http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Any USA based posters care to contribute on the US experience ?.
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Any USA based posters care to contribute on the US experience ?.
I would be interested to know how many of the protestors are basing their objection on sound judgement and not on anti-fracking propaganda like Gasland or Promised Land. The same objectors probably thought Sean Quinn's quarries were a great idea.
Stupid decision to postpose the exploratory drill. If the whole world took that same stance we would still be in the Iron Age.
I was interested to hear Sammy Wilson from the DUP on the radio this morning - how does their version of the bible and creation account for oil and gas? Oh wait, God planted it there.
Now the only threat to the environment and people of Fermanagh is Seamus Quigley!
great song............... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc)
They started fracking for the first time in Nevada earlier this year between Wells and Elko. For a state with water availability issues, and pretty regular, if small, earthquake activity, it isn't being very well received.
Quote from: theticklemister on August 12, 2014, 03:14:06 PM
great song............... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc)
Hardly... Even that lad Brooks had a better catalog of work.
Quote from: Orior on August 12, 2014, 01:53:55 PM
Stupid decision to postpose the exploratory drill. If the whole world took that same stance we would still be in the Iron Age.
I was interested to hear Sammy Wilson from the DUP on the radio this morning - how does their version of the bible and creation account for oil and gas? Oh wait, God planted it there.
Why was it stupid? Are you sure fracking is 100% safe? I've read a bit about it and I'm not convinced it is at all safe. I certainly don't want it being done in Fermanagh. In the middle of a desert maybe but not 40 miles up the road from me.
Dont know what the fuss is? It's not as if Fermanagh hasn't a history of big explosions is it?
Quote from: T Fearon on August 12, 2014, 04:05:14 PM
Dont know what the fuss is? It's not as if Fermanagh hasn't a history of big explosions is it?
That's a bit Nasty Tony!
What's the worst thing could happen?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyiIBY6GO1Q
Fracking will generate Billions if not trillions so it wouldn't matter if old people and children died in the process, it will go ahead regardless.
Quote from: thebigfella on August 12, 2014, 03:26:04 PM
Quote from: theticklemister on August 12, 2014, 03:14:06 PM
great song............... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfR61oZ3tnc)
Hardly... Even that lad Brooks had a better catalog of work.
??????????
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 12, 2014, 03:36:03 PM
Quote from: Orior on August 12, 2014, 01:53:55 PM
Stupid decision to postpose the exploratory drill. If the whole world took that same stance we would still be in the Iron Age.
I was interested to hear Sammy Wilson from the DUP on the radio this morning - how does their version of the bible and creation account for oil and gas? Oh wait, God planted it there.
Why was it stupid? Are you sure fracking is 100% safe? I've read a bit about it and I'm not convinced it is at all safe. I certainly don't want it being done in Fermanagh. In the middle of a desert maybe but not 40 miles up the road from me.
The request was to drill one exploratory bore hole, in an abandoned quarry. No worse that someone drilling a water well. The result of the exploration would tell us whether the whole thing is plausible or not.
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Quote from: Orior on August 12, 2014, 08:31:14 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 12, 2014, 03:36:03 PM
Quote from: Orior on August 12, 2014, 01:53:55 PM
Stupid decision to postpose the exploratory drill. If the whole world took that same stance we would still be in the Iron Age.
I was interested to hear Sammy Wilson from the DUP on the radio this morning - how does their version of the bible and creation account for oil and gas? Oh wait, God planted it there.
Why was it stupid? Are you sure fracking is 100% safe? I've read a bit about it and I'm not convinced it is at all safe. I certainly don't want it being done in Fermanagh. In the middle of a desert maybe but not 40 miles up the road from me.
The request was to drill one exploratory bore hole, in an abandoned quarry. No worse that someone drilling a water well. The result of the exploration would tell us whether the whole thing is plausible or not.
Exactly, what a load of populiat nonsense from Durkan.
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on August 12, 2014, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
According to the BBC report I read ...it was land where fracking might happen. Arlene didn't feel this required her to declare it though.
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on August 12, 2014, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
According to the BBC report I read ...it was land where fracking might happen. Arlene didn't feel this required her to declare it though.
