Opponents of fracking are poorly informed but succeed in putting 64% of England off limits

Posted: February 3, 2015 by tallbloke in Shale gas

 Last week the woeful Environmental Audit Committee succeeded in pushing through a number of restrictive amendments to the parliamentary biill on fracking, putting variously designated areas such as national parks, groundwater source areas and SSSIs off limits. For now, this isn’t a disaster, since the benefits to local communities and the country as a whole will become obvious in fracking permitted areas. But the irrationality of the opposition is still a threat to the UK economy and our energy security. frackingmapfinal3A comment on the Guardian’s website makes some good points:

Take away 40% from the 60% of the UK offered for fracking and you get 36% of the UK land mass still open for fracking.

As throughout this hysteria the anti frackers propaganda relies on ignorance hence it is wildly popular with the febrile masses.

Once a few wells have been fracked and people see the reality that is that the local impact is not dissimilar to having a cement depot near you but only for a few months the hysterics will go quiet for a short while before they pop up again with their next pile of primitive fearful sh1te to inflict costs of on society as they indulge in the subconscious frisson of fear.

In the real world over 1 million wells have now been fracked with only a handful of early wells having problems as the technique and regulation required was first developed. In recent years fracking failures are rare as rocking horse poo, which your garden is no doubt full of.

Not content with 1 MILLION tests of this “controversial” (aka lots of hysterical lies told about it) technique the UK got the pre eminent scientific body, The Royal Geological Society and The Royal Society to produce extensive reports, both of which say fracking can be done safely. Before you rubbish these bodies they are the same ones that you quote to support global warming ideas.

On global warming fracking UK gas will result in no additional gas use whatsoever, it will merely replace LNG shipped half way round the world that we will have to import instead no matter how many useless inefficient subsidy requiring renewables. Shale in contrast to (sans subsidy) uneconomic renewables is a profitable activity without any subsidy. These profits will be taxed at a discounted rate, what liars and cretins call a “subsidy” when one is a payment to something that was uneconomic, the other a reduced profit on something that is profitable Equating the two is so thick it is in fact bare faced lying.

So, you people fearful of fracking, you are simply being lied to by professional fear mongers promoting their political agenda and venting their angst against life. You know you will end up embarrassed and humiliated when the stuff you are buying is shown to be drivel. Why not just stop and read the Royal Society report and try and actually understand what fracking is and how it really works, 1 million times and counting

http://www.bgs.ac.uk/shalegas/

Its all in the link. The Royal Geological Society are neither lying, in anyones pocket, nor hysterical. That would be you. Whose pocket do you think it is (Putin is one candidate)

Comments
  1. wolsten says:

    Good luck with that! I tried discussing this with someone I know recently and found it depressingly difficult to steer the conversation around to the facts. As you say only time will tell.

  2. geronimo says:

    I could be wrong Rog, but the people I go walking with are mostly retired consultants, lecturers etc. with me being the sole oick amongst them. We never talk about global warming, which indicates to me that there is a certain scepticism among the group. But they do talk about fracking and what I’ve found is that there is a woeful ignorance among them both of the extent of fracking, and the actual methodology. Now clearly these are educated men – I think at least 3 out of the twelve will vote UKIP – but none of them knew that there were a million wells in operation. Moreover, I got the impression from them that none of them had thought it through/investigated enough to understand that “fracking” takes place only 1-5 hours out of the total life of a well of 10 years or more.

    I have come to the conclusion that this lamentable state of affairs comes from the fact that the fracking industry is an engineering industry and their response to criticism is an engineering response (I’m an engineer myself so have some insider knowledge). First they are assuming that the general public will know these things as they’re all within the public domain,and secondly they are presenting dry, frequently almost incomprehensible, information about fracking that completely misses the main points being exploited by the anti-frackers which are water contamination, chemical, drilling noise and earthquakes. Although these are deallt with in the various reports they are in the depths of the reports. Do you think the public would benefit from knowing that ht fracking process actually takes around 5/91520 of the total life of the well – gives it some perspective, and that there are a million fracking wells worldwide, common sense will tell you that the fears expounded by the alarmists would be well and truly documented and known by now.

    Fracking needs PR expertise to sell itself to those disinterested in anything but the soundbites.

  3. Whilst I in principle support the frackers … they did not do anything to help the sceptics.

    For a minuscule fraction of the PR budget they must now be spending, they could have helped us stop to anti-CO2, anti-oil, anti-industry culture from spreading beyond the backrooms of the BBC Guardian and other Green fascists.

    But no!

    And the result is that a huge army of eco-nutters, many in powerful positions and now they are spending a fortune on PR trying under the mess.

  4. tallbloke says:

    Gerry: Good comment. See if you can find time to write up a fact sheet of simple points to help allay fears about fracking for me to publish.

  5. Ishtar Babilu Dingir says:

    Not to get into our usual two step, Rog, about pro fracking and anti fracking, can I just say that this writer has just underlined what I’ve said to you in the past – given that most of us are so wading around in p1g 1gnorant sh1te on this subject, why don’t you tell old Nige that if he drops it from his manifesto, he’ll get a whole load more voters.🙂

  6. tallbloke says:

    Ishtar: Because the correct approach is education, not aversion for the sake of populism.

  7. Ben Vorlich says:

    There was an interesting item on BBC One Show last night about Scotland’s Oil Shale Industry started by Paraffin Young in the 19th century and which finally closed in the early 1960s. Anyone under 50 won’t remember anything about it, as most of the bings are now gone the won’t even think that anything except coal was mined in West Lothian. Ignorance is bliss.

  8. tchannon says:

    Ah yes, the West Lothian question.

  9. M Simon says:

    The way to counter at this point in time is simple:

    Do You Want To Be Dependent On The Russians For Natural Gas?

    That counters any risk inflation with a counter risk. And you don’t need to know anything about fracking to make it work.

  10. wolsten says:

    That would be logical. I’ll try that out but my suspicion from recent experience is that the counter answer will be “renewables”.

  11. oldbrew says:

    ‘64% of England off limits’

    Is that a problem? If we need to dig the whole country up to stay warm etc., that’s a problem.

  12. tallbloke says:

    “dig the whole country up”

    None of the country needs to be dug up. a 16″ drill hole is all it takes. However, I’m not to bothered about the restrictions, as I think we need to develop shale fairly slowly in order to get max benefit from it. The Greens want to see engineering capability shift from weapons production to building wind turbines. I want to see it shift to drilling rig production.

  13. Evan HIghlander says:

    Yes yes yes! – I can agree with most of what’s written here , – but Hey! ( playing Dvl’s Advocate ) Just think about the Energy we are storing for our future use – just like ALL the Coal we have ( meantime) abandoned in the Scots & Welsh & English Pits from Magee’s days- GO back and use it / extract it when the WOrld’s resources have run out – Man! Just T H I N K how well-off we’ll be then !
    Now of course not, – Like the N Sea Oil, it will be sold off to the highest bidder to , once again, Bail us OUT of our ridiculous Economic State of Affairs!

  14. oldbrew says:

    TB: ‘None of the country needs to be dug up. a 16″ drill hole is all it takes.’

    OK but there’s some work to do to make that happen…

  15. M Simon says:

    This is interesting:

    Do these grotesque pictures show that Putin wants Europe as his prisoner?

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/02/do-these-grotesque-pictures-show-that-putin-wants-europe-as-his-bitch/