Posted on 10/19/2013 7:46:32 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The benefits of hydraulic fracturing in terms of job creation and meeting energy demands have been drastically exaggerated, while the consequences of the controversial practice could prove cataclysmic, geopolitical commentator Ian Crane told RT.
RT: You used to work in the oil industry yourself: what is it that makes fracking worse than the other extraction techniques of oil and gas?
Ian Crane: What we’re talking about primarily here is the extraction of shale gas from unconventional geology. This is a very different technology, a very different technique from the usual process of extracting from conventional reservoirs.
The gas has to be extracted from what is known as tight geology. That’s a very good description, because it means that the geology is compact; it’s very difficult to drill through, and there’s very low porosity and permeability in that geology.
Consequently, the geology has to be opened, porosity and permeability has to be created, and this is done through high pressure, high volume hydraulic fracturing with literally millions of gallons of water – and primarily this is fresh water – mixed with a very toxic recipe of chemicals.
So what we’re talking about here is a number of issues. We’re talking about a phenomenal use of fresh water, which, once the chemicals are added, is lost to the system.
RT: The companies that are doing this, do they actually have governments behind them? Do they know what’s going on, are they with the companies?
IC: Of course the governments are supporting it, in fact it’s a government/industry driven agenda. What we’re seeing around the world is people reacting against this. The reality is that everywhere in the world, where this process has been put into use, it has resulted in the contamination of the water, of soil and of the air. When the governments and industry are promoting their shale gas agenda, they conveniently leave out the evidence that this is an abomination.
RT: But we’re talking about job creation here as well, with these companies there is that aspect of things. Should the public put job creation above everything else as we are in tough economic times right now?
IC: I think the thing that should be put above everything else is the protection of the water supply. Because if we don’t have access to fresh water, we’re talking about the potential end of all life. As for the jobs and as for the gas…at what price? The end of ecology or the end of life on earth as we know it?
In recent days actually, in the Financial Times – it was two days ago – a report was published that stated categorically that government estimates in terms of the number of jobs that this industry would create are grossly exaggerated. The likelihood is that maybe over the next 20 years, some 10-15,000 jobs may be created, which is actually minute.
This article cleared for publication by the fine folks at GAZPROM.
Russia has been pushing everyone to not go with fracking. They’ve been muscling Europe to forgo it. Of course in the excellent documentary Fracknation, it’s shown how some European retirees will spend a good chunk of their monthly stipend on gas. Russia loves that.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. It’ll probably make your babies be born with no clothes on too.
U.S. FRACKING THREATENS RUSSIA’S ENERGY DOMINANCE:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/15/us-fracking-threatens-russias-energy-dominance/
This message brought to you by OPEC.
Fox News links to the Washington Free Beacon, which has a more detailed story:
http://freebeacon.com/u-s-fracking-threatens-russias-energy-dominance/
I wonder why Democrats want to stop it. And they will, if they ever get the chance.
Global warming has pretty much been debunked. Time for the next crisis.
Because solar and wind will lead us to the promise land, of course.
The Russkies are worried that their natural gas reserves won’t be worth spit.
We’re fighting windmills in my county.
Unbelievable how they tear communities apart.
And it causes global warming.
The lack of fundamental understanding of the process, and the inability to explain it in simple, yet industry standard terminology indicates this person has a very limited knowledge of the topic.
It isn't the geology which is unconventional, it is the reservoirs involved. (etc.).
Just another paid BS artist trying to sway the public with a preponderance of "information".
Oh my God! I just had a baby and she was born without clothes! Who can I sue?
Fixed.
Unbelievable how they tear communities apart.
I've no experience with wind power, other than seeing the wind farms spread across the landscape in Teexas, Oklahoma and Kansas. <
My sister, however, a confirmed liberal, has argued in favor of wind (and solar) power, so that we can do away with that nasty coal, petroleum and nuclear power. She is, of course, totally unfamiliar with the economics and feasibility of her chosen direction.
Well, now, a windfarm has been proposed for her county. Within her view. And her hearing, no less. Suudenly, her favorite energy sources have become ugly, noisy and intrusive. She has joined a group of citizens (all liberals, apparently) who are campaigning vehemently against licensing the windfarm.
Greeny. But NIMBY.
The left wants the US and our troops in the Middle East forever.
thank you...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.