Do You Agree With Fracking?

[spathiphyllum]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/fracking-conservative-mp-lose-election-drilling-lee-rowley-james-heappey-a8567101.html

[cassa333]

Yes

[spathiphyllum]

Do you not worry about the affects it has on wildlife, and our landscape? Not to mention potentially on your own home?

[spathiphyllum]

Also, do you not think it is about time we looked at more sustainable fuels and directed out attention away from fossil fuels?

[kvalidir]

No, they can frack off :(

[emmie]

i don't know enough about it to be honest, to make an informed judgement.

[Canary42]

No. Pumping chemicals into the ground has possible dire consequences for which insufficient research has been conducted.

[dave50]

Yes I do. There are too many people who dont know enough about it but still object anyway.

[fender62]

if it effects water aquifers then it has dire consequences for all of us
drinking water polluted rivers lakes...etc.

[AuntLydia]

I know a heck of a lot about it and effects on wildlife are the least of anyone's worries. Fracking in the oil fields of Alberta or vast unpopulated areas of USA have less consequences. Not in the UK. There will be consequences far outweighing the perceived advantages. Mankind should be putting all their investments into other forms of energy rather than literally sucking the last juices out of the Earth.

[Chipchopper]

No- because the process has a negative reaction on the environment.

[jim360]

My understanding is that, properly regulated, fracking is not nearly as harmful as it's been painted. Still, it seems to me a step in the wrong direction.

[AuntLydia]

Jim it depends who you ask, the Oil Companies who have a vested interest, or the people whose water supplies have been polluted or destroyed by fracking.

[spathiphyllum]

It sucks vital naturally formed nutrients out of the ground, butterfly affect should tell us all we probably don't know half of the negative affects that will come from this.

In my opinion we need to move away from fossil fuels

[jim360]

Yes, no doubt the oil companies are biased. But even accounting for that, various neutral authorities have suggested that the environmental effects with proper regulation are minimal.

I do agree that it's better we weaned ourselves off fracking, as an extension of reducing reliance on fossil fuels. I am not sure I buy the scare stories about it, is all.

[ichkeria]

I don’t agree that fracking will cause the government to lose the election, certainly.

[AuntLydia]

jim, I don't have to 'buy' any story. I've been within 300 yards of a fracking explosion in the US ( they use explosives to loosen up the sub-strata), I could feel the the earth shake and I was on a horse at the time. Two local families lost their well water literally an hour after the explosion. The Oil Company drilled them new wells at huge cost but never admitted liability.

[jim360]

I'm sorry to hear about that, but it still amounts to bad regulation and bad management, rather than the process itself being inherently, and unavoidably, dangerous.

[AuntLydia]

no jim, the processes are very well managed. In Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) the shale is broken up by the pressure of the millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals pumped down into the shale gas fields. They have to create a shaft by 'perfing' with explosives , sometimes this goes wrong or they have missed an aquifer especially if they are in an area with a high water table. Its common knowledge and procedure. This page explains the processes and its very interesting.
http://shalestuff.com/education/fracking/fracking

[naomi24]

I don’t know enough about it to offer a truly informed opinion and wonder if any of us do. However, Fender at 12:38 appears to have made a pertinent observation. That’s the sort of thing that doesn’t spring readily to mind when weighing up the pros and cons. A worrying prospect.

[steg]

Naw, even a very small risk is to much risk