weeping fracktivists?

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
But that's okay, let's just listen to a bunch of fake science and "claims" of damage.


Versus the "whatever we do is our proprietary business, we won't tell you "what" we are doing, and will deny that it's causing anything harmful...", and forcing the onus of proof onto those who are/may be damaged, as opposed to those promoting and profiting from the technology

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Miller88
But that's okay, let's just listen to a bunch of fake science and "claims" of damage.


Versus the "whatever we do is our proprietary business, we won't tell you "what" we are doing, and will deny that it's causing anything harmful...", and forcing the onus of proof onto those who are/may be damaged, as opposed to those promoting and profiting from the technology


I'll be the first one to concede that point. The oil companies are looking out for their shareholders for sure.

But all you need to do is watch those stupid movies to see that so-called "environmentalism" has been reduced to a for-profit biz here as well! The greenies distort and harangue with the best of them and science has little to do with it...

 

[sciphi]

All I know is that I've seen far too many of the negatives from fracking up close and personally. Those negatives make the positives ring quite hollow to my ears.

I have no problem with well-regulated and well-controlled oil and gas exploration. I've helped survey for shallow (ie, non-fracked) gas wells and pipelines. Those have far tighter regulations on them and leave much less behind than a fracking operation. I've driven/biked by several of the shallow wells that I helped stake out after they were operating and cleaned up (public roads 200 meters away), and there's very little if any on-going impact to the nearby residents. No noises, no sounds, no smells.

As was pointed out above, the fracking industry has a track record of promising the moon, puppies, and daisies, then stonewalling any attempts at meaningful oversight. That's not the neighbor I'd want.

 

[whip]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
But all you need to do is watch those stupid movies to see that so-called "environmentalism" has been reduced to a for-profit biz here as well! The greenies distort and harangue with the best of them and science has little to do with it...

Are you saying people with an agenda would lie and make stuff up to push their agenda? Politicians think that's despicable.

 

[kschachn]

Truck traffic? Our definition of "devastation" is not the same then.

Meh, I only have to look back at the claims of world-wide devastation that were upon us due to global warming to be suspicious of the environmentalist's claims. They often like to use the words devastation, destruction, etc. to hype their politically-based agendas.

Originally Posted By: sciphi
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Can you explain the devastation?

Originally Posted By: sciphi
As someone who has seen first-hand the devastation that fracking caused/is causing 30 miles away from my parent's houses, I can't help but think that there are alternatives to fracking.


Let's see, trucks going by at all hours of the day and night hauling water to and from the hilltop well pads, rutted roads from those trucks, local sanitary systems that get overloaded from the fracking waste and that are not equipped to handle the chemicals in the wastewater, no wildlife within a 2 mile area of the well pad, loud compressor stations that run continuously that are placed nearby residences, and rents that have priced local residents out of their rentals as landlords go after the better-paid gas workers. To name a few of the plagues that fracking has inflicted upon many Northern Tier towns. I went on a tour of some of the fracking pads a few years ago, and saw quite a bit of what I am describing. Also, the local papers have followed the fracking industry, and aren't complimentary to it.

The records of Chesapeake and the other large players with dealing with those issues have been spotty at best. The issues that get dealt with are the ones that get media attention, such as the truck traffic.

For NY, they want to frack in the heart of Finger Lakes wine country. The frackers have poo-poohed the concerns of local winemakers and farmers. Throwing away a sustainable and well-paying wine industry for a few years of natural gas seems to be an ill-advised move to me.

 

[hattaresguy]

Well at the end of the day we need energy and this seems like a good way to get it domestically.

The problem is everyone wants to drive their cars, heat their houses, and have lights but they don't want the downsides. We either have to start building a lot of nuclear plants, live with coal, or move the production into someone else backyard. (ie overseas, middle east)

Or go back to whale oil and candles.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Quote:
We either have to start building a lot of nuclear plants


Works for me!

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: sciphi
....

Let's see, trucks going by at all hours of the day and night hauling water to and from the hilltop well pads, rutted roads from those trucks, local sanitary systems that get overloaded from the fracking waste and that are not equipped to handle the chemicals in the wastewater, no wildlife within a 2 mile area of the well pad, loud compressor stations that run continuously that are placed nearby residences, .....


Sounds like very poor negotiation of that gas lease to me.

There is a gas head a few hundred yards from my primary residence. If I didn't know it was there, I wouldn't know it was there. It's hospital quiet. Every once in a while they send me a check.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Quote:
We either have to start building a lot of nuclear plants


Works for me!


Me too. I'd rather see some new, safer nuclear plants built than reliance on a much more hazardous, much less regulated way of getting at these so-called "extreme" hydrocarbons.

There's a large difference between a shallow gas well that relies on underground pressure to force the gas to the surface and a high-volume hydrofracking operation that needs pumps and compressors to blast apart the rock to get it to release the gas, then suck it up to the surface. Then compressors to compress that gas to get it through the pipeline. Large, noisy compressors that can be heard quite easily at several hundred yards off. The engines are awesome to look at, but are awesomely noisy beasts.

The problem really isn't on the landowner side of things, it's on the town/county/state road side of things. A single water tanker going down a dirt road isn't an issue. A fleet of tankers going day and night down that same dirt road quickly makes it difficult for anybody else to pass. The same trucks also destroy paved surfaces built for light volumes of car traffic, not loaded water tankers going from supply to frack pad 24/7 for weeks on end.