99% of respondents say NO - Camoron says fuck you

[colinthewarriormonkey]

People were asked if they would be OK with fracking going on under their houses without their permission.


There were a total of 40,647 responses to a consultation on the move to give oil and gas companies underground access without needing to seek landowners’ permission, with 99% opposing the legal changes.

The government response to the consultation, published online on the eve of the parliamentary vote on military strikes against Islamic militants in Iraq, concluded: “Having carefully considered the consultation responses, we believe that the proposed policy remains the right approach to underground access and that no issues have been identified that would mean that our overall policy approach is not the best available solution


What a cunt - There is still time, greenpeace have done a postcode checker to see if your home is at risk, and don't think it's not a risk. Even if you personally think it's OK and that safety isn't a problem, there will be plenty of others that do, and you can bet your arse that at the very least it's going to affect your property value. If I had concerns over the safety of fracking, would I willingly buy a house that I know is having fracking going on beneath it? - not a fucking chance.

Find out if your house is at risk here, and sign the petition.

http://wrongmove.org/

[therealHJ]

It is economic madness NOT to exploit shale gas, fracking as a technique isn't the evil it is portrayed and there are hundreds of thousands of wells worldwide producing gas quite safely and in an environmentally safe manner. Environmental groups are exploiting the ignorance of people, homes aren't at risk, your drinking water isn't going to set on fire, your house isn't going to fall down, you are not going to hear the drills under your house

[AlcoholBrazil]

Those with underground nuclear bunkers may be worried.
A pity because I've always wanted one of those, but the storage of 500,000 gallons of drinking water is a problem,
and the 50000 batteries to power the air system.

[paolo]

Fracking is not needed and damages the environment

but the industry is controlled by those who control currency and they control our 'leaders'

anyone notice our unofficial war with syria is now official?

[AlcoholBrazil]

but the industry is controlled by those who control currency and they control our 'leaders'

And the shopping by phone-swipe is just another step to the ultimate goal. The Cashless World.
When that arrives, those not in the elite are well and truly fucked.

[carcinogen]

We just haven't got the transport links to support the hundreds of extra trucks carrying equipment, water, waste, the gas, etc. etc. to-and-fro, then there's the CO2 from the trucks themselves! Fracking madness.

[therealHJ]

We just haven't got the transport links to support the hundreds of extra trucks carrying equipment, water, waste, the gas, etc. etc. to-and-fro, then there's the CO2 from the trucks themselves! Fracking madness.

We have a planning system which takes truck movements and road usage into account

[Steve Hunt]

We have a planning system which takes truck movements and road usage into account

Oh, that will be ok then.

Our "planning systems" are always so good, aren't they.

I do actually think we should invest in fracking - anything that makes us less reliant on Russia and the Middle East for energy can only be good.

However, this has all the hallmarks of being rushed through merely in pursuit of profit only. Certainly more investigation needs to be done into the consequences of this, especially in built up areas, and a strict check and balance system introduced.

[paolo]

i wonder if the ground water and the ground itself will be safe.....i wonder what happens when water is forced into, in between and under rock at high pressure?

[paolo]

Could I recommend some reading by F W Engdahl on this subject.

[colinthewarriormonkey]

It is economic madness NOT to exploit shale gas, fracking as a technique isn't the evil it is portrayed and there are hundreds of thousands of wells worldwide producing gas quite safely and in an environmentally safe manner. Environmental groups are exploiting the ignorance of people, homes aren't at risk, your drinking water isn't going to set on fire, your house isn't going to fall down, you are not going to hear the drills under your house

I think that fracturing large areas of rock under built up areas is fucking stupid, if you fracture a brick - does it still look like a brick, does it still have the same structural qualities of a brick?

The only difference between sand and quicksand is the amount of water between the particles. You cannot possibly expect to fracture rock and expect it to have the same structural integrity - that's bollocks.

[therealHJ]

It is economic madness NOT to exploit shale gas, fracking as a technique isn't the evil it is portrayed and there are hundreds of thousands of wells worldwide producing gas quite safely and in an environmentally safe manner. Environmental groups are exploiting the ignorance of people, homes aren't at risk, your drinking water isn't going to set on fire, your house isn't going to fall down, you are not going to hear the drills under your house

I think that fracturing large areas of rock under built up areas is fucking stupid, if you fracture a brick - does it still look like a brick, does it still have the same structural qualities of a brick?

The only difference between sand and quicksand is the amount of water between the particles. You cannot possibly expect to fracture rock and expect it to have the same structural integrity - that's bollocks.

Where did you get that one from? Never thought of you as being someone who would fall for these type of scare stories; I obviously misjudged you

[colinthewarriormonkey]

It is economic madness NOT to exploit shale gas, fracking as a technique isn't the evil it is portrayed and there are hundreds of thousands of wells worldwide producing gas quite safely and in an environmentally safe manner. Environmental groups are exploiting the ignorance of people, homes aren't at risk, your drinking water isn't going to set on fire, your house isn't going to fall down, you are not going to hear the drills under your house

I think that fracturing large areas of rock under built up areas is fucking stupid, if you fracture a brick - does it still look like a brick, does it still have the same structural qualities of a brick?

