Forums
First  << 1  2 >>  Last
Forum Main>>Non Related>> To Frack or Not to Frack
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Thread created on Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:56:20
Last replied to on Mon Jul 29, 2013 14:09:27
Yes, the Fracking Controversy is again full force.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23368505

But controversy just means Controversy - a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. A dispute, no more than that.

I'm strongly in favour of extracting shale gas.
Here is why:

1] Resources will be exploited - and it is silly to pretend otherwise.
2] I live in pone of the mst deprived communities in the UK, and bang on top of a pile of exploitable resources. We Need Jobs.
3] If you think fracking is environmentally unsound, try coal fired power generation instead.
The enviromental argument does not account for the simple fact that TANSTAAFL applies. There is no zero-impact solution.
4] The econmic benefit is beyond dispute - which is why the opposition has given up arguing and simply raises NIMBY-objections.
Greenpeace added that communities affected by fracking - the technique for extracting shale gas - faced a lot of disruption for very little gain.

A splendid cop-out. How many Green Peace freaks live in North Yorks? Is it THEIR community on the line?









Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:00:26
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:46:13
Enjoy your earthquakes and flammable tap water up there in The People's Republic Of North Yorkshire!

+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:14:50
By _I_ [575607]
Enjoy your earthquakes and flammable tap water up there in The People's Republic Of North Yorkshire!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing_by_country
[quote[]
Germany

Massive hydraulic fracturing treatments have been done in German tight sandstone gas wells since 1975.

In February 2013, the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel announced draft regulations that would allow hydraulic fracturing to develop shale gas.[14] The policy was said to be motivated by fear that high energy costs were making German industry uncompetitive with respect to nations developing low-cost shale gas; natural gas prices in the US were a quarter of those in Germany in 2012.
[/quote]

There is no country in Europe with more experiece in this field that Germany, whos operational expertise enhanced recovery systems for fuel and substitution goes back to the BUNA process.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-24/world/38773548_1_gas-production-greenhouse-gas-russian-gas

Promise of shale gas throws unexpected wrench into Germanys green energy plans

Notice the absence of scare-stories



So I guess we can discount the fairy tales about exploding water as just that: the kind of propaganda-bulldust once associatd with Der Stuermer and the Voelkische Beobachter.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-23/opinions/36016925_1_shale-gas-boom-shale-gas-gas-production

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Beerstein

ID: 1322136
Level: 16
Posts: 26650
Score: 20457
[ĞA]Beerstein [1322136]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:20:02
TBH I'm a fan of nuclear power but that's just me. Glad I got that out there before the thread gets derailed by you know who into an argument about you know what.

jack2.gif
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:23:31
By DarthBrogo [21801]
So I guess we can discount the fairy tales about exploding water as just that: the kind of propaganda-bulldust once associatd with Der Stuermer and the Voelkische Beobachter.


Not really, it can actually happen.

Plus, they're *German* Engineers doing the work, they're efficient and thorough. Can't really imagine a formerly long term unemployed Northerner doing it just as well. At least not on a Friday, after lunch.



+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:26:57
By Beerstein [1322136]
TBH I'm a fan of nuclear power but that's just me. Glad I got that out there before the thread gets derailed by you know who into an argument about you know what.


Possibly Prophetic, madam.

I'm very much a sceptic about nuclear power. But that is another topic, although I taker leave to point out that than TANSTAAFL applies to all alternatives - none are cost-free, and or debate must simply weigh alternatives, while facing up to facts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_spar

The overestimation of the contents of the Brent Spar damaged the credibility of Greenpeace in their wider campaigns. They were criticised in an editorial column in the scientific journal Nature for their lack of interest in facts[12]. Greenpeace moved to distance itself from its "5500 tonnes" claim, after the Brent Spar argument was won, and because of this has been accused of indulging in historical revisionism, after issuing statements such as "In the absence of a full inventory, Greenpeace, during our occupation, attempted to find out what was on the Brent Spar. The estimates resulting from this sampling were in no way central to the campaign...". This allegation has also been levelled at individuals, such as Lord Melchett, executive director of Greenpeace UK, who wrote in New Scientist magazine, "Greenpeace made mistakes too. We allowed ourselves to follow the agenda set by the Department of Trade and Industry, Shell and the media too often getting into arguments about the potential toxicity of the Spar."

