Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Fracking

233 replies

Againstfracking · 11/02/2017 19:03

Lancashire voted NO to Fracking but it's been forced on us by the Government. We don't want it! What can we do?

OP posts:
Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 18:54

Undercrackers
Our country has been fracked once 4 years ago. Only once.
It is now agreed even by the frackers that energy prices will not come down.
The jobs are mostly mythical and short term. Once the pad is built there will be 1 or 2 people looking after it.
The rubbish that the industry spouts so they can bully their way into doing it is outrageous.
Even the energy security stuff isn't guaranteed... frackers are for most part private companies and will do as they please with the highest bidder.

OP posts:
Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 18:57

PS if it was a scale 2 earthquake... I think thousands of times but gee may be a bit of an exaggeration?
And 2 scale 2 earthquakes from one frack surely tells us that whatever is going to go in under the substrata certainly can't, and won't be under control... not a great situation really.

OP posts:
raindripsonruses · 14/02/2017 19:32

So I'm not to worry about a man made earthquake. A random on the internet who doesn't live in Blackpool says it's fine. So reassured.

Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 19:41

Raindrips
Lol.
I honestly don't think its scaremongering to say that if they are injecting chemicals and stuff into the substrata and assuring us that NOTHING can get out because this sub strata is impermeable... and then there's earthquakes... I mean, it's just bollocks? Anyone who knows a sponge soaks up water and a rock breaks if you hit it with a hammer can make that connection?
The patronising stuff they come out with is enraging.
But THEY say we'll be fine... pats head 🙄😡

OP posts:
Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 19:44

No one can be complacent. The pink areas are up for grabs...

OP posts:
raindripsonruses · 14/02/2017 19:45

I'm all for progress and thinking about things in a new way. I'm not for a Wild West (wild north west). The blatant disregard for the locals when the first man made earthquakes happened pissed me off and undermined my trust in this.

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:08

AgainstFracking. you are seriously misinformed.

the richter scale is logarithmic. so a 3 is ten times more powerful than a 2.
a 4 is 100 times more powerful than a 2.

and so on.

a 2 , like blackpool, is not detectable by a human. a 6 will damage buildings and shake your bed.

that is where I got my 10 thousand times more powerful from. Its a fact.

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:12

AntiFracking, again, you are seriously misinformed. there has been fracking in this country for 50 years at least. There was serious hydraulic fracking on a commercial scale in the 70's.

This is not something new.

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:17

ConferencePear, It is illegal to frack in France. Correct.

It is also illegal to name your pig Napoleon.

SilenceIsBroken · 14/02/2017 20:20

I'd like to ask again - size notwithstanding, do you not think it's cause for concern that these earthquakes can happen as a result of fracking, Under? If fracking is so well regulated why is this happening?

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:22

AntFracking, what chemicals are being injected ? water and sand.

you use the word chemicals as if it were a dirty word. Everything is made up chemicals.
You can scare some of the people all of the time, you can even scare all of the people some of the time. But you cannot scare all of the people all of the time. stop trying

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:25

SilenceIsBroken, as I said upstream, these tremors were the equivalent of a bus driving down the road 100 m away.

I would not call them earthquakes.
They were detectable, sure. but not by humans.

If fracking caused detectable, risky seismic events, I would be against it.

SilenceIsBroken · 14/02/2017 20:27

You might not call them earthquakes but scientists did. How do you - or anyone - know these events won't be more significant in the future?

Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 20:32

Level 2. Hanging objects may swing.... I think that might be scary for adults and children? If Cuadrilla and others have their way there will be hundreds of pads over the UK.
I can't understand how anyone can dismiss this as nothing to worry about!

Fracking
OP posts:
Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 20:35

Undercrackers
There are literally hundreds of articles, papers and reports about Fracking causing earthquakes. Please try read a few. It might be a bit since you last looked? :)

OP posts:
OP posts:
UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:38

SilenceIsBroken
The journalists called them earthquakes and the anti-Frackers. Scientists called them 'seismic events'

not so catchy.

How do I know they wont be more significant in the future ? Now you got me there. :)

I cannot see the future..but..

