Fracking

I would like go see the Severn barrage built. Done properly it would give a third Severn crossing into Wales.

Why even shale gas may not reignite flagging green movement, in The Economist.

Good article. I heard recently that granite is fracked to release geothermal energy. A beautiful emission free energy resource!! What would the anti-frackers do then, poor things.

bags: and your point?

Perhaps you should read the article for the point, carbon.

I thought the best bit in the article was the fact that Balcolme is only an hour away from London. Fracking down there will suit me, if they are going to do it anywhere.
Obviously an article in the Economist is all about money. The environmentalists are giving up because it costs them to get there is one of the points.
There is a good article in the Independent, comparing Cameron's statements on fracking with those of Caroline Lucas on prices, jobs, water pollution, and earthquakes. Lucas wins on all points.

Caroline probably is better informed than David but you do have to feel sorry for him having a bad back and being unable to kill red deer during his holiday on a small Scottish island (small islands are good for hunting as the prey can't very well escape easily).

Such a difficult word, fracking - I keep pronouncing it wrong!

Extensive deer culling recommended in Guardian article.

bags, keep up, top predators, like wolves are needed not culling. See posts following the dreadful poem that I've not even bothered to read.

Eh?

Just been doing the ironing and thinking about wolves/deer/David. Of course it wouldn't be a good idea to introduce wolves onto Jura. But why are there deer on Jura; I guess they swim there - possibly because the deer population is too high on the mainland. Its complicated but it is still the case that introducing top predators to the Highlands would help the balance of wildlife.
I am not totally against culling - but culling is taking out the old and the sick. I don't think hunters do that; they probably leave that to the gamekeepers. In any case I do not approve of killing for pleasure -not any sort of killing for pleasure. full stop.

carbon, keep up, dear, where would the wolves live? Perhaps you didn't read (surprise, surprise) what Dr Paul Dolman said in the article: ""I don't think it's realistic to have wolves and brown bears in rural England," he said at a news briefing in London. "In the absence of natural predators, the only way to manage them is to shoot them."

This is Josh the cartoonist's answer to the polluted drinking water scare stories (which, of course, are based on nonsense).

This is good. Real facts about fracking

I found that very, very informative. I know little about fracking, but have had my curiosity peaked by this thread, and another thread that has discussed the future of energy and it's impact on the environment in the UK.
It's certainly an issue that needs to be addressed, and for a while all I can do is to remain educated with the many proposals. My feeling at the moment is that energy needs to be multi-faceted in providing the best of several, and maybe diverse, options.

The widening war on...sand
Aug 27, 2013
Energy: gas Greens
When I wrote about Propublica's rather dishonest rebranding of sand as "crystalline silica" the other day, I thought what I'd stumbled across was just a particularly egregious example of the green tactic of making everything sound scary in the hope that somebody will be convinced.

Not a bit of it.

Writing at Forbes, Christopher Helman reveals that there is a fullscale environmentalist war front directed at sand mining. And not only that, but it appears to have had some effect.

Towns like Winona, Minn are now facing calls for the monitoring of silica dust and diesel fumes emitted by the sand mines. There’s a real concern that when tiny particles of airborne silica are inhaled and get lodged in the lungs they could lead to silicosis.

Just this week Trempealeau County, Wisconsin, home to more new sand mines than anywhere else in the country, has imposed a year-long moratorium on issuing new mine permits while it studies health impacts.

I'm not at all convinced that the "concerns" are genuine. Like the environmentalist "concerns" over microseismic events, they appear to take form only when associated with fracking. Sand has, after all, been mined without controversy for quite a long time and the type used as a fracking proppant seems about as far removed from a risk of silicosis as it's possible to get. It's therefore hard for any reasonable person to conclude that these "concerns" are built on anything other than a fervent belief in the evils of capitalism.

Expect to hear about this latest "controversy" in the pages of the Guardian and on the news programmes of the BBC in due course.

From Bishop Hill blog.

.....I think I have a fervent belief.......!

of what?

Shale gas is not just about affordable energy and growth. It’s about reducing dependence on the Middle East

What irritates me beyond measure is that so many environmentalist, particularly those at the extreme end spend all their time finding things they can get concerned about but never offer any carefully thought through alternatives. It is usually those actually in the industries concerned that do this.

A trawl of the literature shows that, in the extraction and construction industry there are already developments that are leading to a reduced use of sand and other aggregates. In this country much of the rubble from demolished buildings is being broken up ground into small even sized pieces and reused on site, which also means a reduction of lorry traffic removing it. In Hong Kong they are grinding recycled glass down to make the fine sand needed in concrete and other alternatives are also being investigated