Fracking - Do you Give a Fruck?

[Peter Jacobs]

Phil,

It will be the same water as that used on golf courses up and down the Country, the same water as that used by other industries, farms and factories, parks and nurseries . . . . . and the same water that is mixed with human excrement and diverted into our rivers whenever a sewage plant over-reaches its storage capacity.

How come it is deemed perfectly acceptable to pour this over golf courses but not to use as a medium to provide cheaper and long-lasting energy sounce to the UK for the next 50 or so years?

As for the recovery and disposal process it is nowhere near as problematic as that currently employed in our nuclear plants in the UK.

As for "the unscrupulous driven by profit do dispose of it in ways that are totally unacceptable and illegal" yes, you pointed out one individual case, hardly a scientific base on which to make sweeping statements, unless you subscribe to the Martin Salter school of authorship that is.

Incidentally, the person in question didn't even work for an oil or gas company but for a waste disposal firm.

I have commented on this topic many times in the past few weeks, and there is so much correct information out there for both Mr Salter and the Angling Trust to have consumed, and then sought to solicit a balanced position from the oil industry rather than what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction based on falacious video clips and this US conservation organisation.

 

[bennygesserit]

Peter I too would concede that the Trust's initial statement seems strangely ill informed and sensationalist.

On the question of how much water is used I have seen , and quoted , lots of different figures , trillions of litres for instance across the thousands of holes required according to some sites. No matter there is a dispute about the amount of water required , no dispute about the nasties bought up or sent down as part of the process though its not a clean process.

 

[Fred Bonney]

Coal mining was never a clean process either!

We've moved on, and are more aware of the responsibilities to this Earth of ours.

I think that there is more Nimbyism built around these stories than factual evidence.

 

[richiekelly]

There is a programe on ITV at 7:30 called "the truth about fracking.

 

[chub_on_the_block]

There is a programe on ITV at 7:30 called "the truth about fracking.

Good. I didnt know that.

Only problem with TV programs - especially BBC ones (which i know this isnt) - is that they rarely come out one way or the other - they will give all the positives and all the negatives and end with some woolly stuff about "if we do our homework and monitor effectively this has promise..so long as it doesnt fall into the wrong hands" type of banality. I suppose i hope they interview some individuals whose views i would listen to.

 

[bennygesserit]

The golf course example is primarily an abstraction issue, although given the amount of fertilisers and weedkillers poured onto the average golf course per annum then it could also be considerd as a potential contamination issue as well. The 300k per day should have been 300k per week, as in: . . . . . . ."Any deficit in rainfall must be supplemented with irrigation. A typical golf course requires 100,000 to 1,000,000 gallons (378.5 m3 to 3,785 m3) of water per week in summer to maintain healthy vegetation."

The amount of water required in hydraulic fracturing can be anything from 200,000 gallons up to around 4 million gallons depending on geology, the tightness of the formations and the location.

As noted previously though, it is possible to recover, clean and re-use the majority of the water from the fracturing process.

4 Million gallons per hole ? Over what timescale ? I must admit this is one of the potential issues for anglers , in particular where you get a concentration of fracking in one area

 

[Dave Smith]

Ooh err tax, vampires, sucking on the public purse best not go there eh! Might just have to look at Google, Amazon, Big oil et al.

Correct the drafts of the IPCC report have been leaked, strange interpretation of what they actually say form you, assuming you’ve “read” them and not relied on the press wing slant on them.Peter and the water being sold to the Fracking Cos by WCs would come from where?
Last time I checked the WCs don’t have a magical supply hidden away with fairies, it comes from the supply system in the areas fracking would take place. Some of those areas are already suffering water stress now!

Whilst some water recovery and cleaning is possible within the industry, the cleaning leaves a very concentrated sludge with other pollutants which weren’t there when they were put down the hole, heavy metals flushed out due to very high pressure, naturally occurring radioactive materials from the drilled rock and shales. All collected in the concentrated sludge pools for disposal.
There is no reference I can find by this industry as to how and where this sludge will be disposed of.
And as I’ve pointed out, the unscrupulous driven by profit do dispose of it in ways that are totally unacceptable and illegal.

WOW! you really ought to be careful! you duck any more and some one might shoot you quack quack

Yes I have read the leaked bits, a Climate sensitivity of less then 2c where as they stated in AR4 Climate sensitivity of 2c-4.5c... but they are of course trying cover the embarrassment of getting that wrong buy stating they are now 95% certain humans are to blame for the warming not 90%..........or lack of as the facts of 17+ years with no warming.Slants can be put on anything...as the AGW scam has proven time and time again, shame no one thought to consider mother nature mg:

 

[richiekelly]

I was undecided about this until I heard on the programme a bloke from "energy at depth" who I imagine are part of the fracking industry in the USA say that yes there have been instances of water contamination due to fracking. that's good enough for me.