Habitual liars, those activists.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:32:11
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
So I guess we can discount the fairy tales about exploding water as just that: the kind of propaganda-bulldust once associatd with Der Stuermer and the Voelkische Beobachter.


Not really, it can actually happen.

Plus, they're *German* Engineers doing the work, they're efficient and thorough. Can't really imagine a formerly long term unemployed Northerner doing it just as well. At least not on a Friday, after lunch.



It can or it does? I refer you - in re earthquakes - to the safety record of the NAM exploitation of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_gas_field - right below Europe's second-densest populated country.

Subsidence? yes. Earth-quakes - none worth the term.




Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
BoA-Maggot

ID: 1271784
Level: 33
Posts: 1228
Score: 403
BoA-Maggot [1271784]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:32:19
By DarthBrogo [21801]

But controversy just means Controversy - a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. A dispute, no more than that.



The keyword there is opinion. If people stopped regarding the opinions of completely unqualified, unprofessional people, arguing for either side of this "debate" as correct, I'm sure you'd find a lot more Pro-Frackers around the world. The only time you should decide your stance on this subject is after listening to the opinions of people qualified in the field of question (i.e. has obtained a PhD in environmental science for example).
Would you allow a school teacher give you his/her opinion on whether or not you need open heart surgery? No, you'd go to a doctor. Same idea applies here. Stop listening to people who think they know how it all works.

Personally I think the dangers are exaggerated in an effort by these environmentalists to brainwash those who don't really care. Whether it happens or not people won't be happy, but I agree that it would be good for the economy.

26835nl5.gif
t7h0ls.jpg
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:36:26
By BoA-Maggot [1271784]
[quote]By DarthBrogo [21801]

But controversy just means Controversy - a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. A dispute, no more than that.



The keyword there is opinion. If people stopped regarding the opinions of completely unqualified, unprofessional people, arguing for either side of this "debate" as correct, I'm sure you'd find a lot more Pro-Frackers around the world. The only time you should decide your stance on this subject is after listening to the opinions of people qualified in the field of question (i.e. has obtained a PhD in environmental science for example).
Would you allow a school teacher give you his/her opinion on whether or not you need open heart surgery? No, you'd go to a doctor. Same idea applies here. Stop listening to people who think they know how it all works. [/qot]


I concur to some extend, but I must point out that leaving the final decision to Aliens armed with Calculators wont wash.

Personally I think the dangers are exaggerated in an effort by these environmentalists to brainwash those who don't really care. Whether it happens or not people won't be happy, but I agree that it would be good for the economy.

Agreed. I believe the record bears out that Environmentalists are dishonest scare-mongers with a dislike of Facts.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-04-18/opinions/35231003_1_natural-gas-methane-gas-producers
? A provocative study from scientists at Cornell University, published last week in the journal Climatic Change Letters, contends that much of the natural gas America would produce over coming decades has a massive carbon footprint bigger than its sooty cousins. America has huge reserves of unconventional natural gas trapped deep underground. Drilling for that natural gas, which is mostly methane, involves pumping a cocktail of water and chemicals below the surface at high pressure. Some of that water flows back up, bringing along methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas. Collecting the natural gas and transporting it via high-pressure pipeline, meanwhile, also results in leaks.

Yet, though the Cornell study relies in part on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) figures to account for this fugitive methane, even the authors admit some of the numbers arent well-documented, and mainstream environmentalists agree that the data are thin. Nor does the study account for the efficiency of power plants fired by natural gas relative to coal-fired ones.


Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri - voila activism.

Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:40:39
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
VJ94
ID: 1556105
Level: 46
Posts: 671
Score: 324
VJ94 [1556105]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:39:46
Definitely pro-fracking.

vj94.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:40:40
By DarthBrogo [21801]
The keyword there is opinion. If people stopped regarding the opinions of completely unqualified, unprofessional people, arguing for either side of this "debate" as correct, I'm sure you'd find a lot more Pro-Frackers around the world. The only time you should decide your stance on this subject is after listening to the opinions of people qualified in the field of question (i.e. has obtained a PhD in environmental science for example).


I say go for it. If Blackpool falls off the edge of the country into the sea, it's no great loss, and would probably count as Urban Renewal.


+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:43:58
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
The keyword there is opinion. If people stopped regarding the opinions of completely unqualified, unprofessional people, arguing for either side of this "debate" as correct, I'm sure you'd find a lot more Pro-Frackers around the world. The only time you should decide your stance on this subject is after listening to the opinions of people qualified in the field of question (i.e. has obtained a PhD in environmental science for example).


I say go for it. If Blackpool falls off the edge of the country into the sea, it's no great loss, and would probably count as Urban Renewal.


You are not quoting me. Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri.


Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:48:42
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:52:52
By DarthBrogo [21801]
You are not quoting me. Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri.


My point still stands. In fact, I'd pay good money for someone to do it badly, so the aforementioned craphole detached itself from the mainland.



+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Gogs247

ID: 1531870
Level: 52
Posts: 1366
Score: 1201
Gogs247 [1531870]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:53:15
By DarthBrogo [21801]
Yes, the Fracking Controversy is again full force.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23368505

But controversy just means Controversy - a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. A dispute, no more than that.

I'm strongly in favour of extracting shale gas.
Here is why:

1] Resources will be exploited - and it is silly to pretend otherwise.
2] I live in pone of the mst deprived communities in the UK, and bang on top of a pile of exploitable resources. We Need Jobs.
3] If you think fracking is environmentally unsound, try coal fired power generation instead.
The enviromental argument does not account for the simple fact that TANSTAAFL applies. There is no zero-impact solution.
4] The econmic benefit is beyond dispute - which is why the opposition has given up arguing and simply raises NIMBY-objections.
Greenpeace added that communities affected by fracking - the technique for extracting shale gas - faced a lot of disruption for very little gain.

A splendid cop-out. How many Green Peace freaks live in North Yorks? Is it THEIR community on the line?









I live in Leeds and really don't care about the alleged side effects of fracking.

My only question is....................... will it reduce my energy bills by even 1p a month? I seriously doubt it!!



When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains, an' go to your Gawd like a soldier. Soldier of the Queen!
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:56:08
By Gogs247 [1531870]


I live in Leeds and really don't care about the alleged side effects of fracking.

My only question is....................... will it reduce my energy bills by even 1p a month? I seriously doubt it!!



Noticing that all such resources are depletable, that water runs allways down-hill, I think it might reduce your bill by 1P. But not for long.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:58:43
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
You are not quoting me. Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri.


My point still stands. In fact, I'd pay good money for someone to do it badly, so the aforementioned craphole detached itself from the mainland.



Which makes it plain then, that your motivations and arguments are not focussed on the public good, and that you therefore have no rightful place in a public debate.

Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 13:59:15
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:02:59
By DarthBrogo [21801]
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
You are not quoting me. Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri.


My point still stands. In fact, I'd pay good money for someone to do it badly, so the aforementioned craphole detached itself from the mainland.



Which makes it plain then, that your motivations and arguments are not focussed on the public good, and that you therefore have no rightful place in a public debate.


I like to think of the Nation as a whole, rather than the individual. Removing Blackpool would do the Nation a great service.

Extremis malis extrema remedia.

+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:09:20
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
You are not quoting me. Suggestio falsi, suppressio veri.


My point still stands. In fact, I'd pay good money for someone to do it badly, so the aforementioned craphole detached itself from the mainland.



Which makes it plain then, that your motivations and arguments are not focussed on the public good, and that you therefore have no rightful place in a public debate.


I like to think of the Nation as a whole, rather than the individual. Removing Blackpool would do the Nation a great service.

