remain there. In Oz there are enormous problems with our water aquifers once poisoned remain so what do we do? – our water resources are minimal at the best of times and water quality can be a problem. Huge amounts of water are needed for the fracking process. In the US towns are running out of water to to the massive extraction!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aU6DJE9h6uc

Four Corners: The Gas Rush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCMcr27uAg4

Gas Leak! by Four Corners
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayhPNCUoQ7I

Got any sources for all of that which aren't random videos on youtube? Hardly a worthwhile source...

 

[Calabi]

The only reason gas is cheaper now is because theirs an over supply of gas. Companies are going out of business because its too cheap, or their just running their fracking at a loss until prices go up.

Anyone selling the fracking as cheaper gas prices is a snake oil salesmen.

Theres no guarantee their even going to be able to get the gas or how much exactly. Poland has close to the largest shale gas in Europe, no companies have been able to get it yet.

Its a stupid gamble to me, too many maybes and dont knows. We can have all the energy we need guaranteed to beyond a hundred years or more with other methods.

 

[Tom_ed1987]

In Excess of 5% of all new fracking rigs leak and due to the nature of geology and the passage of time this rate will rise. As to having 100% control in respect of leaks over the thousands of feet of piping this is impossible. It has been said that the chemicals used resemble washing-up liquid - it would be nice for the Camers family to do their washing up in the chemicals introduced during fracking. These chemicals are highly toxic and once in the ground remain there. In Oz there are enormous problems with our water aquifers once poisoned remain so what do we do? – our water resources are minimal at the best of times and water quality can be a problem. Huge amounts of water are needed for the fracking process. In the US towns are running out of water to to the massive extraction!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aU6DJE9h6uc

Four Corners: The Gas Rush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCMcr27uAg4

Gas Leak! by Four Corners
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayhPNCUoQ7I

In Germany the fracking process has already resulted in pollution and not too far from my land in Niedersachsen We must not forget that there are more lobbyists in Berlin than politicians. Is it to be expected that more care will be taken in the Uk than Germany? Yeh royt!!!

This is scaremongering and inorrect. If there was a 0.1% chance that a correctly installed and regulated fracking operation could contaminate the water table they would not have been granted persmission to operate by the EA.
And I don't get the argument that the chamicals used stay down there forever. What does it matter - it's separated from the water table by more impermeable rock than that which protects Cheyenne mountain from a direct 5MT thermonuclear blast, and what is down there naturally isn't exactly the nicest stuff in the world.