Seymour M Hersh Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 1 minute ago, jake said: More links for you . I dont want to spam thread as ive been warned .But there is a plethora of evidence that shows chemicals which are extremely hazardous to the water table are put there via fracking. And thats the ones that are easily detected. There are others which took years of study to identify. Cancer in children is higher in ares affected etc etc. Id say our natural resource of water is far more valuable. Anyway here are 2 more links. https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/energy-and-climate-change-directorate/fracking-unconventional-oil-and-gas/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=420&uuId=864652080 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fracking-can-contaminate-drinking-water/# There are plenty more if you're not convinced. From Australia America in fact anywhere this takes place. And whats even more unsuitable from a Scottish perspective is that fracking in this country would be in a much more densely populated area. Once again i think the SNP should take healthy praise for this decision in the face of a very powerful lobby. Out of 1.7 million active sites in the US (as of 2015) it's still a minuscule %. There are always risks in extracting energy just look at oil, gas, coal, nuclear even timber for deaths and pollution and (unless your an SNP fanatic) you wouldn't ban these wholesale or would you? The advertising standards authority had to censure friends of the earth for their lies in their posters. When one of the foe senior "activists' said the ASA were cool with them the ASA issued an unprecedented rebuttal of this (more lies). And you're correct i'm not convinced the dangers so massively outweigh the benefits. Fuel prices have halved in the US on the back of shale gas & oil. Renewables won't keep the lights on here no matter what fat alex and his merry band try to tell you (100% reliant on them as a country by 2020 iirc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 30 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said: Out of 1.7 million active sites in the US (as of 2015) it's still a minuscule %. There are always risks in extracting energy just look at oil, gas, coal, nuclear even timber for deaths and pollution and (unless your an SNP fanatic) you wouldn't ban these wholesale or would you? The advertising standards authority had to censure friends of the earth for their lies in their posters. When one of the foe senior "activists' said the ASA were cool with them the ASA issued an unprecedented rebuttal of this (more lies). And you're correct i'm not convinced the dangers so massively outweigh the benefits. Fuel prices have halved in the US on the back of shale gas & oil. Renewables won't keep the lights on here no matter what fat alex and his merry band try to tell you (100% reliant on them as a country by 2020 iirc). On the last point, prices for crude oil and, increasingly, natural gas are being determined by the huge volume of oil and gas being produced from shale/tight reservoirs in the US. Even success in fracking development in Scotland way beyond the most optimistic of estimates would have very little influence on fuel prices in Scotland. A decent small-scale development could potentially provide some cheap feedstock for INEOS, mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said: Out of 1.7 million active sites in the US (as of 2015) it's still a minuscule %. There are always risks in extracting energy just look at oil, gas, coal, nuclear even timber for deaths and pollution and (unless your an SNP fanatic) you wouldn't ban these wholesale or would you? The advertising standards authority had to censure friends of the earth for their lies in their posters. When one of the foe senior "activists' said the ASA were cool with them the ASA issued an unprecedented rebuttal of this (more lies). And you're correct i'm not convinced the dangers so massively outweigh the benefits. Fuel prices have halved in the US on the back of shale gas & oil. Renewables won't keep the lights on here no matter what fat alex and his merry band try to tell you (100% reliant on them as a country by 2020 iirc). You are right about renewables and the energy shortfall the UK is already suffering. But you have not understood the point of my links. Where water tables are affected it ruins them. You say its miniscule amounts but many of the fracking fields in the US are in sparsely populated areas that are very different to the geology of Scotland. Id also point you to future trends in value. Its accepted that water will become a supply stressed commodity. And while countries may survive with less fracked gas they will not survive without water. Just now the expense of exporting water is too great. But our relatively clean and abundant supply should not be underestimated in its value. I repeat to frack and risk that resource is lunacy and would benefit very few at the expense of many. Surely you can accept this. And surely you must give credit to the current Scottish government on a job well done in the face of such powerful lobbyists. As an aside i will look into the miniscule percentages of environmental damage which you claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 So after a quick search ive found out of new wells drilled roughly 10% leak. As they age this increases to 30-50%. Hardly miniscule. And although they may not contaminate water this is due to the geology of the area and not the practice. Once again i cite Scotlands geology. These figures are industry supplied. Happy to post links Seymour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Brown Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 37 minutes ago, jake said: So after a quick search ive found out of new wells drilled roughly 10% leak. As they age this increases to 30-50%. Hardly miniscule. And although they may not contaminate water this is due to the geology of the area and not the practice. Once again i cite Scotlands geology. These figures are industry supplied. Happy to post links Seymour I was watching Landward or Countryfile this week and Geoligist Prof John Underhill of Heriot Watt University (we all know him better in another profession :smile:) stated that Scotland's geology is totally unsuitable for fracking. found this recent link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40953427 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said: I was watching Landward or Countryfile this week and Geoligist Prof John Underhill of Heriot Watt University (we all know him better in another profession :smile:) stated that Scotland's geology is totally unsuitable for fracking. found this recent link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40953427 Good find. Ive been trying to find graphics which show what he was saying. Its really important that people understand the implications for Scotland. Thankfully and im certainly no fan of the SNP they did understand and Sillars was way off on this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 7 minutes ago, jake said: Good find. Ive been trying to find graphics which show what he was saying. Its really important that people understand the implications for Scotland. Thankfully and im certainly no fan of the SNP they did understand and Sillars was way off on this point. The implications of what he is saying is that fracking would never take off anyway, even if the ban was lifted. No need to worry about the environmental effects; drilling and fracking a well is an expensive business, and it needs to work economically before anyone gets close to polluting the water table with nasty chemicals. It’s unlikely anyone would get further than a couple of test wells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Mackerel Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Scotland leads the way in a multitude of cheap green renewable sources of energy and the usual biffers on here are out with all sorts of wailing and utter utter nonsense. I cant be bothered linking NS and her speech plus QnA at the Artic Summit and the reception she got last week now. Did anyone see it on the BeeBeeCee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 On 18/10/2017 at 17:39, Peebo said: No, it hasn’t. Operational at the moment, and will be there for years. I was there on a tour a couple of months ago. Turns out I was thinking of Dounray. Silly me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 On 18/10/2017 at 15:47, jb102 said: Dounreay I think you mean? Or Chapelcross? indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.