I1L2T3 Posted December 14, 2012 Author Share Posted December 14, 2012 Having the power to run the computer is the best argument made for the development of power sources, where is the hand wringing for the pollution caused by wind farms. We need power supplies of course but not at any cost. In UK the case for gas mining is not proven, and may be even weaker than the case for on-shore wind farms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 We need power supplies of course but not at any cost. In UK the case for gas mining is not proven, and may be even weaker than the case for on-shore wind farms. And then again it may be the best thing since sliced bread...we need to give it a chance.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speleo1 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 i had seen a film about fracking in america and it did not look good,poisioning the water supply etc, would ours be different from theres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 The next licenses to be used are for Sussex, Surry and Kent. What environmental damage is it that you're worried about? I've some across a lot of panic that turns out to be just that rather than concern about facts. Experience has taught me to beware of claims made by companies who see profit as more important than the dangers involved in making those profits. Just like the politicians at every hustings they will tell us what they think we want to hear. I'm not saying I'm against fracking. I'm saying that I'm not at all convinced by the statements Caudrilla are making. My jury is out at the moment. http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2011/11/04/Caudrilla-Shale-drilling-caused-quakes/UPI-44821320401700/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 How. The gas won't belong to "the UK", it will belong to, and be sold by Cuadrilla. Unless you are proposing we Nationalise fracking. All those supporting this process would soon change their tune if it was happening near them. We don't need to nationalise the hydrocarbons under Britain, they already belong to the government. They sell a license to Cuadrilla (or whoever) to exploit the resources under an area of land. I'm not sure how it works after that. Either 51% of the oil still belongs to the government or the oil companies are taxed on their production. You could ask a taxman. I wouldn't object to a gas site near me, but the government need to write into the regulations that every site needs to be restored to greenfield once the gas is depleted. They do this already in Germany and Holland and you would never even know that there had once been a drilling site there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 How. The gas won't belong to "the UK", it will belong to, and be sold by Cuadrilla. For someone claiming to be a taxman you have scant knowledge of how our tax & licensing system works. All those supporting this process would soon change their tune if it was happening near them. But I'll bet you'd be all for it if it were an open cast coal mine or a deep pit causing subsidence and leaving massive spoil tips around the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 14, 2012 Author Share Posted December 14, 2012 And then again it may be the best thing since sliced bread...we need to give it a chance.. It's going to get a chance. We shall see how it progresses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 But I'll bet you'd be all for it if it were an open cast coal mine or a deep pit causing subsidence and leaving massive spoil tips around the country. No, why would I, don't be so stupid? I'm not in favour of anything that causes earthquakes and water pollution, and neither would you be if it happened near you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 No, why would I, don't be so stupid? I'm not in favour of anything that causes earthquakes and water pollution, and neither would you be if it happened near you. So you are not in favour of oil, gas, fracking, coal mining, shale, and presumably any type of mineral extraction. Just how would you like the UK to generate power in the next 50 years. And for someone claiming to be a taxman you have scant knowledge of how our tax & licensing system works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I'm not in favour of anything that causes earthquakes and water pollution, and neither would you be if it happened near you. Neither am I, but I'm in favour of unconventional gas. I'm sure the reports of water pollution from the USA are true, at least some of them. We should easily be able to avoid this by our stricter regulations. And as for the two earthquakes caused by fracking at Blackpool by Cuadrilla, they were of such a tiny magnitude that no one felt them. The magnitude has been likened to that of a hand grenade. That's a hand grenade under 8000 feet of rock, no wonder no one felt anything. What's your main objection to the exploitation of shale gas? This article in The Register is very good and tackles the objections raised by anti-fracking campaigners, a recommended read - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/14/gaia_violated_by_frackers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.