Blindly trusting there assertions is never a good idea.
(I like the illustration, too.)
Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
How can any discussion of Natural Gas...
Posted by omb00900@...
25th Jan 2012
Just
In
In
Tar Sands Needs the Same Analysis
Posted by Ron Shook
25th Jan 2012
Show:
0
Votes
Good that there are people running fact checks on the industry.
Posted by LedLincoln
25th Jan 2012
+1
Vote
Good information
Thanks for the analysis. This is the kind of information that policy makers should be using instead of the usual Pollyanna propaganda. The rush to drill for gas as easy money is the kind of action one would expect from a centrally planned economy instead of a capitalistic economy; so why is this happening?
Posted by sboverie
25th Jan 2012
+2
Votes
How can any discussion of Natural Gas...
How can any discussion of Natural Gas not at least include a mention of fracking?
This is especially relevant with respect to this article because pro-fracking industry groups are the very people responsible for inflating the reserve estimates.
Fracking is the process of injecting chemicals deep into the ground to squeeze out natural gas.
Fracking threatens the water supply of over 100 million Americans. It is a pending disaster that will make the recent Gulf spill look like a hiccup. It could ruin the ground water across large swaths of America - a disaster that would be permanent on a human scale.
The frackers claim that their wells are much deeper than the aquifer, but all it takes is a problem with the casing going down into the well, or a problem with their catchment pond, their waste disposal methods, etc. for their poisons and natural gas to leach into the water table. They can't promise that it won't happen, and it's almost guaranteed that it will, over and over again, as it already has happened many times.
This issue should be at the top of everyone's list! See the documentary Gasland, and stop the gas companies before it's too late!
This is especially relevant with respect to this article because pro-fracking industry groups are the very people responsible for inflating the reserve estimates.
Fracking is the process of injecting chemicals deep into the ground to squeeze out natural gas.
Fracking threatens the water supply of over 100 million Americans. It is a pending disaster that will make the recent Gulf spill look like a hiccup. It could ruin the ground water across large swaths of America - a disaster that would be permanent on a human scale.
The frackers claim that their wells are much deeper than the aquifer, but all it takes is a problem with the casing going down into the well, or a problem with their catchment pond, their waste disposal methods, etc. for their poisons and natural gas to leach into the water table. They can't promise that it won't happen, and it's almost guaranteed that it will, over and over again, as it already has happened many times.
This issue should be at the top of everyone's list! See the documentary Gasland, and stop the gas companies before it's too late!
Posted by omb00900@...
25th Jan 2012
+1
Vote
Agreed
The information Chris Nelder presented talked about the difference between England and Norway on the North Sea oil and it is relevant to the rush to drill here in the US. The Macondo oil spill in the gulf 2 years ago did prompt a moratorium on more drilling to let investigators find out what went wrong and to prevent similar accidents; but the rush to drill forced the moratorium to end before gaining understanding of what went wrong.
Posted by sboverie
25th Jan 2012
0
Votes
Tar Sands Needs the Same Analysis
Chris,
It seems to me that it's improbable that this dirty sludge oil will be left in the ground, so it's got to be better both climate & ecology wise and North American supply wise to burn it as slowly as possible over 100+ years rather than building 1 or 2, 36" pipelines and selling it to the rest of the world in 10-20 years in all out capitalist suicide. Will we ever start to get it?
It seems to me that it's improbable that this dirty sludge oil will be left in the ground, so it's got to be better both climate & ecology wise and North American supply wise to burn it as slowly as possible over 100+ years rather than building 1 or 2, 36" pipelines and selling it to the rest of the world in 10-20 years in all out capitalist suicide. Will we ever start to get it?
Posted by Ron Shook
25th Jan 2012