One year on from Blackpool and Fukushima....

[teamsaint]

Looks like some big decisions coming up.
Sadly the issue is, as ever, being distorted by spin and interest groups.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/osborne-to-offer-tax-breaks-for-shale-gas-8373865.html

So there are reserves of £1.5 trillion(worked out how?), but only 10% of these are usable. So thats £150bn then. Still a lot of money but.....

And will gas prices "tumble" as apparently in the US, or drift down at best, as seems likely here.
Remind me why companies need a subsidy to exploit this apparently abundant resource?

Do any MB's live near proposed fracking sites?

I wonder what other activities there are that seem to involve the risk of causing pollution to drinking water and earthquakes, for which you can get paid a government subsidy.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Looks like some big decisions coming up.
Sadly the issue is, as ever, being distorted by spin and interest groups.

Such as those noted energy supply experts Greenpeace and the WWF?

So there are reserves of £1.5 trillion(worked out how?), but only 10% of these are usable. So thats £150bn then. Still a lot of money but.....

The 'but being that those extraction estimates are for 2012 technology. Extraction rates have a habit of improving such as seen in the north Sea oil fileds.

And will gas prices "tumble" as apparently in the US, or drift down at best, as seems likely here.

Well they have in the US: gas prices (on the Henry Hub - the gas spot market) have fallen by a factor of three since 2005.

Remind me just what are the objections to fracking? It does involve bringing plant into rural sites and erecting drill platforms which stand at a fraction of the height of one of those lovely windmills, but once the well is producing, the well head is insignificant and quiet. Any fracking earthquakes are at the same levels as used to be experienced during the good-old-days of coal extraction (i.e at the level of "who gives a toss?").

Just to bring some entertainment into this debate I came across a superb quote from the lovely Gaynor Hartnell, chief of the Renewable Energy association, responding to news that our hero Osborne is planning to divert part of the renewable energy levy away from windmills to big business energy consumprion reduction schemes. She said:
"The Government should not rob Peter to pay Paul. It's unexpected and if it has implications for meeting the renewables target it's a problem". Priceless!

[Resurrection Man]

Looks like some big decisions coming up.
Sadly the issue is, as ever, being distorted by spin and interest groups.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/osborne-to-offer-tax-breaks-for-shale-gas-8373865.html

So there are reserves of £1.5 trillion(worked out how?), but only 10% of these are usable. So thats £150bn then. Still a lot of money but.....

And will gas prices "tumble" as apparently in the US, or drift down at best, as seems likely here.
Remind me why companies need a subsidy to exploit this apparently abundant resource?

Do any MB's live near proposed fracking sites?

I wonder what other activities there are that seem to involve the risk of causing pollution to drinking water and earthquakes, for which you can get paid a government subsidy.

Trouble is, ts, that we need energy in this country. If you look at all the graphs, especially for Europe, you will see that the available supply of natural gas has fallen. So all these countries (and the UK) rely on imports from Russia.

I'm not sure if you're objecting to the subsidies or the alleged risk to water and minor earth tremors. Unless it's Calum's 'Holes in the ground' you're concerned about

[MrGongGong]

Remind me just what are the objections to fracking?

I think the biggest objection is to do with contamination of water supply with chemicals
plenty of things here

http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/energy/2010/10/101022-energy-marcellus-shale-gas-rush/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/dec/09/shale-gas-drilling-epa-fracking-water-contamination

I'm no expert at all BUT from what I have read (and I haven't read all of these by any means) there are serious issues to do with the contamination of aquifers etc

Bring on the wind turbines .........

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

What is casual about linking to a report that reveals that the Chernobyl Congress apparently abandoned all statistical rigour to compile their report, and moreover highlighting details of the statistical misconduct within the report? Why on earth do you continue to link to a paper/report that is so discreditted as to be laughable.?

..............

Well, equally, we on the opposite side to your views might note the way Greenpeace has its fingers in the Chernobyl Congress report that you so cherish. Greenpeace wouldn't be manipulating the media in any way would they? I mean, usually Greenpeace always behave with great integrity and scientific rigour . . .

As soon as they decide to build nuclear power stations, and bury nuclear waste, in London, we shall know that it's perfectly safe.

[teamsaint]

Issues with fracking....there are plenty of unanswered questions about its environmental effects. There are short and medium and long term answers to energy needs that deal at least in known dangers and costs.

Subsidies? we really should be asking a lot more questions about why we are paying companies subsidies to build generating capacity so they they can sell at guaranteed prices. Very free market !

energy "security". Well , perhaps we would be better reducing our consumption rather than risking catastrophic environmental damage.

As for wind farms.,Well I am lucky enough to live in a lovely rural area. If a windfarm is built here(especially in an insensitive way) I would be disappointed, for myself... if they try to start fracking , pretty much any kind of opposition action is justifiable .

Fracking? who is really benefitting?

[amateur51]

As soon as they decide to build nuclear power stations, and bury nuclear waste, in London, we shall know that it's perfectly safe.

In the 1980s I used to be woken around 01:00 most mornings by the distant rumble of the trains carrying nuclear waste flasks through Highbury & Islington station

[An_Inspector_Calls]

As soon as they decide to build nuclear power stations, and bury nuclear waste, in London, we shall know that it's perfectly safe.

Good idea. You mean like Oldbury (Bristol/Gloucester), Hartlepool (Middlesborough, Stockton-on-Tees, Hartlepool)? And as soon as they erect a windmill on Hampstead Heath I'll be convinced the whole world loves them and they make no noise.

[teamsaint]

As a pleasant antidote to the fracking lobby, the Wiki article on renewable is actually pretty encouraging.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy

With all the energy sources available to us, many of which have solid technologies attached, fracking has to be madness.

[Resurrection Man]

Don't get too excited by that article, ts. You need to consider who contributed to it. Renewable energy is far from being the panacea. For example, that table says how much wind-power generating capacity the Uk has. All very good. However, the reality is that the actual power generated is nothing like that maximum. Taking the largest wind farm that we have at Greater Gabbard, it is rated at 500MW but estimated to only generate about 40% of that.

There are alternative viewpoints...for example, here in Wiki on the Thanet Wind Farm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanet_...e_Wind_Project

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of renewables - just that I don't buy into the hype surrounding them. You talk about vested interests elsewhere. Well, there certainly are vested interests when it comes to renewables etc. For example, the plastic double-glazing industry is lobbying hard for yet another lowering of the heat loss through windows (followed by yet another) and yet the savings are incredibly marginal. You lose more heat in a day by opening the front door than the miniscule energy saving with the proposed changes. What you WON'T be able to have are timber framed windows because the heat loss through the actual wooden frame (unless you adopt a sandwich type construction) won't meet the proposed spec.

[amateur51]

Don't get too excited by that article, ts. You need to consider who contributed to it. Renewable energy is far from being the panacea. For example, that table says how much wind-power generating capacity the Uk has. All very good. However, the reality is that the actual power generated is nothing like that maximum. Taking the largest wind farm that we have at Greater Gabbard, it is rated at 500MW but estimated to only generate about 40% of that.

There are alternative viewpoints...for example, here in Wiki on the Thanet Wind Farm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanet_...e_Wind_Project

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of renewables - just that I don't buy into the hype surrounding them. You talk about vested interests elsewhere. Well, there certainly are vested interests when it comes to renewables etc. For example, the plastic double-glazing industry is lobbying hard for yet another lowering of the heat loss through windows (followed by yet another) and yet the savings are incredibly marginal. You lose more heat in a day by opening the front door than the miniscule energy saving with the proposed changes. What you WON'T be able to have are timber framed windows because the heat loss through the actual wooden frame (unless you adopt a sandwich type construction) won't meet the proposed spec.

What about going out the back door?

You can be certain he's got the figures

[teamsaint]

Don't get too excited by that article, ts. You need to consider who contributed to it. Renewable energy is far from being the panacea. For example, that table says how much wind-power generating capacity the Uk has. All very good. However, the reality is that the actual power generated is nothing like that maximum. Taking the largest wind farm that we have at Greater Gabbard, it is rated at 500MW but estimated to only generate about 40% of that.

There are alternative viewpoints...for example, here in Wiki on the Thanet Wind Farm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanet_...e_Wind_Project

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of renewables - just that I don't buy into the hype surrounding them. You talk about vested interests elsewhere. Well, there certainly are vested interests when it comes to renewables etc. For example, the plastic double-glazing industry is lobbying hard for yet another lowering of the heat loss through windows (followed by yet another) and yet the savings are incredibly marginal. You lose more heat in a day by opening the front door than the miniscule energy saving with the proposed changes. What you WON'T be able to have are timber framed windows because the heat loss through the actual wooden frame (unless you adopt a sandwich type construction) won't meet the proposed spec.

I agree with your cautionary words here RM. The wiki article does offer some hope....but its certainly not a source i would trust completely, and you are right to say that there are lobbying and interests on all sides...(what a pity we have "sides" on such a vital issue.)

wiki is normally fairly pro establishment IMO...I posted the link as much for how we might approach the future, as for rock solid info.

Complacency is dangerous here...and that most definitely includes the potential dangers of fracking .

[Resurrection Man]

You might be interested in this thread, ts http://earthjustice.org/features/cam...-united-states

[teamsaint]

good link RM.

I had a look at Ohio, just because it particularly interests me, and it seems that the state government is making money by helping to process polluted water etc produced by fracking in other states.

They aren't stupid !

[french frank]

But back to frackmailing in this country:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20571700