I approach that by looking at the track record. A million fracked wells in the USA, a fair few in this country. The fact that Cuadrilla accepted they caused the richter 2 in Blackpool and said they would avoid that geology (not because of any danger, because of the publicity))
all in all, its a judgement. my judgement is that its a great opportunity for this country

MissingMySleep · 14/02/2017 20:39

Perhaps it would be good to stick to the facts undercrackers. I know how you dislike "howling screeching" approaches.

And please stop telling me what I think, it is really annoying.

I didn't know as much as much about fracking earlier today as I do now, as you prompted me to do some more research, given that you did not provide one single fact yet as to why fracking is a good idea.

I have never blindly accepted what the authorities say. Re the Lancashire fracking application - of the responses to the planning application in Lancashire, 36 were for and over 4000 were against. This was therefore the will of the people that it should not go ahead. Over 150,000 people signed a petition for the government to respect the decision made to reject the planning application there. These people marked their papers as it were - but were over ruled by a man in government who has been wined and dined by the oil industry (again these are facts, I can provide the links or you can play with google to check the truth of this).

Please do not treat fracking related earthquakes as a triviality. Let's look at Oklahoma - where fracking started in 2009. They used to average 2 earthquakes a year - this went up to nearly 3 A DAY. The causality has been proven in Oklahoma and in other states, many times over. Not earthquakes that rattle teacups, but ones for which home owners cannot get home insurance.

Whilst we stick to facts - you mentioned cheap energy? You are aware that the government has confirmed that fracking will NOT reduce energy prices yes? The fracking companies have been warned about using this falsehood in their pro fracking pieces. The Advertising Standards Agency ruled that it was incorrect to state that bills would be reduced. .".The new ASA ruling noted expert views expressed by energy regulator Ofgem, the fracking industry-funded Task Force on Shale Gas, the UK Energy Research Centre and a Department of Energy and Climate Change report, all of which suggested fracking was unlikely to make much impact on bills..."

Sorry this is a little dull, but I am keen to avoid screeching opinions as you dislike them so. Facts do tend to be a little dull.

".. unobtrusive compared to wind turbines for example .." are you for real? Do you know how fracking well pads work? Fracking requires many wells, as each only provides a small amount of gas. Whilst they don't big that up in the planning applications, on their spiel to investors they brag about how many they will eventually get into the relevant area. Well spacings of 8 wells per square mile are common. Please please please google some pictures of fracking well sites and then some of wind farms and work out which one you think is less obtrusive. But to be honest I don't give a fig how obtrusive they are, I am just terrified of how dangerous they are.

".. safe, provided the regulations are enforced, which they are in this country. .." seriously, crackers, do you work for Cuadrilla or the government? We do not actually have any regulations in place in the UK that cover unconventional oil extraction. Are you aware of this? The regulations we have are based on traditional drilling. The regulations have not been prepared to cover the new forms of extraction. The United Nations Environment Program has said that fracking may result in “unavoidable environmental impacts” even if done properly. No one in the UK is in place to make sure that if fracking goes ahead, that all precautions are in place. An important paper called ‘Fracking – Minding the Gaps’ by Joanne Hawkins in the Environmental Law Review has examined the current legislation in detail, and concludes: “These controls were designed pre-fracking and their application leaves a number of gaps, which may risk harm to human health and/or damage to the environment. Under the current regulatory system, the uncertainty and risk associated with fracking is not justifiable.”

".. creates jobs .." um, no absolutely not, dear. You must have read a fracking leaflet one day and believed what you read. The DEFRA report and other clever people have analysed the data to confirm there will be very very few local jobs, most jobs created will be for large companies who do not employ local people. There will however, in rural ares, be a loss of jobs due the reduction in the number of tourists and visitors (that is per DEFRA, not my screeching opinion).

".. local businesses benefit.." actually no. Per DEFRA.

