Jump to content

Fracking


Jambomo

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, DI Bruce Robertson said:


Great post.
I think alternative / renewable is the ultimate goal.
In the meantime, we need to look closely at fossils and decide what's acceptable & what isn't.
Many birds die every year by flying too close to Wind Turbines, so, if we are going to get all "Greenpeace" about it, we need to find an energy source that doesn't disrupt nature at all.
Count out Hydro, Wave, Wind & Solar.
So here we are. Trying to minimise impact, whilst still being able to light dogmc's house & fuel his car.

This is also a myth btw. 

But you're right. If we are going to have renewables powering the country, we basically need to industrialise the countryside with wind farms, hydro, solar etc. The capacity required is that high. This will undoubtedly have an effect on ecosystems, visual impact, etc. Tonnes and tonnes of steel will be required for the construction. People will be affected by the effects of this too. There are trade-offs with every method. It's always a judgement call. There is very rarely an obvious option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Crossbill said:

The rock that the hydrocarbons are being extracted from: Reservoir rock is permeable, it flows under its own pressure.  Source rock is impermeable - you need to split it apart to access the microscopic fissures that hold the hydrocarbons before it will begin to flow (and then only to the extend that you have fractured it). 

I work in subsea design.

This is correct. Can you catch me up on the point you're making please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yeah cancer clusters are entirely comparable to some birds occasionally flying into turbines. Still let's just believe the big corporations that there's no risk to the public after all its the 'greenpeace' types that have the vested interests.....[emoji6]

There is a chance that cancer sufferers can be cured.
I've yet to see the big wind producers sending out a standby team of avian vets to sit beside every wind-turbine.
So the argument about the impact of fracking on the environment is partially nullified when you start bringing human health > wildlife into the argument.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RussellAnderson said:

This is correct. Can you catch me up on the point you're making please?

It was really more a question about whether fracking (as I understand it) is already in practice offshore.  

My supplementary point (and main objection) is that most people do not understand the scale of drilling that would be required for unconventional hydrocarbon extraction and we risk blighting our countryside with hundreds or thousands of sites if we go ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Crossbill said:

It was really more a question about whether fracking (as I understand it) is already in practice offshore.  

My supplementary point (and main objection) is that most people do not understand the scale of drilling that would be required for unconventional hydrocarbon extraction and we risk blighting our countryside with hundreds or thousands of sites if we go ahead.

Okay fair enough. I'm not as au fait with the engineering processes, but as I understand it the offshore fracking is in impermeable shales, which are often found interbedded with permeable reservoir, blocking access to stored oil. The fracking can be used to break these barriers. But either way, it doesn't make too much of a difference I don't think.

The scale of drilling is entirely subjective. The drilling pads are typically pretty small installations, and much of the drilling equipment is there temporarily, before pumping begins. They have a drilling radius of around 3km in each direction, and directional drilling is developing quickly so this is likely to increase. Personally I'm no real fan of lowland countryside landscape, it's all pretty well industrialised in some sense by farming, but another person (ie you) will have a totally different opinion, and that's fair. There's no correct answer, but information always helps.

Out of interest, do you prefer wind turbines in the countryside?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the interest of healthy debate people should bear in mind that the Americans are utter cowboys when it comes to health and safety in this type of stuff. I believe their regulations for well conpletions etc are well below oyrs which may explain the leaks into water etc. (Correct me if wrong)

I do believe that more leeway is given to operations stateside than would ever be contemplated here- even under a Tory environment minister.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes the hypocrisy of some is staggering.

As they type how bad oil is on their Laptop/Mobile/Tablet made from said oil, as they sit in their warm office/home created by said oil/gas. They cannot have it both ways, as there is few alternatives to oil & gas to match their requirements and demands, until something else is found they have very little choice.

Its like the Greenpeace activists on Brent Spa, dressed in their wet suits made from, you guessed it, oil.