Extremis malis extrema remedia.


Define Extremis Malis.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:14:11
By DarthBrogo [21801]
Define Extremis Malis.


If you'd ever been to Blackpool, I wouldn't need to.

+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:23:46
By _I_ [575607]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
Define Extremis Malis.


If you'd ever been to Blackpool, I wouldn't need to.


Did you survive the extremis malis ecountered?

I rather think that you are less than completely honest.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing_in_the_United_Kingdom

A review into these issues was carried out by the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering.[8] According to Robert Mair, chairman of the review, "well integrity is of key importance but the most common areas of concern, such as the causation of earthquakes with any significant impact or fractures reaching and contaminating drinking water, were very low risk."[9]


Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:24:30
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
0ffline
ID: 1372001
Level: 50
Posts: 2736
Score: 2262
0ffline [1372001]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:25:50
Fracking is great so long as you're an investor or worker and it's not done anywhere near where you or your friends/family live.


So, if you're looking for the jobs and willing to go there, by all means. If someone proposes Fracking in your neighbourhood, I'd suggest burning their house down to send a clear message.

it's all fine and good unless it's in the area you live. For instance, I'm all for Fracking the bejesus out of North York. Have at 'er, as they say.


But if you try to Frack near where me or my kinfolk are, you'd better live in a concrete house.

http://i44.tinypic.com/n15npe.png

^^ Only one left in stock!

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
MachineGunSteve

ID: 184119
Level: 73
Posts: 5951
Score: 3930
BBMachineGunSteve [184119]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:38:46
I am in favor of the utilization of any and all resources, so long as they can be harvested reasonably safely.

I am not in favor of fracking in locations where there is a reasonable chance of harm coming to humans due to the process... but then again, I would not have been in favor of building a nuclear power plant on a beach in a known tsunami prone location, even though I do support the use of nuclear power.

Common sense and SOUND AND TESTED ENGINEERING should be used to make decisions about things like this, and the bottom-lines of the uber-rich should not be the consideration of first resort.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
0ffline
ID: 1372001
Level: 50
Posts: 2736
Score: 2262
0ffline [1372001]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 14:43:31
By MachineGunSteve [184119]

Common sense and SOUND AND TESTED ENGINEERING should be used to make decisions about things like this, and the bottom-lines of the uber-rich should not be the consideration of first resort.


Profit is the only motivator. The people owning the companies are profit driven, as are their shareholders. It is the primary consideration, period.

The worst thing about fracked areas is often the local area residents (ie: regional) think it'll mean jobs. More often than not the jobs that manifest are minor and cleanup related or maintenance. The skilled and professional workers are contracted in from other sources with different wage/salary expectations, and this is easilly done via "no skilled workers available locally." Latin america, the middle east, north america and central europe.... if they Frack in North York, expect to see locals pushing brooms and cleaning gear while Gunter and Hank do the serious work.

http://i44.tinypic.com/n15npe.png

^^ Only one left in stock!

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
MachineGunSteve

ID: 184119
Level: 73
Posts: 5951
Score: 3930
BBMachineGunSteve [184119]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:12:28
By 0ffline [1372001]
By MachineGunSteve [184119]

Common sense and SOUND AND TESTED ENGINEERING should be used to make decisions about things like this, and the bottom-lines of the uber-rich should not be the consideration of first resort.


Profit is the only motivator. The people owning the companies are profit driven, as are their shareholders. It is the primary consideration, period.

The worst thing about fracked areas is often the local area residents (ie: regional) think it'll mean jobs. More often than not the jobs that manifest are minor and cleanup related or maintenance. The skilled and professional workers are contracted in from other sources with different wage/salary expectations, and this is easilly done via "no skilled workers available locally." Latin america, the middle east, north america and central europe.... if they Frack in North York, expect to see locals pushing brooms and cleaning gear while Gunter and Hank do the serious work.


If that is the case, and I don't think it is exactly, then we are all already screwed. There is no need for debate... sadly.