That answers that question that question then.
Typical.
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on August 12, 2014, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
According to the BBC report I read ...it was land where fracking might happen. Arlene didn't feel this required her to declare it though.
That answers that question that question then.
Typical.
You'll never guess who quietly granted a 6 month extension to the drilling licence.......
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:56:47 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on August 12, 2014, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
According to the BBC report I read ...it was land where fracking might happen. Arlene didn't feel this required her to declare it though.
That answers that question that question then.
Typical.
You'll never guess who quietly granted a 6 month extension to the drilling licence.......
Arlene ?
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 09:57:42 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:56:47 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on August 12, 2014, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: tyroneman on August 12, 2014, 08:49:44 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 12, 2014, 11:36:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28752425
DUP aren't happy. Sammy is up in arms. What was in it for the DUP ? Everybody else seem to be opposed.
Could it be anything to do with 54 acres of land.....?
Was it Arlenes husband who owned the land that the Fracking was to take place?
According to the BBC report I read ...it was land where fracking might happen. Arlene didn't feel this required her to declare it though.
That answers that question that question then.
Typical.
You'll never guess who quietly granted a 6 month extension to the drilling licence.......
Arlene ?
Nail on head......
Surely that is BIG news?
Quote from: theskull1 on August 12, 2014, 11:54:23 PM
Surely that is BIG news?
Sssssshhhh !
This shouldn't get out. Keep it quiet.
I owe Mark H an apology then ;D. The economy can take the hit so that auld cnut doesn't profit from this.
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
QuoteScientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
Like in
"Them Thar Hills" with Laurel & Hardy?
Quote from: T Fearon on August 12, 2014, 04:05:14 PM
Dont know what the fuss is? It's not as if Fermanagh hasn't a history of big explosions is it?
Disgraceful comment
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Extremely poor decision from the politicians here, what was the given reason? Because there wasn't enough information? Not sure if he is really qualified to make that comment and I'm pretty sure he is even less qualified to make the overall decision. But that's the problem with politicians, they are very good at getting elected but usually very poor leaders and decision makers. I guess he is more concerned with how SDLPs vote will hold up in Fermanagh. DUP are probably more concerned about lining their own pockets somehow. Point is neither are qualified to make the decisions they are making.
This hole was an exploration well, it would be used to explore the reservoir, the chances of contamination to the ground are virtually zero if the well uses modern designs. If this hole was drilled data could be extracted from the reservoir to asses as to whether or not it is even viable. It would also give information on the rock formations.
You need all the information on the table before being able to make an informed decision on this and without an exploration well you don't. The main reason that fracking contaminates ground water is because there is insufficient impermeable rock layers between the reservoir formation and the water table. An exploration well would be able to tell us something about that and asses whether or not there was a risk of contamination. The vast majority of fracking operations do not contaminate ground water as they are buried below maybe dozens of impermeable rock formations.
As someone earlier pointed out if we had this attitude about every new technology we would still be in the Iron Age. Very true and they all have unwanted consequences it just depends on how much we are willing to accept and adapt to them in our daily lives.
- Look at farming, it has changed the natural landscape beyond all recognition in Ireland and continues to have an adverse affect on the environment including water pollution, air pollution, noise pollution etc.
- Quarrying is similar risk of pollution to ground water, noise pollution, disruption on country roads etc
- Aeroplanes are another example
- But the most glaring example is motor vehicles, noise and air pollution and dozens of cases of injury and death every year yet not only are we willing to accept them we just egg-on the carnage with more roads, more cars, faster cars etc etc
Anyway my point is all of these technological advances we are willing to put up with their downsides and build our lives around.
The people making the decisions as to whether we go ahead with a new technology or not should measure up the risks and consequences analytically and logically against the potential benefits. They should not also have to asses the voting pattern of a public which is often ill informed, open to manipulation and scaremongering, and does not know what is best for it.
If I lived in Fermanagh I have to say I would also be out protesting.... but about the ownership of the mineral rights on the land, a potential financial benefit to the locality that will never be seen.