Or is it just ok when its in a third world country and not on our doorstep?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

In the interest of healthy debate people should bear in mind that the Americans are utter cowboys when it comes to health and safety in this type of stuff. I believe their regulations for well conpletions etc are well below oyrs which may explain the leaks into water etc. (Correct me if wrong)

This is one of the issues I currently have. I think that if we introduced fracking now it would be done with full regulation and health and safety in mind. Given the current political climate though, I wouldn't be confident that it would always be the case in the future.

I think that a government (Tory or right leaning Labour government) would be likely to move towards a society similar to the US and where they are desperately trying to attract investment some of the first things to go is often environmental "Red Tape" or protections and legislations. Look at the deregulation of the financial industry as an illustration of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes the hypocrisy of some is staggering.
As they type how bad oil is on their Laptop/Mobile/Tablet made from said oil, as they sit in their warm office/home created by said oil/gas. They cannot have it both ways, as there is few alternatives to oil & gas to match their requirements and demands, until something else is found they have very little choice.
Its like the Greenpeace activists on Brent Spa, dressed in their wet suits made from, you guessed it, oil.
Or is it just ok when its in a third world country and not on our doorstep?

Not one person said oil was bad surely your argument isn't so weak that you need to resort to fibbing? ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

 


Here you... We are building you a bypass so that no one needs to see Aberdeen once the oil is gone. What more do you want???

That is going to be full of traffic visiting the new AFC stadium, AECC and whatever other commercial enterprises the City Council allow beside it.  It will probably end up being quicker driving through the City!!!

Anyway, I live north of Ellon which is where the Dual Carriageway will end.  I think they have found that it is too expensive to build it in the NE metropolis of Aberdeenshire. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes the hypocrisy of some is staggering.
As they type how bad oil is on their Laptop/Mobile/Tablet made from said oil, as they sit in their warm office/home created by said oil/gas. They cannot have it both ways, as there is few alternatives to oil & gas to match their requirements and demands, until something else is found they have very little choice.
Its like the Greenpeace activists on Brent Spa, dressed in their wet suits made from, you guessed it, oil.
Or is it just ok when its in a third world country and not on our doorstep?


13th century baron: You complain about feudalism yet you're wearing rags made under feudalism

13th century peasant: *dies of plague*



More seriously though I remember speaking to SNP MP Phil Boswell who was very active in oil and gas and said he was a huge supporter of switching as much of our energy sources over to renewables and claimed we had the capability to manage it. I'll have a look and see if he's spoken about it somewhere online.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've got huge potential for renewable exploitation in this country, and development of technologies which can be exported to other countries once they become commercially viable could be a huge industry if given the correct investment. Unlikely under Conservative or SNP government determined to cosy up to existing oil industry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RussellAnderson said:

We've got huge potential for renewable exploitation in this country, and development of technologies which can be exported to other countries once they become commercially viable could be a huge industry if given the correct investment. Unlikely under Conservative or SNP government determined to cosy up to existing oil industry. 

You really put the Tories and SNP together on this?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Tony Ferrino said:

You really put the Tories and SNP together on this?

 

 

 

On this issue they both seem keen to back the oil and gas industry. SNP are basically deferring judgement with the moratorium, waiting for public opinion to become clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RussellAnderson said:

On this issue they both seem keen to back the oil and gas industry. SNP are basically deferring judgement with the moratorium, waiting for public opinion to become clear.

No, they're waiting for scientific evidence that can't be challenged in court before they make a decision (ban it).  Nothing to do with public opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

No, they're waiting for scientific evidence that can't be challenged in court before they make a decision (ban it).  Nothing to do with public opinion.

Well they'll be waiting a long time then, because as I've said above, there is no objective case for a ban. This isn't a black and white issue where science can make the decision. This is an area where someone has to weigh up the options and decide subjectively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, RussellAnderson said:

Well they'll be waiting a long time then, because as I've said above, there is no objective case for a ban. This isn't a black and white issue where science can make the decision. This is an area where someone has to weigh up the options and decide subjectively. 

Luckily, that's what they're doing.

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2017/01/8538

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...