Frakking

[mwmackenzie]

UK Ledgilation is going to be in a different league to the US do what you want and don't tell anyone attitude so if reglated and monitored correctly should be OK? right? Research seemed to point all pollution and ground water contamination toward faulty low level equipent and shafts rather than the actual fracking itself. In the UK the chemicals used will need to be let known.. It is ludicrus that the US companies can buy "silence" on what they use, I mean a Dr can't even discuss their findings with another Dr, they simply refer the paitient to another department to do their own test and try and work out a solution to the problem rather than the 1st Dr saying I have found traces of "Bleep" in the patients blood or samples so I'm refering him/her to you the 2nd Dr has to do all the investigation and test all over again and might even miss it if they do different test?? weird! US govenment must be getting some almighty kickback from these companies to allow them to opperate in such a gun ho manner

So Surely if the industry is well reglated and the H&S is as anal as it is for a window cleaner or Joe Bloggs and all chemical useage is safe and made public then we should all benefit??

OR.... The govenment will keep engery pricing as is or slightly higher and just tax the arse out of it and there will be no real world benefit to anyone other than the government purse... That to me is most likely scenario. Kindly dealt to us all with the added danger of us knowing nothing about it until people start to get sick from chemical leakages and spills... Govenment (fat cats) will get richer at our expense most likely, as usual.. Bend over Joe Public!

2p

[scott_e]

Programme on BB2 right now about it

Watched most of that Horizons too. I am of the opinion Frakking is required. Regarding energy security I am sick of making other countries rich. Anything we can do internally has to be a good thing IMO. (wind, wave , frakking energy mix and maybe even the old nuclear argument which I have been generally opposed too so far ... we appear to be paying the French for that expertise). Will read this thread in more detail when I get time.

[robin]

Regulation by itself is not enough. The penalties for breaching the regulations must be punitive and limited only by what a court considers reasonable under the circumstances.

Clearly the government will tax it the same way current gas production is taxed with possibly a reasonable discount to encourage investment into this technology.

Either way the price you pay will not change one jot - it's only a question of whether the treasury takes the money or the producer takes the money.

I would prefer the proceeds of this to be ring fenced for investment in nuclear research and building of nuclear plants so that when the frackers have run out of easy-ish to reach gas deposits there might be something else coming online to fill the gap. Wind, wave and tidal power generation are also potential consumers of the cash, but I don't think onshore wind is going to be doable on a sufficient scale so would prefer what money is spent on these sources to focus on off shore.

Mr Osborne is so desperate for cash, though, that'll he'll just plough it all into the pointless attempts to reduce the national debt by "selling anything of value as soon as possible".

Cheers,
Robin

[Mr Momo]

My take on it:

- You need to understand the geology between the shale and the surface to appropriately set out the casing and cement isolation requirements, Evidence from Ian Stewart's programme was that methane in groundwater is real and that it probably is due to poor isolation (non gas-tight casing connections and poor cement), rather than large, uncontrolled fracs from the shale zone

- UK regulations on chemicals will mean that we should have full disclosure of what is being used. If it is like offshore, only approved chemicals will be used.

- Regulations should be more controlled, avoiding some of the 'mom and pop' companies active in the states. HSE approvals for operations.

- More indigenous gas will provide (a little) more energy security than we currently have (Norway OK, Russia/Middle East imports on the other hand ....)

- Doesn't answer the CO2/climate change issues

- More economic than nuclear

- Not likely to impact Scotland as it has in the states - more for the midlands of England

Met Iain Stewart at our office a couple of months ago - pretty switched on chap, who knows how to communicate the complex issues well across all levels.

[scottishselise]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bigscreen/ ... /b02zldds/