One thing to keep in consideration is that anybody who has a retirement plan these days is a "shareholder"... not to mention the fact that most of us like lights, heat, and internet connectivity, and all the other wonderful things that natural resources provide. Until we humans evolve (or become extinct) into life forms that no longer need these simple creature comforts, I guess we need to figure out a way for the profiteers to profit, without killing us all off in the process.


Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
0ffline
ID: 1372001
Level: 50
Posts: 2736
Score: 2262
0ffline [1372001]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:40:02
By MachineGunSteve [184119]
By 0ffline [1372001]
By MachineGunSteve [184119]

Common sense and SOUND AND TESTED ENGINEERING should be used to make decisions about things like this, and the bottom-lines of the uber-rich should not be the consideration of first resort.


Profit is the only motivator. The people owning the companies are profit driven, as are their shareholders. It is the primary consideration, period.

The worst thing about fracked areas is often the local area residents (ie: regional) think it'll mean jobs. More often than not the jobs that manifest are minor and cleanup related or maintenance. The skilled and professional workers are contracted in from other sources with different wage/salary expectations, and this is easilly done via "no skilled workers available locally." Latin america, the middle east, north america and central europe.... if they Frack in North York, expect to see locals pushing brooms and cleaning gear while Gunter and Hank do the serious work.


If that is the case, and I don't think it is exactly, then we are all already screwed. There is no need for debate... sadly.

One thing to keep in consideration is that anybody who has a retirement plan these days is a "shareholder"... not to mention the fact that most of us like lights, heat, and internet connectivity, and all the other wonderful things that natural resources provide. Until we humans evolve (or become extinct) into life forms that no longer need these simple creature comforts, I guess we need to figure out a way for the profiteers to profit, without killing us all off in the process.


It's the case here in Canada, at least. A lot of pension funds invest in energy, so it wouldn't be surprising to discover that your work retirement portfolio is, however remotely, invested.

Fracking is pretty tough on the landscape, and a dirty bit of business, when it comes down to it. It's been done in Canada for a while now, and Australia has a massive Fracking project prepping (if I remember correctly). I think the part about fracking that pisses me off is the PR spin.

Yes, it's hard on the environment.
No, it won't lead to a magical influx of jobs or income (Most jobs are outsourced from the region, and the money goes back to from whence it came, which sure as shit isn't generally local).
Yes, it will have a health impact on the area.
And yes, odds are your grandkids, if they remain in the area, will both feel the effects, and be cleaning up after it. Likely their grandkids too.


BUT, if you're an investor, or have some kind of investiture in it, and don't live anywhere near where it's going to occur: Enjoy!


Only when enough places near residential areas become toilets will we tire of business as usual.

http://i44.tinypic.com/n15npe.png

^^ Only one left in stock!

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_I_

ID: 575607
Level: 65
Posts: 7779
Score: 6369
_I_ [575607]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:43:35
By 0ffline [1372001] if they Frack in North York, expect to see locals pushing brooms and cleaning gear while Gunter and Hank do the serious work.


Gunter and Hank's toilet won't clean itself, you know! That's some damn fine minimum wage work, right there.

+++ 5 star sports company always hiring, $100k/day - Needed: 4-5* Efficiency and 2000+ manual. +++
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Beerstein

ID: 1322136
Level: 16
Posts: 26650
Score: 20457
[ĞA]Beerstein [1322136]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:48:59
I'll just leave this here then.



Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:53:51
jack2.gif
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
MachineGunSteve

ID: 184119
Level: 73
Posts: 5951
Score: 3930
BBMachineGunSteve [184119]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 15:53:53
By 0ffline [1372001]
By MachineGunSteve [184119]
By 0ffline [1372001]
By MachineGunSteve [184119]

Common sense and SOUND AND TESTED ENGINEERING should be used to make decisions about things like this, and the bottom-lines of the uber-rich should not be the consideration of first resort.


Profit is the only motivator. The people owning the companies are profit driven, as are their shareholders. It is the primary consideration, period.