The only difference between sand and quicksand is the amount of water between the particles. You cannot possibly expect to fracture rock and expect it to have the same structural integrity - that's bollocks.

Where did you get that one from? Never thought of you as being someone who would fall for these type of scare stories; I obviously misjudged you

I didn't get it from anywhere.

It's common sense, how are they going to maintian the same structural integrity. I've fractured dirty great clods of earth in my garden, I've never managed to get it to go back to the same size or shape though, the smaller bits all settle into themselves taking up less space, if you've got ground and houses above that why will there be no movement?

[therealHJ]

Here is a briefing note by the Geological Society

http://cms.geolsoc.org.uk/sitecore/shel ... 160825.pdf

[colinthewarriormonkey]

Here is a briefing note by the Geological Society

http://cms.geolsoc.org.uk/sitecore/shel ... 160825.pdf

There are recorded instances of methane in groundwater
in the USA in areas where shale gas operations have
taken place. A more likely cause than migration through
fractures is methane leakage at the well site itself, due to
poor design or construction, or subsequent damage.

Stupid monkey for being concerned. All my fears have now been allayed, it's not the fracking that causes it it's the well site.

That's alright then

Except for the fact that if they weren't fracking in the first place, it wouldn't be a problem

[colinthewarriormonkey]

Here is a briefing note by the Geological Society

http://cms.geolsoc.org.uk/sitecore/shel ... 160825.pdf

Induced seismicity – the release of energy stored in the Earth’s crust triggered by
human activity – is known to be caused by activities such as mining, deep quarrying,
geothermal energy production and underground fluid disposal.
In 2011, two seismic events of magnitude 2.3 and 1.5 took place in Lancashire, close to
a fracking test site operated by Cuadrilla. Operations were suspended, and subsequent
studies have suggested that hydraulic fracturing is likely to have been the cause, by
reactivating an existing fault.
The maximum magnitude of any seismic event is dependent on the mechanical
strength of the rock. The crust in most of the UK is relatively weak, and unable to store
sufficient energy for large seismic events. This means that the largest natural
earthquake we can expect is likely to be no greater than magnitude 6. However, based
on our understanding of the mechanical strength of shale and case studies of fracking
operations in the USA, it is extremely unlikely that seismic events induced by fracking
will ever reach a magnitude greater than 3


That's fine then - unlikely to be anything more than a level 3 earthquake under my house.

I feel soooo much better.

[therealHJ]

Magnitude 3 won't even be noticed by most people and won't cause any damage to buildings

[Steve Hunt]

That's fine then - unlikely to be anything more than a level 3 earthquake under my house.

I feel soooo much better.

On the plus side, next time you & Mrs CTWM fancy a "romantic night in", it could be that the earth really does move for you!

[AlcoholBrazil]

Magnitude 3 won't even be noticed by most people and won't cause any damage to buildings

Those lucky enough to have foundation made out of rubber.

[colinthewarriormonkey]

Magnitude 3 won't even be noticed by most people and won't cause any damage to buildings

Would you willingly buy a house sitting on an area which would have an increased risk of having am magnitude 3 earthquake underneath it?

Because the insurance companies would never refuse to insure would they?

[lv]

[therealHJ]

Magnitude 3 won't even be noticed by most people and won't cause any damage to buildings

Would you willingly buy a house sitting on an area which would have an increased risk of having am magnitude 3 earthquake underneath it?

Because the insurance companies would never refuse to insure would they?

Yes, because the increased risk of a magnitude 3 tremor is minimal and if one was to occur it wouldn't do any damage. There are hundreds of similar events every year in old coal mining regions, the area around Ollerton had 36 seismic events over a period of 50 days, I can't recall seeing reports of devastation or insurers refusing policies. In fact the British Geological Survey says there have been no reports of structural damage by mining induced seismicity in the last 40 years. We get bigger natural earthquakes in the UK relating to tectonics and old fault systems than we would ever get with shale gas operations.

The watermelon crowd (green outside and red inside if you didn't know) and nimbys are using scare stories which the ill-informed seem to fall for, perhaps understandably given induced seismicity is not something most people know anything about! My training and background is such that I do know a lot about it and I would not be worried one bit if fracking was happening under my house.

The key issues with onshore shale gas are water and vehicle movements both of which can be dealt with in any planning application.

[paolo]

will the ground water be safe?

[therealHJ]

will the ground water be safe?

Yes because most aquifers are in the top two or three hundred metres whereas fracking in the UK occurs at depths of 2 to 3km. It is important that the casing in the well is done correctly passing through the aquifer, but even if there was a leak instrumentation would spot it quickly and the effects would be negligible

[colinthewarriormonkey]

will the ground water be safe?

From the report HJ posted

It will be safe, unless they fuck up - then it wont.

Of course, oil companies, never, ever have leaks or fuck up anything.



However if there's no fracking then the groundwater will be as it is today.



There are recorded instances of methane in groundwater
in the USA in areas where shale gas operations have
taken place. A more likely cause than migration through
fractures is methane leakage at the well site itself, due to
poor design or construction, or subsequent damage.