Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Shale Gas - Mod note post#117
Options
Comments
-
They had a presentation from Ardcarne group against fracking. Theres been plenty of debate and other consultation out there, and yes with hundreds of people turning up at cos of the level of concern. Majority opinion from what I can see in this part of the country is for a moratorium at the very least.
Well done to Roscommon. Yes its symbolic but they are listening to their population I would suggest, and supporting them.
Ps Not all popular opinion is incorrect. Some initiatives like this I would suggest are just ethically, economically, and environmentally unsound from the beginning.
I think it might be more grown up to have a proper enquiry, rather than having a "presentation" from one side.
But I suppose balance is too much to expect these days, where so many seem to make decisions based on half truths and emotion, and where anyone trying to find power sources other than wind are assumed to be nasty wicked people set on world domination.
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
NotCarrotRidge wrote: »One of the major issues regarding fracking seems to me to be concern regarding the chemicals used in the process. Just using water to expand and keep open the fractures is feasible. So that deals with that.
It is sometimes necessary to use drilling muds to drill a clean hole, but these are used in very minor quantities and are used by all sorts of drill rigs, all over the country, all the time, with no adverse affects.
Regarding earthquakes, you simply cannot create enough stress in the earth's crust to induce an earthquake by injecting fluids at what is a relatively shallow depth. What you can do is release stresses that have already built up before they get to a point where they overcome the pressure stopping them from inducing a 'quake. In that case, all you're doing is precipitating something that would have happened anyway, and by doing it early you're actually making it less likely to be significant enough to cause damage.
The shakes caused by the pressurised fracturing of the rocks will be nothing more than a minor inconvenience, and will not be any worse than the vibrations you get when a heavy truck passes by.
I do not work in the oil and gas industry, but I have a much better understanding of this than the average Joe. I am not going to state publicly what I do or who I am, but if one of the mods wants to PM me, I will divulge some information on the proviso that they promise to keep it entirely to themselves.
EDIT: I hope I have made it clear that I do not have experience with fracking, but I do understand the principles and have experience with other forms of drilling. I don't wish to mislead anyone.
Using water hasnt been done in practicality and thats according to many including Professor Ingraffea, Cornell university whose seen as an authority in the area.
And even if it was able to be done as the company alleges in the exploration side, It cant be done in the manufacturing side if you want to get gas out in enough quantities to make a profit. And thats not even going into the increased noise pollution thats goes along with it.
The problem isnt just with the chemicals in the substances going down, it about whats already down there and polluted water staying there. Its about the polluted waste water and mud coming up, about storage where to get rid and potential to pollute ground water. Substances in the earth have to go somewhere, benzene, hydrocarbons, arsenic and the observed high amount of radon in the areas.
Its the increase of air pollution from these substances in storage "ponds" the evaporation and risks of seeping through lining of the ponds. Air pollution from diesel with increase trucks to and fro to service the area and machinery at the plants. New road infrasructure to carry materials to the areas. The change of usage of the area complately.
This fracturing process is scientifically shown to be dirtier than others and not the cleaner fuel sold as when it comes to green house gases. So what kind of ethics have we, if we follow this and how are we to me our international climate change obligations.
http://frackingfreeireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Tyndall-final-press-release.pdf
Its about the acknowledged vaste amts of land it consumes with the process.
Its about the amount of water it uses in the process, when in effect water is our most precious resource and undervalued. This water has been advocated to be shipped to Dublin to ease water shortages there.
Its about agreed inability to regulate as it is a new technology as alerted by the European Commission in 2011 report.
And even if we did its about dropping the ball. We are already getting fined for our adherence to ground water directives. There is and always will be the risk of human error.
And I am not a seismologist but I really dont like speeding up the potential for earthquakes thanks and all. :eek:
Its about the potential of displacing a thriving industry in our farming industry with exports of 8.9 billion a year and a tourism industry of great potential with an unknown. Indeed ecotourism in the form of the Greenbox Network has been seen as a market leader and again another model of best practice to further invest in.
http://www.businessandfinance.ie/index.jsp?p=286&n=288&a=1024
We have a brand for green produce and tourism it doesnt take much to lose it. It doesnt make economic sense.
