What's new
PNE-Online
Welcome to PNE-Online. Why not register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! You can also join up as a forum Patron to help support in the running costs of the forum.

Fracking

northender0602

Forum Patron
Patron
Not according to the science, loads of areas round here getting looked at. No plebs round here the majority vote for the Tories. I call them something else though Tories that is.

One thing which may help but have never heard anyone mention how about all social housing fitted with solar panels?
My lass lives in a social housing property up near the grasshoppers, all houses in that area have solar panels, I believe its a requirement for all new builds.
 

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
What about wave technology? Is that any good?
Queen Elizabeth GIF


Too soon
 

Portishead

Forum Patron
Patron
There is an adjacent subterranean area near & adjacent to this, in the area of the Fylde that straddles the estuary of the River Eyre:this formerly contained Rocksalt deposits, (now I believe are empty caverns,) where formerly Brine was pumped, until the 1980's The stuff was pumped-out from the Stalmine Area across to 'ICI Thornton' on the West Bank of the Wyre Estuary at Thornton. Stalmine has seen frequent 'slumpings' of whole farms & fields since this extraction process began in the 19thC.

Empty Caverns . History of Major Collapses. Next to ( & possible overlapping by? Dunno ! a proposed Shale Gas Extraction Area? Alarm Bells SHOULD be ringing...
---oOo---
Under the Fylde is a layer of Sandstone.
This Sandstone is water-bearing rock.
In the 1970's, and since, the NWWA has sank numerous pumps into this mass to extract this 'Groundwater'. They have actually taken as much so as to shut-down quite a few of these, because the Ground Water level has been lowered to that crucial point of depth. "Uh, the Well's run dry".

How do we know that Fracking waste water will not find it's way into these now empty/ but still porous volumes of Sandstone & seep & pollute the Remaining Volumes of (still) Water Bearing Sandstone ?

Betcha bottom dollar Mr Francis Egan hasn't been called upon to answer these two (rather troubling,imo) concerns.
Anyone else know owt?
If I was a resident of the Stalmine area, I'd seriously consider relocation.

Your on the very cusp of being labelled a scaremonger. Which these days means youre on the brink of getting close to the truth. If all of this was so obvious, easy and safe, we would have done it years ago. I suspect its actually difficult to do and fraught with cost risk which has been indicated by Quasdrilla in their recent statements. Such that you might subsidise them now to embark on drilling but that in 10 years time the cost might be prohibitive.
 

Sepp Blatter

Ursula Fanboy
Patron
What about wave technology? Is that any good?

Your on the very cusp of being labelled a scaremonger. Which these days means youre on the brink of getting close to the truth. If all of this was so obvious, easy and safe, we would have done it years ago. I suspect its actually difficult to do and fraught with cost risk which has been indicated by Quasdrilla in their recent statements. Such that you might subsidise them now to embark on drilling but that in 10 years time the cost might be prohibitive.
Imagine investing the money they want to put into fracking into further developing wave energy - a far better use of funds!
 

outreacher

Respect Nature
Patron
Oh that pesky Tory shale gas only being accessible in the plebs areas.
Why are you in favour of Big Oil's determination, to pursue the continuation of Oil and Gas expansion, regardless of the damage to the planet?

You claim not to be a Tory supporter, yet you agree with all their policies, no matter the damage it does to ordinary people, working people on low pay. The resurrection of drilling for shale gas, when it is proven that it's extremely damaging to the environment, not only to local communities, but to the whole world. There have been numerous High Court cases against Exxon in the US for climate crimes, about their cover-up of the extreme damage their expansion into fracking is doing to the environment. They actually try to block projects intent on using green energy as a way forward.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...al-climate-crimes-fossil-fuels-global-heating

Donald Trump tore up the Paris Agreement for reducing carbon emotions, in favour of making the US the world's biggest producer of Oil and Gas, on his team were ex big-wigs of Exxon. Disregarding the rest of the awful shit that man's policies were leading, his support of oil and gas expansion, is probably the worst. I believe from your posts you are a fanboy of his too.