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Looks like there's pockets of flammable gas coming through with the water rather than the water itself being flammable (which is what I was imagining)
This is all a smoke screen by the DUP. They are looking more of a cut from this fracking to line the coffers. There are no Catholics directly involved in this to annoy so why would they stop if not for a better deal for the DUP.
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 13, 2014, 07:29:03 AM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Looks like there's pockets of flammable gas coming through with the water rather than the water itself being flammable (which is what I was imagining)
Ah that's ok so! ::)
Quote from: Hereiam on August 13, 2014, 09:20:30 AM
This is all a smoke screen by the DUP. They are looking more of a cut from this fracking to line the coffers. There are no Catholics directly involved in this to annoy so why would they stop if not for a better deal for the DUP.
DUP wouldn't be like that.
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 09:23:11 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 13, 2014, 07:29:03 AM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Looks like there's pockets of flammable gas coming through with the water rather than the water itself being flammable (which is what I was imagining)
Ah that's ok so! ::)
Sure who takes a lighter into the shower?
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 09:23:11 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 13, 2014, 07:29:03 AM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Looks like there's pockets of flammable gas coming through with the water rather than the water itself being flammable (which is what I was imagining)
Ah that's ok so! ::)
TBF, having flammable gas coming through your pipes is a different problem to the water itself containing contaminants (e.g. flammable liquid hydrocarbons). Understanding exactly how a problem like this arises is surely important for both sides of the Fracking debate.
In Ireland, most water is piped from lakes / reservoirs and seeing as gas (assuming it's a hydrocarbon gas such as methane) is insoluble in water, I don't see how we could have this particular problem. If you were piping water directly from a bored well, then you might be more likely to have a situation such as this and obviously that would be a problem.
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Posting links to those videos does not make something fact. I could equally post links to articles saying that in some of those areas there was methane in the groundwater supplies prior to fracking and that those videos were ballix.
There is no doubt cowboy fracking would be a disaster. Assuming there are examples elsewhere of industrial best practice, then these are the areas that should be looked at, rather than throwing out the idea entirely on the basis of shoddy work elsewhere.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on August 13, 2014, 01:26:59 PM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Posting links to those videos does not make something fact. I could equally post links to articles saying that in some of those areas there was methane in the groundwater supplies prior to fracking and that those videos were ballix.
There is no doubt cowboy fracking would be a disaster. Assuming there are examples elsewhere of industrial best practice, then these are the areas that should be looked at, rather than throwing out the idea entirely on the basis of shoddy work elsewhere.
I assume there are examples of industrial best practice in many fields (nuclear energy/erection of telephone masts/siting of airports etc etc). That doesn't mean that the industry itself is safe or is something that you would want on your doorstep.
Quote from: Franko on August 13, 2014, 01:34:03 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on August 13, 2014, 01:26:59 PM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on August 13, 2014, 02:36:21 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on August 13, 2014, 12:17:34 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on August 12, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on August 12, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Scientific analysis has shown that in West Virginia and Pennsylvania fracking has contaminated ground water, so severe in places that tap water is actually flammable.
I find that fairly hard to believe tbh.
Personally I'd be opposed to it without knowing more about it and having a full review completed
From my understanding of the process I struggle to understand how ground water would not be contaminated to some degree. I cannot fathom how the chemicals used in the fracking or the gas released could be completely contained so as to make it safe.
Take a look at these videos
http://rt.com/usa/flammable-water-dakota-fracking-023/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
Posting links to those videos does not make something fact. I could equally post links to articles saying that in some of those areas there was methane in the groundwater supplies prior to fracking and that those videos were ballix.
There is no doubt cowboy fracking would be a disaster. Assuming there are examples elsewhere of industrial best practice, then these are the areas that should be looked at, rather than throwing out the idea entirely on the basis of shoddy work elsewhere.
I assume there are examples of industrial best practice in many fields (nuclear energy/erection of telephone masts/siting of airports etc etc). That doesn't mean that the industry itself is safe or is something that you would want on your doorstep.
Risk versus reward. Plans shouldn't be passed due to bias from a cabal of politicians nor should they be rejected on the basis of objections from people having their heads twisted by a couple of online videos and pressure from the green lobby. If, on the evidence available it isn't worth the risk then don't do it. Simple.
Arlene has told them to frack off eventually.