Its about where we want to live, how we would like to perceive ourselves. Do we want to be seen as an industrialised nation...
Its about the potential public health consequences and sadly that should be the number one issue and potentially will be once more and more long term evidence comes through. Its early days for that.
http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.journalarticle.php
And its about the promise of short term jobs some of which may be shipped in, over all the above.
http://frackingfreeireland.org/info-to-download/flyers/0 -
-
-
Using water hasnt been done in practicality and thats according to many including Professor Ingraffea, Cornell university whose seen as an authority in the area.
And even if it was able to be done as the company alleges in the exploration side, It cant be done in the manufacturing side if you want to get gas out in enough quantities to make a profit. And thats not even going into the increased noise pollution thats goes along with it.
This is a matter for debate. If the company wants to do it and can't do it economically, that's their problem. I would have no sympathy if they got it wrong.
The problem isnt just with the chemicals in the substances going down, it about whats already down there and polluted water staying there.
I'm not sure that I understand what you mean by referring to polluted water already in the ground. Are you referring to shallow groundwater or groundwater at the depth of the shales?
Its about the polluted waste water and mud coming up, about storage where to get rid and potential to pollute ground water. Substances in the earth have to go somewhere, benzene, hydrocarbons, arsenic and the observed high amount of radon in the areas.
This is all a matter of regulation and mitigation. Every activity carried out by man has risk and mitigation factors. It is perfectly possible to stay on top of these risks if done properly. If, after a proper risk assessment has been carried out, it is deemed to be unacceptable, that should be the end of it. But let's do it properly, instead of jumping up and down without quite understanding what we're jumping up and down about.
Its the increase of air pollution from these substances in storage "ponds" the evaporation and risks of seeping through lining of the ponds. Air pollution from diesel with increase trucks to and fro to service the area and machinery at the plants. New road infrasructure to carry materials to the areas. The change of usage of the area completely.
It's unlikely to completely change the usage of the area. New road infrastructure is development in an economically depressed area. Not sure that you'll get a lot of support for maintaining lower standards.
This fracturing process is scientifically shown to be dirtier than others and not the cleaner fuel sold as when it comes to green house gases. So what kind of ethics have we, if we follow this and how are we to me our international climate change obligations.
http://frackingfreeireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Tyndall-final-press-release.pdf
I don't have any specialised knowledge on this, so can't comment. There's no doubt that we're unlikely to meet our carbon reduction targets either way.
Its about the acknowledged vaste amts of land it consumes with the process.
Its about the amount of water it uses in the process, when in effect water is our most precious resource and undervalued. This water has been advocated to be shipped to Dublin to ease water shortages there.
You surely don't agree with that? When a massive proportion of the water used just leaks into the ground, you're in favour of just piping more from the Shannon? I presume I have misunderstood you there.
Its about agreed inability to regulate as it is a new technology as alerted by the European Commission in 2011 report.
And even if we did its about dropping the ball. We are already getting fined for our adherence to ground water directives. There is and always will be the risk of human error.
And I am not a seismologist but I really dont like speeding up the potential for earthquakes thanks and all. :eek:
This is a red herring. We're in the middle of a pretty stable plate, and there are no serious stresses worth talking about. The sort of earthquake that would be precipitated is the same as any other we've experienced here before, i.e. negligible. And once the stresses are released, that's it, they're gone.
Its about the potential of displacing a thriving industry in our farming industry with exports of 8.9 billion a year and a tourism industry of great potential with an unknown. Indeed ecotourism in the form of the Greenbox Network has been seen as a market leader and again another model of best practice to further invest in.
http://www.businessandfinance.ie/index.jsp?p=286&n=288&a=1024
I wouldn't say that agriculture is thriving in large parts of Leitrim to be honest, I was in the area recently and I'd say it's subsisting at best. I'm open to correction on this.
We have a brand for green produce and tourism it doesnt take much to lose it. It doesnt make economic sense.
Its about where we want to live, how we would like to perceive ourselves. Do we want to be seen as an industrialised nation...
