A request


Currently watching Gasland on youtube. It’s all about how bad fracking is. Even Alan Jones doesn’t seem to like it.

Also watched a reply on youtube from the gas industry saying it’s basically OK.

Hmm. Watching people being able to light their tap water on fire looks pretty bad, to say the least…

A few readers and writers here are involved in the mining industry (right?). Is anyone able to give us a basic run down on whether fracking really is a total disaster the environment or whether it’s the best thing since bourbon whisky was invented… or somewhere in between?

In return, tits!

Thanks in advance.

UPDATE

A hot redhead explains in 6 minutes what an entire night of documentary and lecture watching does.

Angus Dei would be proud.


(edited)

21 Responses to “A request”

  1. spot_the_dog Says:

    A bit of reading material for you…

    An industry debunking: http://www.energyindepth.org/2010/06/debunking-gasland/
    Another: http://dpa.aapg.org/correlator/debunkingQ410.cfm

    Phelim McAleer (Not Evil, Just Wrong) has just recently been going head to head with the Gasland producers as well: http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/General/gasland-director-tries-to-ban-journalism.html
    If you’re on Twitter, follow him – he’s good value: http://twitter.com/PhelimMcAleer

    Bit of a start for you!

  2. thefrollickingmole Says:

    I think the problems are associated with the liberation of heavy metal compounds in the rock. Gold mines tailings have the same problem, the chemicals and grinding free up other metals as well. As for gaslan1d, cant say till Ive bothered to watch it, Im expecting it to be a hatchet job though.

    • chuck2251 Says:

      GOLD MINE TAILINGS ARE NOW REQUIED TO BE CLEANEW..

  3. boy on a bike Says:

    http://www.fightgaslandcensorship.com/

  4. bingbing Says:

    Thanks for the links boys, esp. Spot.

    So why is Jones referring to the doco as “outstanding”?

    http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9128

    Only a couple of minutes in.

  5. chuck2251 Says:

    WE NEED ENERGY..THERE SHOULD BE A METHOD TO GET THE GAS AND OIL OUT OF THE SHALE WITH OUT POLLUTING THE GROUND WATER..

    They get the cyanide out of the leach ponds after extracting the gold..

    maybe you help us gold dredgers on this problem??

    THIS HOW I SEE IT..

    AGAIN OUR LEGISLATORS FAILED TO READ A BILL THAT THEY RE SO EAGER TO PASS. CLOSING ALL THE RIVERS TO SUCTION DREDGING WILL NOT HELP THE SALMON. ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT FLOW EASTWARD FROM THE EAST SIDE OF THE SIERRAS. NOR WILL IT DO MUCH ON ALL THE WESTERN FLOWING RIVERS THAT ARE DAMNED UP WITHOUT FISH LADDERS. THE KERN RIVER FOR EXAMPLE HAS NO WAY IN HELL FOR A SALMON TO SWIM UP STREAM FROM THE OCEAN. WE HAVE NO MONEY TO KEEP PRISONERS IN JAIL, YET WE WILL FUND A STUDY AND CRIPPLE AN INDUSTRY THAT PROVIDES 60 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR TO OUR CALIFORNIA ECONOMY. TO MY KNOWLEDGE A ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ON SUCTION GOLD DREDGING WAS COMPLETED BY THE STATE IN 1994.DREDGERS TAKE OUT “MERCURY AND LEAD” FROM THE RIVERS WHICH ARE FAR MORE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR ENVIRONMENT. IF WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO WASTE IN OUR BUDGET PERHAPS A SELECT GROUP OF RIVERS THAT HAVE SALMON WOULD BE A BETTER CHOICE.HOW MANY RIVERS ARE OPEN TO SALMON FROM THE OCEAN?HOW DO DAMS HELP THE SALMON?
    NOW AFTER COMPLETING THE STUDY THE DFG WANTS DO ANOTHER STUDY..THE COHO SALMON ARE ALSO UNDER ATTACK FROM THE JAPANESE AND OTHER COUNTRIES, THAT USE NETS UP TO 25 MILES LONG TO HARVEST FISH..
    ALSO THE GREAT WHITE HAS BEEN KNOWN TO DINE ON THE CO HOE SALMON..

    • J.M. Heinrichs Says:

      No.

      Cheers

    • spot_the_dog Says:

      Dear SHOUTY CHUCK: If you’re going to plaster the same comment all over the interwebz, at least reformat it into conventional case so that it’s not so HARD ON THE EYES, YO.
      /protip

  6. bingbing Says:

    So it looks like the anti-fracking side reckons the fractures allow nasties to leach into the ground water, and the pro-fracking side reckons, no, the fracking happens so far underground, and with so much un-fracked rock in between, that it’s impossible for the nasties – and there are a lot less nasties than the anti-fracking side claims – to get anywhere near the ground water.

    That about right?

    • J.M. Heinrichs Says:

      Yep.

      Cheers

  7. MarkL of Canberra Says:

    That’s about right.

