hydrofracking
Jul. 2nd, 2012 12:32 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ericadawn16"Advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies have helped to increase our total natural gas resources by almost 50 percent over the past decade and it is estimated that by the year 2035, over a quarter of our natural gas production will come from shale gas, and the primary method of collection will be hydrofracking."
-Marco Rubio
Excuse while I go sit in the corner and weep for humanity...
-Marco Rubio
Excuse while I go sit in the corner and weep for humanity...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 04:38 am (UTC)Hydrofracking isn't as bad as people think. It's a itty bitty hole, easily filled in with dirt, and drilled along natural 'weak spots' already. I mean, fossil fuels are hyped up to be a bad thing, but the methods of retrieving it aren't nearly as damaging to the ecosystem as the media would like us to believe. You hardly know it's there once all the machinery and equipment has left.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 12:05 pm (UTC)What is the evil thing fracking supposedly does to the world?
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 01:59 pm (UTC)http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-12/earthquake-outbreak-in-central-u-s-tied-to-drilling-wastewater.html
Anything worth seriously worrying about since the tremors being caused are minor? I dunno. It certainly seems like the planet is saying SOMETHING in response to the fracking, though.
I'm also concerned that the companies doing the fracking won't say what's in the goop they inject, though we do know it's toxic and polluting our groundwater.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 04:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 07:30 pm (UTC)A lot of people complain that fracking causes natural gas to get into their pipes for water, sewage, etc., and/or flood their yards with mud. In the case of the first, natural gas can't possibly get into their systems unless there is a leak in their piping, or if it is residing under the foundations of their house after digging occurs. If there is a leak, it is far more concerning than any natural gas, which would have wound up there anyway with or without drilling. And the builders test for natural gas and any sort of harmful substances before digging starts, so someone would know there was natural gas there and take care of it in that case (unless it is a very old house, or the builder didn't go through the proper channels). In the second case, it's obvious, because the dirt you are displacing has to go somewhere, and it doesn't take that much time to clean up. As for the environment, the hole that it makes really isn't even worth considering. I can understand the machinery putting stress on the surrounding animals and greenery, but if the animals flee the area, they'll be back whenever the machinery is gone, so it's not like it's lasting.
Yeah, I think that ultimately, we should be using safer and more renewable resources than fossil fuels, but fracking is a lot safer and less environmentally damaging than the old methods of doing things, even if the name sounds a bit dubious, lol.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-03 07:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 06:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-03 09:53 am (UTC)It is if the, to use the words in your original post, 'natural weak spots' being drilled into turn out to be earthquake faults. Pumping several thousand gallons of a poison-laced solution at extremely high pressure into landscape features like that adds to the stress they're already under, possibly at an extremely high rate. Also, depending on what part of the process your dad is responsible for, he may be being poisoned as well (assuming he handles the solution used in the hydraulic pumps, and doesn't have ample protection, that is). Just something to think about.
But that's just it, it is. The negative effects may not be immediately obvious, or even occur the first time the method is used, but if activities like this are sustained in one area for an extensive period of time, said effects will certainly be seen. And once one habitat/ecosystem is horribly degraded or destroyed outright, it causes ripple effects to others close by. In time, regions where such activities are conducted will end up having huge stretches of polluted, toxic, terribly contaminated areas where nothing, not even people, should be living.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 05:41 pm (UTC)To me, it reminds me a lot of the car industry. The car industry did half-hearted attempts for decades at making more efficient cars using other sources like electricity or solar power or hydrogen but didn't actually really try until people stopped buying cars and we had to bail them out.
Yes, solar power has significantly improved. If we put solar panels on every government-owned building that wasn't to be kept historically accurate, think how much money that could save and how much reserve energy that could create. The majority of those with solar panels end up creating far more energy than they require. However, the electric companies hate this. They want people dependent on them.
Thus, it doesn't happen because big business keeps us backwards just like Satellite 5.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 04:52 pm (UTC)...because, yeah, the media cares more about their bottom line than, you know...news.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-03 07:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 06:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 09:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 12:04 pm (UTC)Don't forget that you benefit from these resources, whether it's because it's the energy that runs your home, or the energy that runs businesses that create goods that you purchase.
You can weep for humanity about fracking, or you could consider how life has been improved since since we've discovered how to harness and distribute energy, and be grateful that we've been able to do SO MUCH.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 05:04 pm (UTC)"You wear clothes made of cotton don't you? You should just be grateful there are slaves out there picking that cotton."
Just go along with the status quo, ignore the evils of the practice and not even try to imagine a less harmful option, because that might be inconvenient.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 05:20 pm (UTC)We can also keep everything unplugged that isn't absolutely necessary. I have my additional electronics on a power switch that I can just turn on and off. There also have been huge advances in energy efficient light bulbs.
To think it's an all or nothing proposition is really no different than religious extremism and just as dangerous.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 06:16 pm (UTC)So, let's see: energy exploitation has led to or enabled certain advances, therefore we should just do away with accountability. Fracking uses numerous iffy chemicals and places massive strain on already-overburdened freshwater supplies, pollutes groundwater (but we all know that works out well for local folk), and weakens thinner portions of crust (of zero concern, though, given that increasing frequency of tremors and quakes we're seeing on a global scale). Should that automatically be tomorrow's problem simply because we're not seeing serious consequences today?
Also, I love the notion of 'gratitude', and the underlying implication that all exploitation happens directly and unequivocally for the average consumer's benefit. Completely not to make a profit on extant profit margins, or for market shares and global positioning, or for actually any other reason but the public's needs. Oh yes.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 07:35 pm (UTC)The bottom line of the argument is this: needs win out. As of right now alternative energy sources are too expensive or not as effective, and thus until we find a different, cheaper way to power our lives, natural resources must be used. (And don't even get me started on 'electric cars'; the electricity needs to come from SOMEWHERE, and where is that? Electrical power plants, which, surprise surprise!, burns coal. Ergo, electrical cars = more burning of coal, which is just as bad as any fuel-powered cars.)
no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 05:53 pm (UTC)They did offer rebates and things for installing solar panels but the rebates are not enough to really help those who need it most. It's the equivalent of the car trade program...those with the real clunkers that need to be off the road don't have the money for a new car, even with a trade-in PERIOD.
We need to focus on biofuels from trash and waste products. There is also algae but that has to be carefully controlled or it could impact environments with foreign algae. We also need to use more solar energy on businesses, government buildings and companies that can afford it while making the energy cheaper and easier to access.
I will admit that Progress Energy did install solar panels at my nephew's school which is great.
If someone has a solar panel, that would be all they need to charge their car without resorting to a coal burning or nuclear powered plant.
Although funnily enough, I do have Amish ancestors...
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 03:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 04:27 pm (UTC)OOOOOOOKay.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-02 06:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 05:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-03 07:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-10 06:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-04 06:36 pm (UTC)