Fracking is something that will kill us all. Here is some historical background.

Watch
Evansu
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
In 2005 Cheney, 46th Vice President of the United States, pushed through Congress the Energy Policy Act that excluded representatives of American oil and gas industry from Safe Drinking Water Act and other Acts that should protect the environment. In fine energy companies since that time can use any chemicals near sources of drinking water and keep the mixture of these chemicals a secret. And of course no one will tell you what they use there, the only thing they tell is some doubtful statistics and tales about fracking.
Today everyone believed US lies about fracking and now every place where people use fracking is a potentially dangerous because of earthquakes and pollution. What will you do without drinking water after some energy company will pump ground near your place with some crap that for sure will kill you? Do you really believe that greedy moneybags will give you cheap energy? Our dreams about cheap and clean energy will turn into ecological nightmare so we must do everything to stop fracking.
0
reply
SoftPunch
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Preach the message, sister/brother.
0
reply
Alfissti
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
YAWN!!

Next.
0
reply
Hyde
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
Maybe if you backed up your statement with legitimate evidence it'd be more persuasive.
1
reply
Rob da Mop
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
Every time someone says fracking I think of Battlestar Galactica.

My favourite was the headline "Fracking Experiment Caused Earthquakes"... I could just see Tigh yelling it....

Anyways, fracking's probably bad, but meh, who knows.
0
reply
username207685
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by Rob da Mop)
Anyways, fracking's probably bad, but meh, who knows.
The Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering had a crack at it

http://royalsociety.org/policy/proje...action/report/
  • The health, safety and environmental risks can be managed effectively in the UK. Operational best practices must be implemented and enforced through strong regulation.
  • Fracture propagation is an unlikely cause of contamination. The risk of fractures propagating to reach overlying aquifers is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres. Even if fractures reached overlying aquifers, the necessary pressure conditions for contaminants to flow are very unlikely to be met given the UK’s shale gas hydrogeological environments.
  • Well integrity is the highest priority. More likely causes of possible contamination include faulty wells. The UK’s unique well examination scheme was set up so that independent, specialist experts could review the design of every offshore well. This scheme must be made fit for purpose for onshore activities.
  • Robust monitoring is vital. Monitoring should be carried out before, during and after shale gas operations to detect methane and other contaminants in groundwater and potential leakages of methane and other gases into the atmosphere.
  • An Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) should be mandatory. Every shale gas operation should assess risks across the entire lifecycle of operations, from water use through to the disposal of wastes and the abandonment of wells.
  • Seismic risks are low. Seismicity should be included in the ERA.Seismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing is likely to be of smaller magnitude than the UK’s largest natural seismic events and those induced by coal mining.
  • Water requirements can be managed sustainably. Water use is already regulated by the Environment Agency. Integrated operational practices, such as recycling and reusing wastewaters where possible, would help to minimise water requirements further.
  • Options for disposing of wastes should be planned from the outset. Should any onshore disposal wells be necessary in the UK, their construction, regulation and siting would need further consideration.
  • Regulation must be fit for purpose. Attention must be paid to the way in which risks scale up should a future shale gas industry develop nationwide. Regulatory co-ordination and capacity must be maintained.
  • Policymaking would benefit from further research. The carbon footprint of shale gas extraction needs further research. Further benefit would also be derived from research into the public acceptability of shale gas extraction and use in the context of the UK’s energy, climate and economic policies.
0
reply
Rob da Mop
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by betaglucowhat)
The Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering had a crack at it...

And concluded Fracking's probably fine but meh, who knows


[*]Policymaking would benefit from further research. The carbon footprint of shale gas extraction needs further research. Further benefit would also be derived from research into the public acceptability of shale gas extraction and use in the context of the UK’s energy, climate and economic policies.[/list]
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (113)
13.85%
I'm not sure (36)
4.41%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (249)
30.51%
I have already dropped out (20)
2.45%
I'm not a current university student (398)
48.77%

Watched Threads

View All