Sign in to follow this  
JohnM

Frack on, or off?

Recommended Posts

GS wrote "I have no idea about this particular case in Grasmere; it seems both parties are tailoring the debate around their own needs and telling half-truths. FoE are suggesting from your article that places 'like' Grasmere (not in Grasmere!) are the types of locations fracking companies want to exploit (see Forest of Bowland) whilst Rev Roberts and Cuadrilla are being disingenious if they are stating there is no evidence that fracking causes groundwater contamination; there is plenty of evidence showing it does to certain extents as its impact on causing earthquakes largely from wastewater. Therefore our fracking companies nutters as well?"


 

 

The issue is that the FoE are scaremongering, promoting a visual lie and trying to stir the emotions of an ill-informed and unthinking general public. The issue is that FoE stated visually that there was to be fracking under Grasmere. Its a lie, its an untruth, a falsehood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to FoE nowhere did it state on the leaflet you refer to that the area was actually Grasmere; it was just a stock shot of pretty countryside that happened  to be that particular lakeland village. 

 

On the broader issue of fracking, I agree with you, there is a lot of misinformation around, and probably from both side of the argument. Personally I have reservations around the idea of fracking as it seems to me the technology is still in development and the full side effects are not yet fully understood. I'd be very uncomfortable with the idea of it being done in close proximity to my home. I'd like to see some test sites developed on a small scale far enough away from populous areas so that tests can be independently studied and verified before allowing large scale development. Additionally the well head sites need careful planning, who would really like a large industrial complex being thrown up a relatively short distance from their homes with large volumes of heavy traffic negotiating unsuitable narrow roads again very close to well populated areas as was recently proposed and rejected on the Fylde? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to FoE nowhere did it state on the leaflet you refer to that the area was actually Grasmere; it was just a stock shot of pretty countryside that happened  to be that particular lakeland village. 

 

On the broader issue of fracking, I agree with you, there is a lot of misinformation around, and probably from both side of the argument. Personally I have reservations around the idea of fracking as it seems to me the technology is still in development and the full side effects are not yet fully understood.

 

That's absolutely the point I was making and I think what the FoE were suggesting as well. John has alluded to them scaremongering and lying but that is exactly what Rev Roberts has done in the same article, which highlights your second sentence I have highlighted in bold.

 

Regarding the full side effects, people and organisations will also tailor findings to suit their own arguments, especially when it comes to money. There is evidence starting to appear about fracking in the US and Canada that fracking may not be as safe as geologists/scientists working for these companies are leading us to believe. Contamination of groundwater sources, earthquakes due to wastewater etc are being identified in the US and Canada; in a small country like ours, we don't have the space or capacity to counter this (just my opinion of course). We are also aware of the impact fossil fuel retrieval and consumption has on the planet. It is about time we took the lead and went down other routes and generated other energy less harmful to both us and the planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a weird thing that fracking and windmills seem to have political affiliations*.  

 

UKIP love fracking but hate turbines for example.    

 

Fracking has risks, the history of the technology in the states tells us that, however, some of this comes down to regulations (or lack of).  Would proper regulations make fracking unfeasible?  The slump in oil prices has led to wells and operations being closed in the USA.

 

Fracking does generate waste water (even if heavily regulated) so it is not some negative free industry.  Some of that waste water will be mildly radioactive, not renown as being a positive PR point.

 

*sweeping generalisation, but I this comes from a long time participation in climate discussions 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an article on the bbc news website about a place in Inner Mongolia. It sounds, and looks, like hell on Earth. It is where they mine the rare earth metals needed to make the guts of wind turbines. These things are not as green as people think. They just allow us to shift the pollution to some God-forsaken hole that nobody gives a damn about. (There is a moral judgement in there that I don't agree with!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/16/fracking-under-national-parks-approved-by-mps-amid-acrimony

 

MPs have voted to allow fracking under Britain’s national parks, amid accusations that the government has sneaked the measure through parliament without a proper debate.
 
Ministers used a statutory instrument to push through the new rules, which means legislation can pass into law without a debate in the Commons. MPs voted in favour by 298 to 261.
 
The new rules allow fracking 1,200 metres below national parks and sites of special scientific interest as long as drilling takes place from outside protected areas. This comes despite the government pledging an outright ban on the controversial technique for extracting shale gas in national parks in January.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/16/fracking-under-national-parks-approved-by-mps-amid-acrimony

 

MPs have voted to allow fracking under Britain’s national parks, amid accusations that the government has sneaked the measure through parliament without a proper debate.

