Shale on the other hand , is a sedimentary rock, consisting of mainly mud, compacted in layers , millions of years ago.
Which contained dead vegetation that decomposed and produced methane, just as happened in coal.
Shale on the other hand , is a sedimentary rock, consisting of mainly mud, compacted in layers , millions of years ago.
Just watched the One Show in which there was a reporter asking questions of some Science guy and some of the protestors. The science guy was very honest about the fracking in the US and the consequences. Most of the anti arguments seem to be without substance. One clip showed a guy in the US lighting gas coming out of his water tap and who purported that Fracking was the cause of the gas. Subsequent investigations showed that the gas was from coal deposits and nothing to do with the Fracking being undertaken in the area. Also Scientific studies show that Fracking extraction of gas is far less environmentally damaging than Coal mining both atmospheric and surface damage and also nuclear radiation is far less than in coal mining. Earth quake problems are minute in that it does happen but so far below ground that its manifestation on the surface is almost unnoticeable. Apparently there are identified Gas deposits in the North of the UK is such that if we manage to get 10% recovery, there is enough gas to supply the UK for 51 years. Sounds a good idea to Frack to me.
The reporter then gave a protester a platform to put his views forward. All the protester could come up with was to ask the question of what the reporter knew of fracking, to which he replied "nothing but I am only here to ask questions and report and give the protector a platform to convince the public fracking was wrong". The protestor demonstrated his total lack of knowledge of what he was protesting about.
So Score to date = Fracking 6 - Anti Fracking A big Nil.
I know a little bit more about fracking now than I did this morning
Watching the news recently, it seems the protesters in Essex, aren't locals anyway, so they certainly aren't NIMBY's. It appears even the locals don't like them much. If fracking realises as much potential for fuel as the experts mention, I'm all for it. (although I can't see it bringing down the price of gas, but at least there's less chance of be held to ransom, by foreign companies, who export gas here.).
since sparsly populated areas in other countries have already been contaminated...
Add to that the vast amounts of water needed for fracking in a drought prone area...
theres a risk of it contaminating the water supplies.
How? You may want to look into conny's comment. He has hit the preverbial nail on the head.
theres a risk of it contaminating the water supplies.
How? You may want to look into conny's comment. He has hit the preverbial nail on the head.
theres a risk of it contaminating the water supplies.
How? You may want to look into conny's comment. He has hit the preverbial nail on the head.
Lots of videos where householders are show setting fire to the tap water.
theres a risk of it contaminating the water supplies.
How? You may want to look into conny's comment. He has hit the preverbial nail on the head.
Lots of videos where householders are show setting fire to the tap water.
The fire from water taps has been shown on many occasions that the gas in the Water supply was a s result of Coal Mining NOT Fracking.