Fracking

Last week a meeting of our village Sustainability gp discussed Fracking Awareness.- a mention in a thread last year fizzled out.

Somerset is a PEDL ( Petroleum Exploration and Development License ) area
We felt that the important thing to focus on is raising awareness of Fracking and effects that it will have on land/enviroment/health etc - as the majority of people out there don't have a clue what it is!!

Also important to keep on top of the planning applications that will be rolling in.
'Frack Off' have up-to-date information on this on their website
frack-off.org.uk/ that they keep on top of, and also
Frack Free Somerset www.frackfreesomerset.org/news/

Fracking is a perfectly legitimate method of releasing oil and gas from reserves and has been used extensively in the North Sea for over 20 years. Like everything, from disposing of clinical waste to driving a car if done negligently, or knowingly or recklessly dangerously it is harmful to individuals and the environment

But if were to ban everything that might just be hazardous to us if done inappropriately, we would have to live in a world where no energy, food or mineral resource was ever exploited bcause it might be harmful.

I live in the Vale of Glamorgan and they are going positivly mental here on the fracking idea, no matter how we protest they will still go ahead and ruin our countryside and now they are starting on the beautiful coastline, I dont where it will all end .Why cant they leave things alone.

Isn't Fracking in the North Sea rather different than in e.g.Somerset countryside.

There is an article in this months National Geographic about oil extraction. Worth popping to the library maybe.

There have been some pretty horrific stories coming out of the USA re fracking.

Fracking onshore is no different from fracking offshore. It has been being used at the Wytch Farm oilfield on the Isle of Purbeck for some time without problem.

Yes, of course there have been cases of fracking being done inapropriately and dangerously. It is not, I think, coincidental that this has happened mainly in the coal mining areas of the Eastern USA, where lax legislation has resulted in a shockingly bad safety record and lack of control of pollution in the coal mining areas for decades. Would you ban the consumption of meat in Britain because of the recent problems of horsemeat being discovered in 2% of the products tested?

I'm sorry but I find the idea of fracking very frightening. How much can we remove from the earth without disturbing it? There is already evidence of earthquakes caused by it. The experts tried to tell us nuclear power stations were safe and look at the disasters they have caused.

I heard a talk about this at my local group of the Geology Society. I think the risks are very overated. The likelihood of major Earthquake activity in the UK is very small

See this link about earthquakes on the UK in that 50 days.

www.earthquakes.bgs.ac.uk/earthquakes/recent_uk_events.html
Did you hear about any of these?

They are happening all the time and particulary in areas of the uk subject to mining subsidence. It is important to get risk into perspective.

There are risks all around. Has anyone looked at the radon risk maps?
www.ukradon.org/map.php?map=englandwales.

You have to look at such risks in relation to every day life with such activities as driving. That is a man made problem as well and causes a a lot more injuries in the UK damage than earthquakes.

Nellie, thank you for another voice seeing fracking in context. I always find it curious how we all drive cars, walk down the street, drink alcohol and regularly undertake a whole range of very risky activities but only worry about the dramatic risks that are statistically less likely to happen and to affect few.

I fear fracking may be taken over by big business' jumping on the bandwagon and riding roughshod over anything which interferes with profit. This has happened with wind farms sprouting up to excess, and attention is now becoming concentrated on covering good farmland with solar panels. Fracking could just be another money making bandwagon taken to excess.

I must admit that until just now, I`d never heard of fracking.

Can I suggest you read this
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/19/carbon-bubble-financial-crash-crisis?INTCMP=SRCH
It will explain why we should not be fracking; and why we need to leave fossil fuels in the ground.

And this:
www.guardian.co.uk/search?q=Why+can%27t+we+quit+fossil+fuels&target=guardian

CO2 output in the US has fallen because of fracking: natural gas gives off a good deal less than coal and the country's industries and homes still have to be powered by something. I think fracking will fill a useful role until enough less carbon-intensive power is 'invented', or until we get over our fears of nuclear (carbon free) power.

Here is an American view of Europe's attitude to fracking

And another, just for balance

you obviously have not read it. It is not about how much co2 any particular sort of fossil fuel gives off. Its about the necessity of leaving much of it in the ground - and the danger of using it all up.

Think Methane....much worse than CO2. Fracking risks methane realease in huge quantities. But not to worry...there will be plenty of methane released when the permafrost melts. The worst greenhouse gas.

I do not think that anyone would disagree with the proposition that the less CO2 released into the atmosphere the better but there is currently no alternative. A major programme to construct enough nuclear reactors to provide us with the power we need to lead the life we are accustomed to would take upwards of 20 years to implement and wind and photo voltaics are far too unreliable and uncontrollable to depend upon, as the Danes have found out to their cost. Biofuels are contentious because wood produces health damaging particulates and growing biofuels on land that should be in food production is also questionable.

Electric cars are not a solution unless the power they use is generated from carbon free resources (see above) and battery technology is still many decades away from being able to hold a charge that enables vehicles to travel long distances. Oil is used widely in the production of the plastics and chemicals that form an essential part of our lives.

I quite agree it is best to leave hydrocarbons in the ground, but what is the alternative?

If we don't leave them in the ground we end up in a terrible mess; that's the choice. We have to use a whole raft of renewable solutions, not just one or the other.

Yes. They say it will only be "little" sites scattered here and there. It will still be more disturbance to wildlife and an eyesore into the bargain.

And you can't drill deep into rock without risking earthquakes.

Nuclear fission is getting closer.

Actually that should be fusion. I think. It's the other one anyway. Without any scary waste.