Also house prices go down (per government report), and many of the UK’s best known insurance companies will not insure against fracking-related damage, an investigation by The Independent on Sunday and the campaign group Spinwatch found.

and bless you, undercrackers -".. This country has been fracking for well over 50 years. It's harmless..." do you know what fracking is? High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing (HVHF), or ‘fracking’ for short. Fracking requires millions of gallons of fresh water, sand and chemicals, is done at very high pressure in vertical and horizontal wells, and is designed to fracture solid shale rock deep underground. HVHF Fracking – which is considered to be a method of unconventional oil and gas extraction – has only been done commercially since about 2007, mainly in the USA, where over a million wells have sinced been fracked.

This is a very different process from the long-used technique of pumping water at low pressure into conventional wells to increase the amount of oil and gas recovered. This technique has been used for decades to stimulate conventional gas wells near the end of their life in order to extend their production, and uses low pressure, very small quantities of water and no dangerous chemicals. It is estimated that about 200 wells in the UK have been subject to this ‘well stimulation’ technique since the 1980s, and is a very different – and much less environmentally damaging – technique to HVHF fracking, which Cuadrilla admitted was the cause of two small earthquakes at Preese Hall in 2011.

This has been confirmed by a letter from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), which said: “Cuadrilla is so far the only operator in the UK to use High Volume hydraulic fracturing – this technique was used on the Preese Hall well in Lancashire in 2011.”

I could go on, ie I haven't even started on the water issue - the massive use of water when we regularly have droughts and water shortages in some of the areas they want to do this, the risk to aquifers, the proven carcinogens that are used as part of this process and where does the wastewater go (energy companies have confirmed that they do not know where the bulk of the contaminated water goes) but I am afraid I am boring myself now.

Facts are not that exciting, but they are what we all ought to be looking at when we have these conversations.

Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 20:43

Undercrackers
These are the chemicals Cuadrilla say they use. Other companies have their own 'mix.'
Besides the problem of what they inject.. there's the added problem of the toxic and radioactive flow back to get rid of... last time in the Manchester ship canal... they also admit that most of what they inject and what it mixes with and becomes... they have no idea where it end up... 👍🏽 no problem there at all ...

Fracking
OP posts:
SilenceIsBroken · 14/02/2017 20:45

Sorry, no. Scientists called them earthquakes. I've just read an article where Brian Baptie of the British Geological Survey refers to them as earthquakes.

Does calling them "seismic events" (which by the way, means earthquake) make you feel a bit better about them?

UnderCrackers5 · 14/02/2017 20:46

AntiFracking, what do you mean there are literally hundreds of articles linking this with that ?
Are you saying the number of articles means that its true ? Like some sort of popularity contest ?

I can assure you that the number of articles in favour of burning witches, and the number of articles in favour of bleeding very sick people were very high a few hundred years ago.

Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 20:48

Undercrackers. There has been 1 onshore frack in the U.K. Please get your facts right. It's hard to discuss things seriously if you aren't going to bother checking up if someone points out an incorrect statement?
Everyone makes mistakes but for us to advance and discuss this important subject properly, we must try to stick to facts and not dogma?

OP posts:
Againstfracking · 14/02/2017 20:50

Can we stick to 21st century? There is much evidenced based research that fracking causes earthquakes. Cuadrilla admitted their only UK frack caused 2. Fracking induced earthquakes are widespread in the USA.

OP posts:
MissingMySleep · 14/02/2017 20:52

undercrackers you are hilarious.

Seriously you made me laugh out loud for the first time today. It has been a hard day.

But do you have any facts to share with us?

latebreakfast · 14/02/2017 20:58

The one big way you can reduce the need for fracking is by using less energy. And by persuading others to do so too. Give up your car. If you want to live in a naice village out in the sticks then use public transport or get a bicycle. Turn the heating down. Use the oven and the kettle less. If everybody did that then we wouldn't need to frack and we might just get by on renewables. But that won't happen because we prefer to wave our arms and sign petitions than to actually do something inconvenient that might make a difference.

Personally I'd prefer to live next door to a fracking well than a massive wind farm. I think that the dangers of fracking have been hugely overhyped by those who have an agenda which is a million miles away from that of supplying the poorest in this country with the best value energy.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.