Ministers used a statutory instrument to push through the new rules, which means legislation can pass into law without a debate in the Commons. MPs voted in favour by 298 to 261.

The new rules allow fracking 1,200 metres below national parks and sites of special scientific interest as long as drilling takes place from outside protected areas. This comes despite the government pledging an outright ban on the controversial technique for extracting shale gas in national parks in January.

 

 

 

 

Something that this government seems to be relaying on increasingly to circumvent proper debate on sometimes contentious issues.

Edited by Griff9of13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something that this government seems to be relaying on increasingly to circumvent proper debate on sometimes contentious issues.

Blair used the Parliament Act to the same effect on occasion.

 

I would imagine the government has been stung by the actions of the House of Lords in the tax credits debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about fracking but the way that some people have been going on about it it's as if all other forms of fuel are without risk or side effects.  They aren't.  I like the idea of trying out fracking on a small scale away from population centres over a period of a few years to see what the effects may be.  We are never going to frack at the same level as the US because we don't have the space to do so regardless of how much shale gas there may be underground.  I can't see it being an answer to anything much and the fracking industry themselves have said its existence won't bring down our bills but it may serve to help provide a power source at least until other sources are up and running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blair used the Parliament Act to the same effect on occasion.

That I don't doubt.

 

I would imagine the government has been stung by the actions of the House of Lords in the tax credits debate.

I think the Lords were partly provoked by the government trying to smuggle the working tax credit legislation through without adequate scrutiny via a statuary instrument rather than a "proper" bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blair used the Parliament Act to the same effect on occasion.

 

I would imagine the government has been stung by the actions of the House of Lords in the tax credits debate. 

That's why the Prime Minister's (any Prime Minister) powers should be curbed.  We are living in an increasingly presidential society, but without the checks on executive power the Americans have, effectively an elective dictatorship.  Indeed the way the electoral system and party funding is being manipulated we could if we don't watch out end up with a one party state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blair used the Parliament Act to the same effect on occasion.

 

I would imagine the government has been stung by the actions of the House of Lords in the tax credits debate. 

 

But using a statuary instrument opens it up to rejection from the Lords???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about fracking but the way that some people have been going on about it it's as if all other forms of fuel are without risk or side effects.  They aren't.  I like the idea of trying out fracking on a small scale away from population centres over a period of a few years to see what the effects may be.  We are never going to frack at the same level as the US because we don't have the space to do so regardless of how much shale gas there may be underground.  I can't see it being an answer to anything much and the fracking industry themselves have said its existence won't bring down our bills but it may serve to help provide a power source at least until other sources are up and running.

I agree, test sites and extensive monitoring should be undertaken first. The site cuadrilla drilled last year just outside Manchester would be ideal. Its next to the M62, an already noisy, polluted area and not immediately adjacent to any housing estates or public buildings like school's. There's also a large waste water treatment plant just a few miles away where they could test and then treat the waste generated from the site.

 

Overall I'm not opposed to fracking, but feel that a bit more caution now could save us a whole lot of grief later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, test sites and extensive monitoring should be undertaken first. The site cuadrilla drilled last year just outside Manchester would be ideal. Its next to the M62, an already noisy, polluted area and not immediately adjacent to any housing estates or public buildings like school's. There's also a large waste water treatment plant just a few miles away where they could test and then treat the waste generated from the site.

 

Overall I'm not opposed to fracking, but feel that a bit more caution now could save us a whole lot of grief later.

 

 

Or they could just dump it in the ship canal again?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Local objections being ignored in my old village of Marsh Lane and 5 miles away in Harthill.

Local councillors dithering and INEOS taking it directly to the Ministry where no doubt they have friends. Local democracy in this country is a joke. I'm not sure people understand what "taking back control" actually means. I'll be interested how much North East Derbyshire's shiny new Tory MP can do about this given that he got in on the back of an anti-fracking ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Trojan said:

My  mum's been campaigning against the Kirby Misperton fracking project since it was announced, so this is a positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

Back on in Lancashire.

They best be quick before the hosepipe ban kicks in!

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ckn said:

We're now at the point where another example of lying and deceit from this government illicits nothing more than a shrug. Oh for an actual opposition and not a personality cult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday



Rugby League World - Sept 2018

Rugby League World - Sept 2018

Rugby League Books On Sale Here