OK, but what about contamination of groundwater and underground water sources? We need drinkable water a hell of a lot more than fracked gas.
I have a huge dilemma ... I have just 59p left on my iTunes account and both Avicii - Wake Me Up and Foster the People - Pumped Up Kids are on sale for 59p. Also, Kelly Clarkson - Breakaway is another contender. Which should I go for?
And you lot are the sensible ones. Imagine living up here - I must be the only person for miles who doesn't really care.
Even ignoring the potential environmental consequences, my main problem with fracking is that it increases our dependency on fossil fuels and reduces the incentive to develop economically sustainable renewable sources
Unless you live anywhere near a major fault line of course. Some twat decided to build a nuclear power plant pretty much right on the San Andreas Fault.
Respect to you Pomps for realising that you should pay for art, and that if you don't have more money left you should wait until you do, not steal it. Of those choices....probably Foster The People.
Yes, it's possible for a badly lined borehole to leak into groundwater. It's meant to be lined with steel and concrete in layers. If it's done to standards (that have been in place for years) then, no, there won't be contamination. Accidents do happen, though. Good enforcement of standards minimises the risk. An excellent source for good quality, well-argued information (on many, many subjects) is ResearchGate. They have answers to this question on here:http://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_fracking_shale_gas_contaminate_ground_water_aquifers - just a warning, it's not light reading. People who work for the industry who comment are identifiable by company names. Vin
Solar is dropping in price at an astounding rate. please log in to view this image From http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...y-lessons-for-the-united-states-from-germany/ The price is getting closer and closer to being the cheapest way to generate electricity. Once the price is lower than other energy sources it will be madness to power anything any other way. The biggest obstacle to solar is that battery technology is not good enough. However, it will be. There's an astounding amount of money to be made from good power storage to it'll arrive sooner rather than later. And how much solar power is there? Here's an illustration from a German physics doctorate paper. please log in to view this image http://www.dlr.de/tt/Portaldata/41/...lance_of_a_Solar_Electricity_Transmission.pdf This is why I tend not to worry about over reliance on fossil fuels. It'll stop of its own accord without any grand plans. Vin
Exactly, plus there is a lot of evidence that it can lead to the water table being contaminated, which isn't good. The main problem I think, though is that companies are desperate to make money out of fossil fuels with the overwhelming evidence, accepted nowadays by the vast majority of scientists, that creating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases contributes to climate change. And Vin, I may have implied that my main concern is the aesthetics of fracking, but I would honestly rather see a field full of wind turbines, or an array of PV panels opposite my house than a load of carefully camouflaged shale gas pumps, simply because the energy being produced is renewable, infinite, and non-polluting, none of which can be said of any fossil fuel. I have PV panels on my roof, which together with a battery storage system means I have cut my consumption of grid electricity by about 80% for most of the year. If the government gave better incentives to people to invest in renewables then we would eventually free ourselves from being dependent on the likes of Putin or fracking companies like Cuadrilla.
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore said the state supreme court today issued an order that effectively keeps probate judges from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples for 25 days. Moore said in his view the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Friday ending the gay marriage ban is now stalled in Alabama. Parties have 25 days in which to contest the U.S. Supreme Court ruling before it becomes a mandate. "In that 25-day period that (U.S. Supreme Court) order is not in effect," Moore said. "The (Alabama Supreme Court order speaks for itself." http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/06/roy_moore_gay_marriage.html
Agreed. It isn't so much that fracking is bad. In fact it's really no worse than other forms of extracting fossil fuels. It's the dependence upon a fossil fuel that is the problem. Fracking merely extends that dependence and the refusal to make the necessary change is pushed further away. There is a simple fact here. The planet is rebalancing the climate. It's been doing it ever since. When humans lit the first bonfire it had an imperceptible amount of unnecessary rebalancing to do. It is always trying to find equilibrium. We are tilting that further away from what is easily liveable for human beings. The planet doesn't give a sh*t about that. It will just continue to find a climactic equilibrium. Those are its natural cycles plus our silly nudges to send it off-balance on top of them. Thing is, the more we push it, the further and further those natural cycles go outside of our ability to tolerate them. Don't be worried about the Earth. It will be just fine. Give a sh*t about the people in the future. Almost certainly your grandchildren. Maybe even your children. And the dig about the Greens is outrageous. They are simply more aware and intolerant of waste and consumption than the vast majority are. While most people walk around not giving a toss, they don't. They should be applauded, not ridiculed.
If "companies are desperate to make money out of fossil fuels" (the bad side of capitalism, your tone suggests) remember that there are a thousand companies, ten thousand companies, desperate to make even more money by offering you sustainable power when it's economically viable. That's the joy of capital - it moves to where the profits are. I'd love us to generate the energy we use by wind or solar but the mathematics show that it can't practically be done in the UK. That's quite a sweeping statement but it's the conclusion of the best book I'm aware of on the subject, namely "Sustainable energy - without the hot air". It's a mathematical view of what would need to be done to go completely renewable. 10% of Britain covered in wind farms to generate just half the energy used by cars, anyone? The guy's not a climate sceptic in any way, shape or form (believe it or not, neither am I), he just looks at the maths. It's all available online at: http://www.withouthotair.com/ - No opinions at all in there, just maths. Tough read my brother bought me the paper version) but well worth it. Going off grid is the tip of the iceberg. Look at the graph for the UK - pink bar 2/3 of the way across the page: http://www.withouthotair.com/c17/page_101.shtml Your home use of power is a very, very, very small part of the problem. It's worth doing (and I'll be doing it in the next few years) but solar panels on British roofs solves an exceptionally small part of the energy problem. I genuinely expect us to end up relying on solar power piped via a HVDC grid from North Africa in about twenty or twenty-five years (nice and stable, just like oil producers!). I also accept that filling that gap will mean we need the cheapest, lowest carbon, fossil fuels, which will probably mean fracking. Vin
I remember using that map (or one like it) in something I wrote at uni. Yes I agree, the reason I like solar is a) I'm a geek, b) the energy in your average square m of sunlight is ridiculous, we just need to work out how to get at it, whereas with wind it's all marginal materials improvements, and c) I have this crazy dream of big solar investment schemes where average joes are making good % returns in solar banks cropping up everywhere. And let's ship a few of last year's model to Africa and Helmand while we're on the subject. I like the last line so much and actually I think it's true about most bad stuff in the world. I think we are boring everyone now. (ask me another time why we should spend our whole aid budget on condoms)
