![]() |
|
Technology Computing, programming, science, electronics, telecommunications, etc. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Franklin Pierce
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,695
|
I agree that drilling companies who frack should be subject to strict regulations and the chemical names should be released to the public. Hell, most of the frackers I've met agree with that. Gas and oil companies will push against it, but outside of them, there should be a wide consensus.
I hate wording it like this (the whole "it's there fault!" argument) but the problem I have with the 'ban fracking' crowd is that they push way to hard and most of their arguments are not grounded in reality. For example, it is impossible that fracking fluid at the shale level will seep into our groundwater aquifers. It is impossible. On the other hand, borehole breakouts (pipe failure) and surface spills can occur but this is more of a regulation issue instead of a fracking issue. There will always be a risk associated with those, but groundwater pollution can be largely reduced (like almost 0%) with strict regulation. Also, from what I have heard, big gas companies are usually good with their designs but some of the independent companies have a tendency to skip corners and that is where accidents occur. That is why most frackers I've encountered tend to support regulations. Yet, if people think there is a fundamental risk associated with fracking and not a regulation issue, they will immediately try to ban it. I think this will eventually just turn into another "not in my backyard" situation. Not that I don't think it is a legitimate justification (it's always easier to tell other people to suck it up), but if we get rid of shale gas we go back to coal, which is worse in almost every aspect.
__________________
I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
Many drilling companies say that fluid can be stored in large ponds lined with plastic. And then unilaterally dispose of that water in some cases by any convenient means - such as the public sewer system. Always be suspicious when companies refuse to define what materials are being used. And instead, pay a Governor massive sums to 1) keep all regulations away from fracking, and 2) take the mineral rights virtually tax free. It is not about fluids two miles down. It is about the blantant attitude of some fracking companies. They even ignore the large pools of fracking fluid stored on the surface as if the only threat was only two miles down. And the 'powers that be' are acting as if on the take. Plenty of reasons to be suspicious. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|