angos Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 (edited) But it can presumably be captured instead, making even more financial sense. No because it seeps out of the land around the franking site, one site was said to be loosing 12% to the atmosphere. ---------- Post added 20-08-2013 at 16:26 ---------- No greater significant amount of methane, or other hydrocarbons, escape into the atmosphere during "Fracking" than during conventional drilling operations. Methane (natural gas) is the product, the whole point of drilling for it is to capture it in order to get it to market. The vacuous, sensationalist, ill-informed/dishonest bint doesn't know what she's on about. Fracking by its very nature creates millions of cracks in the bed rock this apparently can and does lead to seepage of gas around the fracking site. Edited August 20, 2013 by angos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastbank Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Though you'd happily risk contaminating future generations water supplies. the water will be fine...carry on fracking...we will supply the parts that are needed...boosting engineering in sheffield... if the water looks dodgy..get some from tesco...:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 No because it seeps out of the land around the fracking site, one site was said to be loosing 12% to the atmosphere. ---------- Post added 20-08-2013 at 16:26 ---------- Fracking by its very nature creates millions of cracks in the bed rock this apparently can and does lead to seepage of gas around the fracking site. Oh dear, where to start... How does the gas 'seep' with thousands of feet of rock above it? Where has this ever happened? I'd like a reference to an actual case please. And where exactly was the site where 12% of the gas was lost to the atmosphere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Don't try to confuse the protestors with facts, Nagel. Their minds are made up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megalithic Posted August 20, 2013 Author Share Posted August 20, 2013 Don't try to confuse the protestors with facts, Nagel. Their minds are made up! Pot/kettle ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Que? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megalithic Posted August 21, 2013 Author Share Posted August 21, 2013 Que? . Well you seem to have come down on the pro side, and formed an opinion on all those "anti". So. Pot/kettle ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Come down on the 'Pro' side? - What makes you think I was ever on any other side? I hope that the government imposes (and enforces) strict laws to minimise pollution (and fines anybody who breaks those laws, together with forcing those who do to 'put right' any damage they cause. Those who are 'anti' are just as entitled to their opinions as are the rest. What makes you think that the 'antis' should be exempt from paying for any damage they cause? The protestors have cost the (council) taxpayers a lot of money. Why should those council tax payers pick up the bill? I've no doubt that the protestors (along with many other people ) would expect the energy companies to pay for any damage they cause . Shouldn't that work both ways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megalithic Posted August 21, 2013 Author Share Posted August 21, 2013 Come down on the 'Pro' side? - What makes you think I was ever on any other side? I hope that the government imposes (and enforces) strict laws to minimise pollution (and fines anybody who breaks those laws, together with forcing those who do to 'put right' any damage they cause. Those who are 'anti' are just as entitled to their opinions as are the rest. What makes you think that the 'antis' should be exempt from paying for any damage they cause? The protestors have cost the (council) taxpayers a lot of money. Why should those council tax payers pick up the bill? I've no doubt that the protestors (along with many other people ) would expect the energy companies to pay for any damage they cause . Shouldn't that work both ways? You've completely lost me with the bolded paragraphs, nowhere did i mention either. Fracking is wrong, only those with an interest would disagree. It's that black and white for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Why is fracking 'wrong'? Was fracturing coal seams and extracting the stuff manually (which caused one or three landslips and a lot of deaths) wrong? Did you ever protest against coal mining? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now