Iwonder how many in power stand to gain from this.

 

[Paul Boote]

Definitely, blanker. Not even with somebody else's.

 

[geoffmaynard]

Lastly Geoff, and for the record, I live in Wiltshire, and far from being "Grumpy" I would prefer to describe myself as being . . . . . . informed.

I wasn't meaning you were Mr Grumpy, it was generic insert... oh, I have!
I wish I shared your trust in the powers that be to ignore financial considerations when issuing an abstraction license.

 

[The bad one]

Phil,

It will be the same water as that used on golf courses up and down the Country, the same water as that used by other industries, farms and factories, parks and nurseries . . . . . and the same water that is mixed with human excrement and diverted into our rivers whenever a sewage plant over-reaches its storage capacity.

How come it is deemed perfectly acceptable to pour this over golf courses but not to use as a medium to provide cheaper and long-lasting energy sounce to the UK for the next 50 or so years?

As for the recovery and disposal process it is nowhere near as problematic as that currently employed in our nuclear plants in the UK.

As for "the unscrupulous driven by profit do dispose of it in ways that are totally unacceptable and illegal" yes, you pointed out one individual case, hardly a scientific base on which to make sweeping statements, unless you subscribe to the Martin Salter school of authorship that is.

Incidentally, the person in question didn't even work for an oil or gas company but for a waste disposal firm.

I have commented on this topic many times in the past few weeks, and there is so much correct information out there for both Mr Salter and the Angling Trust to have consumed, and then sought to solicit a balanced position from the oil industry rather than what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction based on falacious video clips and this US conservation organisation.

It will be the same water as that used on golf courses up and down the Country, the same water as that used by other industries, farms and factories, parks and nurseries . . . . . and the same water that is mixed with human excrement and diverted into our rivers whenever a sewage plant over-reaches its storage capacity.
Ah the oilman tactic eh, answer with sweeping statements to divert it away from answering the questions posed.
There is no grey water supplies in this country supplied to anyone by WCs Peter. It’s either treated and put back into the public supply system or returned to the river treated, where the plants are.

So are you suggesting it will come out of the public supply chain or taken from the rivers? A system that suffering water stress already in many parts of the country. Your area and rivers being a case in point!
It’s a finite resource Peter that’s at breaking point.
That’s the point MS is making along with stronger regulation taking Full EIAs.

How come it is deemed perfectly acceptable to pour this over golf courses but not to use as a medium to provide cheaper and long-lasting energy sounce to the UK for the next 50 or so years?

They, rightly or wrongly are establish demands on the already over stretched supply. This is a new high demand industry on that already over stretched system in areas that can’t support those demands. As to its cheapness, that case has not been proven in the UK. Other than the Boy Osborn telling us it will because it is in the US.

As for the recovery and disposal process it is nowhere near as problematic as that currently employed in our nuclear plants in the UK.

That my well be true but with the record of the Nuclear industry one should not be filled with glee that it may be. And you have avoided totally how it will be disposed of. So how Peter?

As for "the unscrupulous driven by profit do dispose of it in ways that are totally unacceptable and illegal" yes, you pointed out one individual case, hardly a scientific base on which to make sweeping statements, unless you subscribe to the Martin Salter school of authorship that is.
Incidentally, the person in question didn't even work for an oil or gas company but for a waste disposal firm.

That’s the only one so far I can find that’s been caught, but it shows that there are those “contracted” to and for fracking Cos that will cut corners.
It also shows a weakness in the US EPA. Here under our EPA the creators Oil/Gas Cos would have been alongside him in the Doc…. Cradle to Grave Scenario. “Not us Gov we passed it on to a contractor,” paid and working for us, doesn’t wash in the UK Courts.

I have commented on this topic many times in the past few weeks, and there is so much correct information out there for both Mr Salter and the Angling Trust to have consumed, and then sought to solicit a balanced position from the oil industry rather than what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction based on falacious video clips and this US conservation organisation.

But that’s the disputed part Peter the correctness of the industry.

 

[Fred Bonney]

Too many if 's but's and maybe's for my liking in the anti brigades stance.

Bloody Luddites!

 

[Peter Jacobs]

On the contrary Phil, I have stated (twice I think) that the water will come from the EA via the general supply, so no sweeping statements, it will be the same water that is used throughout the Country (in all probability paid for)
So, no obfuscation from my side either deliberate or implied.

As to the corectness of the industry, we have utilised Hydraulic Fracturing in the US for many decades, in Germany for almost 60 years and throughout most of the European Continental shelf since the late 70's without incident.
It is an intrinsically SAFE Process.

Can accidents happen?
Of course they can, but in all probability with far less incidence or severity that those from a nuclear power station.

Notwithstanding that we have discussed this topic quite a few times in the recent past, the real point is that Martin Salter and the Angling Trust have issued a very misleading and wholly one-sided view that I believe needs to be redressed by them, and the sooner the better.