The worst thing about fracked areas is often the local area residents (ie: regional) think it'll mean jobs. More often than not the jobs that manifest are minor and cleanup related or maintenance. The skilled and professional workers are contracted in from other sources with different wage/salary expectations, and this is easilly done via "no skilled workers available locally." Latin america, the middle east, north america and central europe.... if they Frack in North York, expect to see locals pushing brooms and cleaning gear while Gunter and Hank do the serious work.


If that is the case, and I don't think it is exactly, then we are all already screwed. There is no need for debate... sadly.

One thing to keep in consideration is that anybody who has a retirement plan these days is a "shareholder"... not to mention the fact that most of us like lights, heat, and internet connectivity, and all the other wonderful things that natural resources provide. Until we humans evolve (or become extinct) into life forms that no longer need these simple creature comforts, I guess we need to figure out a way for the profiteers to profit, without killing us all off in the process.


It's the case here in Canada, at least. A lot of pension funds invest in energy, so it wouldn't be surprising to discover that your work retirement portfolio is, however remotely, invested.

Fracking is pretty tough on the landscape, and a dirty bit of business, when it comes down to it. It's been done in Canada for a while now, and Australia has a massive Fracking project prepping (if I remember correctly). I think the part about fracking that pisses me off is the PR spin.

Yes, it's hard on the environment.
No, it won't lead to a magical influx of jobs or income (Most jobs are outsourced from the region, and the money goes back to from whence it came, which sure as shit isn't generally local).
Yes, it will have a health impact on the area.
And yes, odds are your grandkids, if they remain in the area, will both feel the effects, and be cleaning up after it. Likely their grandkids too.


BUT, if you're an investor, or have some kind of investiture in it, and don't live anywhere near where it's going to occur: Enjoy!


Only when enough places near residential areas become toilets will we tire of business as usual.


It would be nice to hear the TRUTH about anything in this world these days... "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"... so that everyone could make an informed decision about what is best, but that will never happen, so I guess I should stop dreaming.

Thanks for your input, Offline, as it sounds like you might have seen a bit of what is going on, I will have to defer to you on this one.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
TheDarkLegacy

ID: 1712562
Level: 38
Posts: 8733
Score: 7732
TFCTheDarkLegacy [1712562]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 16:11:37
I just wish we would invest in fusion instead of gas/oil.

If we spent just 10% of what we annually spend on free money (benefits) on developing fusion reactors then we would have (almost) infinite clean energy.

Last Edited: Fri Jul 19, 2013 16:12:08
4d6200cf-2566-238e-1712562.png

This signature has been viewed 5KHG.jpg times!
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
dunmugmeh

ID: 538353
Level: 70
Posts: 28094
Score: 21124
dunmugmeh [538353]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 16:14:40
I too am a fan of nuclear. Costs a hell of a lot to set up and run a plant though however once set up it is totally worth it.

We need to try and develope our own energy and not be dependent on africa/the middle east for our oil and gas. We dont really want another oil war like iraq do we?

We should do everything possible to develope our own fuel so we can be less dependent on countries like iran and saudi arabia for our fuel.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
justthejobby

ID: 1640111
Level: 35
Posts: 805
Score: 609
justthejobby [1640111]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri Jul 19, 2013 16:33:24
By dunmugmeh [538353]
I too am a fan of nuclear. Costs a hell of a lot to set up and run a plant though however once set up it is totally worth it.

We need to try and develope our own energy and not be dependent on africa/the middle east for our oil and gas. We dont really want another oil war like iraq do we?

We should do everything possible to develope our own fuel so we can be less dependent on countries like iran and saudi arabia for our fuel.


I do agree...trouble is most governments are short term, mainly only looking to be popular for the next election....a huge investment in a long term, sustainable energy solution isn't in there political favour.

I've seen a number of documentories on fracking, they all seem 50/50 as to wether the enviromental impacts are bad. Shrugs, what can you do? Refuse to turn the lights on in protest?

Forum Main>>Non Related>> To Frack or Not to Frack
First  << 1  2 >>  Last