Reminder Secure

Our FRACKING government ! Cheap gas my A***

Andy is off-line
11 April 2013 19:23
photostore
Photographer
photostore
Location
United Kingdom
Fife
fife based, but Scotland wide

Quote from mattharper
Naturally, you can access this but Durham can't 



Maybe he does'nt want to ........

"The lead author of a report which compared seismic activity caused by fracking to the energy produced by someone jumping off a ladder insisted today that his study was fully independent of big energy companies.

Professor Richard Davies of Durham University, who has previously worked in exploration for ExxonMobil, said it was vital that academics in the field had direct experience in the industry."

Gotta love the second paragraph cheeky
And another little piece of info

"The Durham Energy Institute, of which Professor Davies is director, boasts a number of private partners from the energy sector including the part Chinese-state owned IGas which has raised £23.1m to fund exploration for shale gas in North West England this summer. The company also owns licences to drill in the Chancellor George Osborne's constituency of Tatton.


lets get shootin


Rob Keynsham is off-line
11 April 2013 20:07
basil
Photographer
basil
Location
United Kingdom
Avon
Bristol

Quote from OldMaster
It's forecast to become the largest source of fuel in the US making them self sufficient on shale gas alone..apparently.

I know we have a much smaller land mass and much higher population densities but we need a long term solution and fracking should not be dismissed on insufficient information. Is it really more dangerous than digging deep coal mines and pits or quarry blasting for instance?

In my view virtually any opportunity to not go down the flawed route of nuclear needs careful consideration.

It is true we benefited little from north sea gas 'cos we sold it, but that was a political decision!!




Slightly off topic but what's the problem with nuclear power. Its responsible for less deaths than the internal combustion engine and contributes less to global warning.I'm in favour of offshore windfarms myself but opponents say it spoils their view.


HowardJ is off-line
12 April 2013 01:38
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
Location
United Kingdom
Surrey
West Midlands

Quote from basil
Slightly off topic but what's the problem with nuclear power. Its responsible for less deaths than the internal combustion engine and contributes less to global warning.I'm in favour of offshore windfarms myself but opponents say it spoils their view.




Nuclear is good apart from the waste and decommissioning which nobody to seems to have properly cracked.

http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/16-06/ff_heresies_08nuclear


HowardJ is off-line
12 April 2013 01:39
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
Location
United Kingdom
Surrey
West Midlands

Quote from couchpotato
Fracking BAND in New Zealand.......



What kind of music do they play?

Or did you mean banned?


Andy is off-line
12 April 2013 12:28
photostore
Photographer
photostore
Location
United Kingdom
Fife
fife based, but Scotland wide

Quote from basil
Slightly off topic but what's the problem with nuclear power. Its responsible for less deaths than the internal combustion engine and contributes less to global warning.I'm in favour of offshore windfarms myself but opponents say it spoils their view.



If the choice is nuclear or fracking ? then stick a wind turbine in my garden any day.
lets get shootin


HowardJ is off-line
13 April 2013 02:56
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
Location
United Kingdom
Surrey
West Midlands

Quote from photostore
If the choice is nuclear or fracking ? then stick a wind turbine in my garden any day.



I think they've said we don't get enough of sufficient strength to get enough generation capacity and what do you do on calm days?

You'd need to be storing the wind generated power for use later.


Andy is off-line
13 April 2013 06:16
photostore
Photographer
photostore
Location
United Kingdom
Fife
fife based, but Scotland wide

Not sure about the strength thing Howard,
Where i live they have just put up 9 outside the local town which i look on from my vantage point at the highest part of that town (small Scots town so more like a large village really) They are pretty much in constant movement as a lot of time (years) was spent with mini towers across the landscape locally testing it)and as for storage capacity i agree and would imagine that is an area that a lot of work is being done on ?

There were the usual debates before they went up which i found laughable given they are situated right next to Mossmorran petrochemical cracker plant (for anyone that remembers the flixborough disaster it's similar i believe just much bigger)and given that it had a 20 year lifespan then was to be decommisioned ? but has just had a 25 year extension at the point of expiry all authorised without public debate i think we have other things to worry about around here The dammned plant fails monthly and the resultant safety protocal means it goes into flare mode burning of the gas in the pipeline which cannot be stopped pumping from Aberdeen, the result is a flare hundreds of feet high and a rumbling noise like an army tank core driving through the town for days at a time
BRING ON ALTERNATIVES TO FOSSIL/GAS FUELS I SAY !
lets get shootin


Bob is off-linePlatinum Member
13 April 2013 07:34
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Honiton

Quote from photostore

The company also owns licences to drill in the Chancellor George Osborne's constituency of Tatton.



Well nobody can accuse George of being a NIMBY if he hasn't used his influence so send the frackers elsewhere.

Incidentally, I've never understood why NIMBYs are so anti something as intrinsically gracious and beautiful, not to mention environmentally sound, as wind farms.

Unlike solar farms (I live very close to the second biggest in the UK) wind farms don't need to be guarded around the clock to prevent TPBs stealing the valuable metals and they also make great backdrops. I can't wait for my local wind farm to be built ..... though I may have to, as the NIMBYs are bleating like spring lambs that they will spoil their view of a boring flat and currently featureless landscape.

Bob


HowardJ is off-line
13 April 2013 08:27
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
Location
United Kingdom
Surrey
West Midlands

Quote from photostore
Not sure about the strength thing Howard,
Where i live they have just put up 9 outside the local town which i look on from my vantage point at the highest part of that town (small Scots town so more like a large village really) They are pretty much in constant movement as a lot of time (years) was spent with mini towers across the landscape locally testing it)and as for storage capacity i agree and would imagine that is an area that a lot of work is being done on ?

There were the usual debates before they went up which i found laughable given they are situated right next to Mossmorran petrochemical cracker plant (for anyone that remembers the flixborough disaster it's similar i believe just much bigger)and given that it had a 20 year lifespan then was to be decommisioned ? but has just had a 25 year extension at the point of expiry all authorised without public debate i think we have other things to worry about around here The dammned plant fails monthly and the resultant safety protocal means it goes into flare mode burning of the gas in the pipeline which cannot be stopped pumping from Aberdeen, the result is a flare hundreds of feet high and a rumbling noise like an army tank core driving through the town for days at a time
BRING ON ALTERNATIVES TO FOSSIL/GAS FUELS I SAY !



I'm sure the strength is fine in some places but I believe research has found sticking smaller wind turbines around towns won't work due to the wind not being strong enough or coming from the right direction.

We're going to end up with a mix of energy source: Wind (20%?), Solar (30%?), Tidal (10%?) but all of these are subject to weather conditions. We'll need another source to provide the base and it needs to be something you can bring on to the national grid predictably and quickly. At the moment we have hydro, coal and nuclear. Coal is due to be shutdown to meet the carbon emissions targets and hydro is limited due to the few naturally occurring locations that make it effective. Nuclear is probably where we need to be heading. There was an interesting article in Wired about 8 years ago about nuclear really was the lowest environmental impact solution. I think even the Japanese are going to have to accept that longer term even though they're pulling away from it now.

We've gotten ourselves into an awkward position through lack of consistent direction from the government and lack of investment from our energy companies. If you were an energy company operating in the UK you'd be slightly confused and not motivated to spend money on generation infrastructure as you can make a few quid from the mess the government has created.



diipii is off-line
14 April 2013 16:28
diipii
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Worcestershire


Anything is better than nuclear.
It only happens all the time.



3 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
FirstLifePhotography imagezone photofrank