 

[Paul Boote]

It's when you get chappies like this - Ukip: anti-fracking 'eco-freaks' will kill economic opportunity | Environment | theguardian.com - branding anyone agin the Frack Thang as "eco freaks", you begin to get a not so good a feeling about fracking and its advocates. Follow the money, as always; fracked gas won't reduce domestic bills for the many here (as it has in the States), merely line a few already well-stuffed pockets.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

It's when you get chappies like this - Ukip: anti-fracking 'eco-freaks' will kill economic opportunity | Environment | theguardian.com - branding anyone agin the Frack Thang as "eco freaks", you begin to get a not so good a feeling about fracking and its advocates. Follow the money, as always; fracked gas won't reduce domestic bills for the many here (as it has in the States), merely line a few already well-stuffed pockets.

Is that the best you can conjure-up?

I'm disappointed, I had hoped for a more informed and worthy opponent.

Nonetheless, even if the initial cost of shale gas is no cheper than what we are paying (through the nose for) from our Russian suppliers, it will at least secure home produced supplies for an estimated 50 years or so.

Again it would appear that the case against is built on the shakey foundation of "ifs, buts, posibles and maybes"

I have throughout this debate been careful not to brand anyone as an "eco-freak" or "bunny-hugger" (as tempting as i has been on occasion) so by the same token I would not expect the word "profit" to be misinturpreted as a swear word Paul.

 

[Paul Boote]

Is that the best you can conjure-up?

I'm disappointed, I had hoped for a more informed and worthy opponent.

Nonetheless, even if the initial cost of shale gas is no cheper than what we are paying (through the nose for) from our Russian suppliers, it will at least secure home produced supplies for an estimated 50 years or so.

Again it would appear that the case against is built on the shakey foundation of "ifs, buts, posibles and maybes"

I have throughout this debate been careful not to brand anyone as an "eco-freak" or "bunny-hugger" (as tempting as i has been on occasion) so by the same token I would not expect the word "profit" to be misinturpreted as a swear word Paul.

Very telling reply that, Peter Jacobs. I am not in the deeply entrenched, political or climate change pointscoring argument and arguing war; some clearly are, though. Very telling.

What I have merely been saying here is: "Look before you leap." and "Act in haste, repent at leisure".

 

[Peter Jacobs]

What I have merely been saying here is: "Look before you leap." and "Act in haste, repent at leisure".

A wise route to take, maybe the Angling Trust should have taken heed themselves.

People seem to think that by dint of the fact that I work in the oil and gas industry that I have a vested interest in Shale Gas.

The truth of the matter is that I could have retired 5 years ago, however because I love the work I do I decided to carry on, and probably will do so for the next 4 or 5 years.

My current Projects have absolutely nothing to do with the extraction/production of shale gas but are actually centred around the decommissiong of "end of life platforms" in an environmentally friendly manner . . . . . . . .

My participation on these threads is purely to try to bring an informed and experienced opinion, based on more than 35 years in the industry, to correct some of the "ifs, buts, posibles and maybes"

But, back to the main point: this is taken from the Martin Salter afrticle, "Quite clearly the Angling Trust needed to wade in on this issue "

Well, to be honest Mr Salter, no, the Angling Trust most certainly did not need to "wade in" at all!

What the Angling Trust needed to do was to obtain a balanced view by consultation with all knowledgable parties and then attempt to either draw their conclusions or, better still, offer its members a properly balanced argument.

 

[bennygesserit]

mostly a good natured debate I thought Peter - it should be we have had enough practice at it This particular debate is all about water and , for me , there are still 3 unanswered questions


How much water does each well use and will the resultant abstraction , concentrated in a single area , affect the local eco-system. What safeguards are there in place to monitor.

Will any drills go directly through a water source - is Cuadrilla being made to consider this and consult directly with our water companies.

How much contaminated water will be generated and will it be disposed of / monitored carefully.

 

[Dave Smith]

It's when you get chappies like this - Ukip: anti-fracking 'eco-freaks' will kill economic opportunity | Environment | theguardian.com - branding anyone agin the Frack Thang as "eco freaks", you begin to get a not so good a feeling about fracking and its advocates. Follow the money, as always; fracked gas won't reduce domestic bills for the many here (as it has in the States), merely line a few already well-stuffed pockets.

But its OK for the Eco's,Greens to label skeptics as "deniers" or say they are all in the pay of big oil!! when infact if a little research is done you will see big oil,mining,all the things the Eco's, Greens, hate have been funding the climate science the Ecomentalists use

Are you really naive enough to believe that shale gas will not reduce domestic bill and more importantly give us some energy security!!

 

[Paul Boote]

It's beginning to become abrasive. Strongly held opinions being aired by some looking to sway and convert others. Sorry, but I don't do Jehovah's Witnesses and Doorstep Evangelists.