    Look, the game behind this is that there are truly staggering increases in extractable tight gas which can now be extracted by the brand new technology of fracking. How staggering? At least three thousand years of gas at current consumption growth rates. Perhaps as many as 40,000 years worth! (Including abyssal methane clathrates).

    We are at the very start of the fossil fuel age.

    Imagine how delighted the Greens are about that!

    Most of Europe now turns out to be sitting on either huge coal seam methane (dry gas) or tight gas (wet gas) reserves. So is the USA. So are we.

    Now just how pleased do you imagine the Saudi’s, Iraqis, Iranians, Libyans, malaysians, Qataris and Russians are about this? They supply oil or pipeline gas and they extract political and economic leverage with it.

    What if the USA and Europe could produce enough domgas to meet their internal demands for the next few centuries, by fracking turning tight gas reserves from a geological oddity into a massive resource?

    The result is garbage like gasland. It’s a new scare campaign.

    MarkL
    Brisbane

  8. MarkL of Canberra Says:

    Bingbing. That’s about right.

    Look, the game behind this is that there are truly staggering increases in extractable tight gas which can now be extracted by the brand new technology of fracking. How staggering? At least three thousand years of gas at current consumption growth rates. Perhaps as many as 40,000 years worth! (Including abyssal methane clathrates).

    We are at the very start of the fossil fuel age.

    Imagine how delighted the Greens are about that!

    Most of Europe now turns out to be sitting on either huge coal seam methane (dry gas) or tight gas (wet gas) reserves. So is the USA. So are we.

    Now just how pleased do you imagine the Saudi’s, Iraqis, Iranians, Libyans, malaysians, Qataris and Russians are about this? They supply oil or pipeline gas and they extract political and economic leverage with it.

    What if the USA and Europe could produce enough domgas to meet their internal demands for the next few centuries, by fracking turning tight gas reserves from a geological oddity into a massive resource?

    The result is garbage like Gasland. It’s a new scare campaign. Bear in mind what fracking IS. It is pumping water and sand under very high pressure into a hole drilled in very fine-grained rock. The HP water cracks the rock. The sand lodges in the cracks (it’s very fine sand) and holds them open my a tiny amount. This increases the surface area from which the gas can seep out.

    So you are cracking shale with water thousands of feet down, and adding a bit of sand.

    Scary stuff, eh?

    Well it terrifies the Greenies, Russians the oil ticks. Reasons? $$$$$!

    So the Russians and oil ticks are kicking up a scare campaign using those most useful of idiots, the Greens. After all, they are stupid, and come cheap.

    MarkL
    Brisbane

    • bingbing Says:

      As usual, superb job MarkL.

      Yes, have noticed – and blogged – about the Age of Fossil Fuels.

      Wonder if that will become part of Julia’s National Conversation.

    • kae Says:

      Wet gas?

      I know a lot of older people who are very concerned about wet gas.

      Ahem.

    • Merilyn Says:

      Cheeky gal Kae, heh.

  9. Winston Smith Says:

    This is a replay of nuclear power. Make the process of bringing a nuke online so convoluted, expensive and time consuming that no one builds them. Make the maintenance and the regulatory environment so daunting no one will want them in their generating inventory.
    It worked, didn’t it?
    Greens will only accept windmills and PV.
    This new process will have to mount the same regulatory hurdles that were effective with nuclear.

    • Merilyn Says:

      Winston did you write that very long post on Piers blog or is someone else using your name? [His latest post and the one before it]. O/T I know bing.

    • bingbing Says:

      Merilyn…

      You know?

      As much as we try, this still isn’t live blogging. What do you know?

      EEK!

    • Merilyn Says:

      That my question to Winston was off topic, why what have you been up to, eh????????

  10. boy on a bike Says:

    It turns out that has little to do with fracking. In many parts of America, there is enough methane in the ground to leak into people’s well water. The best fire scene in the movie was shot in Colorado, where the filmmaker is in the kitchen of a man who lights his faucet. But Colorado investigators went to that man’s house, checked out his well, and found that fracking had nothing to do with his water catching fire. His well-digger had drilled into a naturally occurring methane pocket.

    http://reason.com/archives/2011/05/19/plentiful-fuel

  11. MarkL of Canberra Says:

    Kae!

    Do I have to spank you again?

    On a serious note, ‘wet gas’ = methane containing condensate, a light diesel-like oil that condenses out of the gas stream when it cools. Very profitable stuff, condensate. Normal LNG contains methane, propane, butane, (the ‘liquid petroleum’ gases) ethane, condensate and sometimes waxes. Oh, and eeevill CO2. It comes out of the gas field hot, sometimes really hot (like 200 degrees).

    Coal seam gas is just methane. It is very ‘lean’, and has no other goodies with it. It’s bound on to the coal (which is very porous) hydraulically by water pressure. Pump out the water and out it bubbles.

    MarkL
    Brisbane

    Weird – it takes ages for responses by me to appear.


Well, SAY something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: