Jump to content

Fracking in Sheffield?


Recommended Posts

Anyone just watched The One Show covering this? An interesting piece damaged only by some ultra loony lefty snapping at the interviewer that he was part of a fascist conspiracy. This twerp was in his fifties too.

 

I'm against fracking, a lot of damage and potential damage for relatively little gain with unknown risks. My message to campaigners is keep the nutters out, they drain all your credibility with selfish shouty camera hogging or blocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone just watched The One Show covering this? An interesting piece damaged only by some ultra loony lefty snapping at the interviewer that he was part of a fascist conspiracy. This twerp was in his fifties too.

 

I'm against fracking, a lot of damage and potential damage for relatively little gain with unknown risks. My message to campaigners is keep the nutters out, they drain all your credibility with selfish shouty camera hogging or blocking.

like the green party mp arrested today protesting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ms. Lucas was on Radio 5 Live this morning and she stated that:

 

“Fracked gas is more of a greenhouse gas than natural gas because of the methane and other constituents.”

 

She is obviously not aware that “Fracked gas” is natural gas.

 

All gas is treated to remove harmful and damaging contaminants (such as moisture, H2S, CO2, non-methane hydrocarbon, mercury and NORM etc.) before it is distributed via the national grid pipe network.

 

The gas that is actually piped to homes and businesses is the same whether it has come from a conventional well, a “Fracking” site or is imported. All gas has to comply to the same standards, which among other things, specify that it must be 93-97% methane.

 

Ms. Lucas also omitted to point out that the majority of methane produced in the world comes from biological decay and cattle rearing, not from the burning of fossil fuels.

 

 

 

Several other of the protesters were claiming that the water in Balcombe was discoloured (one even produced a sample) because the water table had been breached during the “Fracking” process.

 

They are obviously so hard-of-thinking or blinded by their self-righteous indignation that they have totally failed to grasp that there is no “Fracking” going on in Balcombe, and possibly never will be.

 

 

When the green lobby is as uninformed and disingenuous as this, it does their argument no good whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I heard that as well, the trouble is the interviewer is generally also not fully clued up and cannot therefore call the greenies on their errors, even when they are absolute howlers like that. Mind you outright lying is a recognised tactic of the greenies for at least 20 odd years so their disingenuity comes as no surprise any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the 'right' to go out and buy a very expensive motor car. Should I exercise that 'right', then I would be expected to pay for the car.

 

We all have rights - lots of rights - but those rights are often accompanied by responsibilities.'

 

If a football club puts on a match, it's generally accepted that policing that match will impose an extra cost on the community and the football club (who have done nothing wrong) is required to pay that cost.

 

We all have the right to protest, provided the protest is peaceful and the protestors act within the law. but if the protestors break the law, then that protest is likely to cost a significant amount of money to police.

 

Why should protestors be exempted from the responsibilities associated with their exercise of their 'rights' (including the responsibility to pay for the cost they cause others)?

 

When , do you think, can we expect to hear that the Green Party is going to step in and pay the costs of policing the Balcombe protests? - Being 'reasonable people' (or so they say) I"m sure they've made provision to put right any damage they may cause.

 

I won't hold my breath while I wait.

 

Some people - including the Green Party's 'Prominent Member' have been arrested. If those arrests lead to charges and the charges lead to prosecutions, then no doubt the courts will fine those convicted.

 

I don't suppose the fines will be very large ... but the court can award costs. A 50-quid fine probably would be 'water off a duck's back' to the Green Party's 'Prominent Member', but a £50 fine with £100,000 costs might make her eyes water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.