Fair comments Peter and respect given for your moderation skills but Phil does have a valid point. What do politicians know about the risks posed from fracking? I suspect that to be little to nothing outside of the "advice" they are given. But where does this advice come from? Independent experts or experts who are tied up with the fracking industry?
If political angling find themselves negotiating in order to protect our watery environments from perceived threats from fracking, who will they be negotiating with? Domestic politicians.
A short extract from the Centre For Research Into Elections And Social Trends (CREST)
"Britain is widely believed to be suffering a crisis of democracy. Levels of turnout at elections have fallen. Cynicism about politics and politicians is thought to be rife. And nowhere are these problems perceived to be more evident than amongst young people who appear to comprise a new generation
of the politically disengaged. In short, we no longer participate in politics and no longer lend respect, authority or legitimacy to our political leaders. "
It is politicians themselves, by their actions, ( actions where some MP's have been handed out prison sentences no less) who have caused cynicism and mistrust among the electorate. So where grave concerns exist for angling over perceived threats to the watery environment via fracking, can we trust them? I feel that the trust issue is as legitimate as the concern itself.
For me, the world of domestic politics is a world away from the quiet pastime we indulge ourselves in. But on occasion the path of the angler and that of the domestic politician cross. With fracking however, the threats do not merely effect anglers but life itself if our rivers and aquifers were to come under serious threat from fracking.
For me, and many more like me, the rhetoric coming from domestic politicians is all too familiar as they talk endlessly about the so called benefits to be had for our nation from fracking but say nothing at all about the threats.
Fracking has been going off in America for some time so data has been collected and verified by various bodies.
So what are the threats from fracking that our politicians appear to have forgotten?
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, is the process of drilling and injecting fluid into the ground at a high pressure in order to fracture shale rocks to release natural gas inside.
Each gas well requires an average of 400 tanker trucks to carry water and supplies to and from the site.
It takes 1-8 million gallons of water to complete each fracturing job.
The water brought in is mixed with sand and chemicals to create fracking fluid. Approximately 40,000 gallons of chemicals are used per fracturing.
Up to 600 chemicals are used in fracking fluid, including known carcinogens and toxins such as…
LEAD
URANIUM
MERCURY
ETHYLENE GLYCOL
RADIUM
METHANOL
HYDROCHLORIC ACID
FORMALDEHYDE
DOWN 10,000FT
The fracking fluid is then pressure injected into the ground through a drilled pipeline.
THE MATHS
500,000 Active gas wells in the US X 8 million Gallons of water per fracking X 18 Times a well can be fracked. 2 trillion gallons of water and 360 billion gallons of chemicals needed to run our current gas wells.
SHALE FRACTURING
The mixture reaches the end of the well where the high pressure causes the nearby shale rock to crack, creating fissures where natural gas flows into the well.
CONTAMINATION
During this process, methane gas and toxic chemicals leach out from the system and contaminate nearby groundwater.
Methane concentrations are 17x higher in drinking-water wells near fracturing sites than in normal wells.
DRINKING WATER
Contaminated well water is used for drinking water for nearby cities and towns.
There have been over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination next to areas of gas drilling as well as cases of sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water.
LEFT BEHIND
Only 30-50% of the fracturing fluid is recovered, the rest of the toxic fluid is left in the ground and is not biodegradable.
The waste fluid is left in open air pits to evaporate, releasing harmful VOC’s (volatile organic compounds) into the atmosphere, creating contaminated air, acid rain, and ground level ozone.
So are our politicians deceiving us? Are they telling as "ALL" the fracking facts? And if not, WHY NOT? Given that the world generally is looking towards alternative methods of energy production with directives aimed at reducing threats to our planet is the practice of fracking taking us backwards to the days when we polluted our world with no thought as to the consequences.
Money money money, must be funny, in a rich mans world.
How does one keep comments in a non-political nature Peter when clearly its very much a political issue both in terms of angling politics and domestic politics? In this case they are inexplicably inter twinned surely?