Thirty years ago, when I lived in Spain, and the Spanish media were concerned about the rising temperatures in Andalusia, warning that if it continued it would have serious consequences on the South of Spain. I was convinced that the climate crisis, it was called Global Warming then, was utter bullshit, spread by the extremist environmentalists, with nothing better to do, than protest and spread fear, without justification. It took a long time to reverse my views, hours watching programmes by experts who spend their lives working in the places where the damage is being done. Polar caps, the oceans, and the areas where climate change is advancing rapidly. Reading and studying reports by scientists and experts, all led to reversing my views.

Today, I wonder what sort of world my grand child is going to inherit, the young kids today will face a terrible future, created by us, no fault of theirs, they didn't make it. It is people like you, the deniers, enablers, supporters of Global Exploiters whose motivation is greed. Be sure to let your grandkids know, that you were complicit and fully supported the expansion and exploitation of fossil fuels, do you think they will believe you were right and thank you?
 
Last edited:

nigelscamelcoat

Advisor to the Owner
Your on the very cusp of being labelled a scaremonger. Which these days means youre on the brink of getting close to the truth. If all of this was so obvious, easy and safe, we would have done it years ago. I suspect its actually difficult to do and fraught with cost risk which has been indicated by Quasdrilla in their recent statements. Such that you might subsidise them now to embark on drilling but that in 10 years time the cost might be prohibitive.
We did do it with coal mining. I know over in east Yorkshire a whole river once disappeared under ground.
Still causing major problems years after excavating under ground ended.
We don't want to be taking risks again.
Keep it in the ground seems like a sound mantra.
 

Snicky

Hasa Diga Eebowai
Patron
Bloody marvellous. How many does it supply for how long. And when its gone youre in the same position. Deal with the long term now.
That is the point of the exploration that I am in favour of, to find that out.

The whole idea if this is for it to be a gap fuel, to sustain us to a point where tech has improved to the point we can rely on other clean sources.
 

Summat

First Team
That is the point of the exploration that I am in favour of, to find that out.

The whole idea if this is for it to be a gap fuel, to sustain us to a point where tech has improved to the point we can rely on other clean sources.

Problem is that if fracking was feasible then it will not be on stream till 2025 at the earliest, just in time for the phasing out of gas boilers, we already have plenty of clean sources that can be utilised and brought on stream quicker if investment in the form of subsidy was available in preference to massively investing in what is intended to become obsolete, whoever is in government, why are labour not supporting these alternatives instead of hanging of the shirt tails of tory policies and proposing more of the same.
 

Sepp Blatter

Ursula Fanboy
Patron
Problem is that if fracking was feasible then it will not be on stream till 2025 at the earliest, just in time for the phasing out of gas boilers, we already have plenty of clean sources that can be utilised and brought on stream quicker if investment in the form of subsidy was available in preference to massively investing in what is intended to become obsolete, whoever is in government, why are labour not supporting these alternatives instead of hanging of the shirt tails of tory policies and proposing more of the same.
Absolutely - spending time and resources on a technology that won't be used for long, even if it does produce results, seems like a waste. There are other innovations that need investment - the wave power discussed above, for example, is promising and at the prototype stage, but it has been suffering from massive under-investment. The UK has a chance of being a leader in this technology.

As for Labour, let us hope that they take no notice of that idiot Mandelson and his cronies say:

The party should also “stay positive” but be unafraid of capitalising on “quick wins from the Tories when possible”; nor should it focus on “green jobs” bringing back manufacturing roles but instead promote the possibility of new ones in digital, finance and innovation, the report added.


Never was quite sure why he hated manufacturing so much. The UK has some great potential in green manufacturing with the right investment.
 

noelpne

Forum Patron
Patron
That is the point of the exploration that I am in favour of, to find that out.

The whole idea if this is for it to be a gap fuel, to sustain us to a point where tech has improved to the point we can rely on other clean sources.
This gap-fuel theory would be fine if it was controlled & ( voluntarily?forcibly? ) tapered-off by a/many successive Sympathetic Governments , who would subsidise the taking-up by the Public , of this newtech.

What's happened in the past with North Sea Gas is that it was so convenient simply to use it, (and then also remove their Storage Facilities without replacing these in out-of-town areas ) and use the Tax Revenues for, er, 'some-other-use' by the Chancellor(s) of the Exchequer.

What's to stop this happening again?



(oh, and what about this Zero Emissions greenwash? )
 
Top