Its about the potential public health consequences and sadly that should be the number one issue and potentially will be once more and more long term evidence comes through. Its early days for that.
http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.journalarticle.php
And its about the promise of short term jobs some of which may be shipped in, over all the above.
http://frackingfreeireland.org/info-to-download/flyers/
All of this may be true. But let's weigh it up, have an informed debate and come to a rational, non-hysterical conclusion. Why isn't the website called frackingdebateireland.org?0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Invariably, that is the issue with many special interest groups. Generally, the people who set them up have no desire for balanced views, often have their own agendas coupled with what is known as invincible ignorance.
In the case of fracking, they have probably seen a youtube video or two, believed them without question, didn't stop to see if they were balanced, true, or if things have changed since the video was made, and decided from that point on to ignore any evidence and just agitate as much as they can against it.
Bit of a gross generalisation dont you think.
And a damning indictment of large masses of the population of the north west because theres no getting away from it, it is a popular movement. And of course lets not forget tarring councillors from Sligo, Leitrim, Clare, Roscommon and Donegal who voted for a ban or moratorium with the same brush. No special interest this is mainstreamed. It is rather your post that appears in this light quite biased.
The speaker was sharing her first hand negative experience of the gas industry who she claims has changed her life and community utterly. By all accounts she has been remarkably lacking in vitriole. This was/is an opportunity for exchange of ideas of experience, wasnt billed as anything else.
The large multinationals that gain to benefit from this have hired public relations companies to do their own work.
But best always in these things to do as we have and make up your own minds.
Here is Jessica Ernsts two last seminars one in the ballroom of Romance, Glenfarne, leitrim, at 8pm tonight, Friday .
And in Dublin. Teachers Club, Parnell Square. Sat 25th at 4pm.
http://www.activelink.ie/node/82640 -
Bit of a gross generalisation dont you think. And a damning indictment of large masses of the population of the north west because theres no getting away from it, it is a popular movement. And of course lets not forget tarring councillors from Sligo, Leitrim, Clare, Roscommon and Donegal who voted for a ban or moratorium with the same brush. No special interest this is mainstreamed. It is rather your post that appears in this light quite biased.
The speaker was sharing her first hand negative experience of the gas industry who she claims has changed her life and community utterly. By all accounts she has been remarkably lacking in vitriole. This was/is an opportunity for exchange of ideas of experience, wasnt billed as anything else.
The large multinationals that gain to benefit from this have hired public relations companies to do their own work.
But best always in these things to do as we have and make up your own minds.
Here is Jessica Ernsts two last seminars one in the ballroom of Romance, Glenfarne, leitrim, at 8pm tonight, Friday .
And in Dublin. Teachers Club, Parnell Square. Sat 25th at 4pm.
http://www.activelink.ie/node/8264
Stoning and hanging humans were also popular spectacles once, but popularity is no guarantee of quality or guarantee that the poplace is right.
I agree we all have to make up our own minds, but first we have to open them and examine ALL the evidence, and not just the evidence which we like.0 -
-
-
-
QUOTE=Tidyweb;77342317]It wasnt an information night, it was a rally. Call it eye witness testimony of someone who lived through fracking. Hey is this a trick question, is a rally when more than 200 people turn up!
I am presuming you like to use the term for effect....
I am not saying she was lying, thats another days work. But she did come across as a crack pot. I think you must agree there. No. Appeared to be a woman of considerable integrity intellect and a sense of humour admirable considering. And she is UNANIMA International, a United Nations Economic and Social Council accredited NGO working for international justice at the United Nations, annual ‘Woman of Courage’ award winner. Hem.
Regarding the company, they havent drilled anywhere yet, they are putting together a team of experts. Or they are doing the exploratory side then paving the way for the Shells of the world...and promises about no chemicals will mean nothing to them.
It doesnt take much to sue someone, different story to someone who wins a case. No but you can still present your case as a research piece in the process, especially if you have spent years compiling it. Is that a crime?
Its also important to point out this is not a "Cornell Study", will take me a day to ready it, albeit it will be quoted in every rally and newspaper by people who have never read it. I give up!:D[/QUOTE] 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement