Off Topic The Goodhand Arms

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
  • Like
Reactions: Onionman, tomw24, - Doing The Lambert Walk and 1 other person
Qwerty said:
Now they've finished with that they can get on with the important business of cancelling the parking ticket I got for parking outside my house with a permit.
Click to expand...
**** parking tickets. I went to court over a parking ticket and won. Now I park where ever I want for as long as I want.

This was a private company though, not a council.
 
ChilcoSaint said:
Lancashire County Council has rejected a planning application to start fracking on the Fylde coast by 10 votes to 4. Great news for those who love the English countryside.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-33313084
Click to expand...


Well, I may be unique on here and I fully expect to have my head bitten off but I cannot see what the problem is with fracking. Please don't link me to websites that prove how stupid I am; I've read them. Once through the production stage, which typically uses a site around three acres (about three football pitches), you're left with something about the size of a large shed on site.

Drilling:

You must log in or register to see images


Production:

You must log in or register to see images


The production stage is pretty ugly in this pic but I'm sure a dozen bushes could sort it out. One of those every three or four miles would hardly be a destroyed environment.

Loads of the pictures you find on the net are not of fracking sites; they are old-style vertical oil wells. They look awful but they are simply not related to the truth.

I'd much rather have gas from a fracking site half a mile down the road than have to rely on Putin and his vile henchmen.


I know I'm rowing against the tide but I also know that the USA is shortly going to become a net exporter of gas because they have a different view from us. Frackers are also responsible for the fact that oil is now no longer $130 a barrel.

No, I'm not employed by an oil or gas company (or anyone in any way associated with such). I'm just a bloke who sees that it's not as bad as painted by the greens. The greens who rely on scaring people to exist.

Vin
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintalfie and jenthesaint1990
Onionman said:
Well, I may be unique on here and I fully expect to have my head bitten off but I cannot see what the problem is with fracking. Please don't link me to websites that prove how stupid I am; I've read them. Once through the production stage, which typically uses a site around three acres (about three football pitches), you're left with something about the size of a large shed on site.

Drilling:

You must log in or register to see images


Production:

You must log in or register to see images


The production stage is pretty ugly in this pic but I'm sure a dozen bushes could sort it out. One of those every three or four miles would hardly be a destroyed environment.

Loads of the pictures you find on the net are not of fracking sites; they are old-style vertical oil wells. They look awful but they are simply not related to the truth.

I'd much rather have gas from a fracking site half a mile down the road than have to rely on Putin and his vile henchmen.


I know I'm rowing against the tide but I also know that the USA is shortly going to become a net exporter of gas because they have a different view from us. Frackers are also responsible for the fact that oil is now no longer $130 a barrel.

No, I'm not employed by an oil or gas company (or anyone in any way associated with such). I'm just a bloke who sees that it's not as bad as painted by the greens. The greens who rely on scaring people to exist.

Vin
Click to expand...
I can't be arsed to argue with you but you're wrong. And the last thing this planet needs is yet another source of fossil fuels to **** things up even more than they are already. And your dig about greens is simply outrageous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSecondStain
Onionman said:
Well, I may be unique on here and I fully expect to have my head bitten off but I cannot see what the problem is with fracking. Please don't link me to websites that prove how stupid I am; I've read them. Once through the production stage, which typically uses a site around three acres (about three football pitches), you're left with something about the size of a large shed on site.

Drilling:

You must log in or register to see images


Production:

You must log in or register to see images


The production stage is pretty ugly in this pic but I'm sure a dozen bushes could sort it out. One of those every three or four miles would hardly be a destroyed environment.

Loads of the pictures you find on the net are not of fracking sites; they are old-style vertical oil wells. They look awful but they are simply not related to the truth.

I'd much rather have gas from a fracking site half a mile down the road than have to rely on Putin and his vile henchmen.


I know I'm rowing against the tide but I also know that the USA is shortly going to become a net exporter of gas because they have a different view from us. Frackers are also responsible for the fact that oil is now no longer $130 a barrel.

No, I'm not employed by an oil or gas company (or anyone in any way associated with such). I'm just a bloke who sees that it's not as bad as painted by the greens. The greens who rely on scaring people to exist.

Vin
Click to expand...
The problem with fracking is not the aesthetics of the site - it's the actual process itself. The damage it causes below ground level is shocking. It's also linked to causing earthquakes.
 
ChilcoSaint said:
I can't be arsed to argue with you but you're wrong. And the last thing this planet needs is yet another source of fossil fuels to **** things up even more than they are already. And your dig about greens is simply outrageous.
Click to expand...

As predicted.

On a factual basis, anyone claiming green credentials should be overjoyed at the thought of more natural gas, as it produces significantly less CO2 per unit of energy than either oil or coal (around 50% of coal and around 70% of oil). And fracked gas would be cheap so it would displace more carbon intensive fuels. Doubtless that's "wrong" too.

Vin
 
Last edited:
tomw24 said:
The problem with fracking is not the aesthetics of the site - it's the actual process itself. The damage it causes below ground level is shocking. It's also linked to causing earthquakes.
Click to expand...

Ref earthquakes; the famous ones in Blackpool that are always reeled out were, IIRC, 1.4 and 2.4 on the Richter scale. First one is literally impossible to feel. Second one might just be sensed on a quiet night. And there are around a million a day of that magnitude, so it's quite possible that they were entirely unrelated to the drilling going on.

I dealt with the aesthetics because that's what the original post referred to.

Vin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back