UK reverses on fracking

[metalslug 31]

5 hours ago, olofscience said:

When the founder of a fracking company, who's still a very vocal proponent of fracking, says it won't work in the UK: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/21/fracking-wont-work-uk-founder-chris-cornelius-cuadrilla

...it's goalpost moving time for the deniers.

That 'founder' does make some curious comments; "...the geology of the UK and the densely populated nature of the British countryside made it impossible to set up a commercially viable fracking.." vs "There was an opportunity 10 years ago to look at this [fracking] sensibly, but that opportunity has now gone" . Does Cornelius believe that the geology and population density of the UK has had a marked change over 10 years? It would seem to me that the only change of significance within the last 10 years is his own employment, from fracking to "a geothermal consortium" that now sees him curiously promoting geothermal energy over fracking (in the UK). Who'd have guessed?  I've been known to share the opinions of industry shills, although I'm somewhat surprised to see you doing the same.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

4 hours ago, metalslug said:

That 'founder' does make some curious comments; "...the geology of the UK and the densely populated nature of the British countryside made it impossible to set up a commercially viable fracking.." vs "There was an opportunity 10 years ago to look at this [fracking] sensibly, but that opportunity has now gone" . Does Cornelius believe that the geology and population density of the UK has had a marked change over 10 years? It would seem to me that the only change of significance within the last 10 years is his own employment, from fracking to "a geothermal consortium" that now sees him curiously promoting geothermal energy over fracking (in the UK). Who'd have guessed?  I've been known to share the opinions of industry shills, although I'm somewhat surprised to see you doing the same.

Are we then at least in agreement that fracking has a significant enough impact on the land that population of that land could be an issue?

[olofscience 420]

15 hours ago, metalslug said:

Does Cornelius believe that the geology and population density of the UK has had a marked change over 10 years? It would seem to me that the only change of significance within the last 10 years is his own employment, from fracking to "a geothermal consortium" that now sees him curiously promoting geothermal energy over fracking (in the UK).

No, it's because of the regulations that have been implemented into law within the past 10 years. More on this on the article they've actually written: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/21/liz-truss-fracking-britain-economic-political-low-carbon-cuadrilla

As a founder I'd expect him to retain quite a bit of equity in the company, and he's still very pro-fracking so he's still very much not in my camp when it comes to energy policy. I just quoted him to show how inconsistent and confused the pro-fracking side are, like how I proved with some simple maths how Europe can't even get near meeting their gas needs even if they fracked as much as they can. I want the energy issues solved too, but fracking isn't it. People are just going for it to 'own the libs'.

[jakee 1,254]

On 9/8/2022 at 3:18 PM, brenthutch said:

When faced with the decision to address an imaginary crisis, (Global warming) or an actual one (energy poverty), the adult at 10 Downing St. chose the latter.

Worth noting that after this post the ‘adult’ in 10 Downing Street has wreaked havoc on the UK markets with a kamikaze budget fuelled by such rabid ideology that her own party will almost certainly refuse to vote for it. Yet she refuses to back down, even though every day she continues to push forward with a policy that is stone cold dead on arrival is causing more financial pain to the working people of the country.

 

Just to put her support for fracking in context. 

[SkyDekker 1,121]

6 minutes ago, jakee said:

Worth noting that after this post the ‘adult’ in 10 Downing Street has wreaked havoc on the UK markets with a kamikaze budget fuelled by such rabid ideology that her own party will almost certainly refuse to vote for it. Yet she refuses to back down, even though every day she continues to push forward with a policy that is stone cold dead on arrival is causing more financial pain to the working people of the country.

 

Just to put her support for fracking in context. 

Yeah but the markets are not a proper measure of policy, that is why it so important to remember how Biden's policies have tanked the stock market......

[brenthutch 383]

On 9/23/2022 at 4:59 AM, olofscience said:

I just quoted him to show how inconsistent and confused the pro-fracking side are, like how I proved with some simple maths how Europe can't even get near meeting their gas needs even if they fracked as much as they can. 

Question.  Would Europe be closer or further away from their gas needs if they fracked as much as they could?

[lippy 771]

23 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Question.  Would Europe be closer or further away from their gas needs if they fracked as much as they could?

That's a pretty simplistic way to look at the situation.  There are a lot of reasons why Europe will never be fracking 'as much as they can'.  Places with much looser regulations that are trying to make a go at the horizontal shale plays, like Vaca Muerta in Argentina, are having a damn rough go of it.

 

Frack operations have insane amounts of equipment and personnel on a frack pad compared to traditional vertical completions of old.  It's impressive to see things moving like clockwork on a zipper pad, where they'll drill wells out in several different directions and have different crews performing different stages of the completion on different wells at the same time, in order to keep as much of the equipment on pad active at any given moment.

 

When things go bad, they go bad quickly with failures suddenly causing all of those people and equipment to be costing money instead of making it.  When you require $55 oil to break even and you don't have your shit together, losing half a day because of a broken blender or wireline getting stuck in hole gets real expensive real quick.  

 

The US shale revolution took off when VC firms poured ridiculous sums of money into the industry for years and years while the expertise and efficiency was built up.  Many of those firms lost their shirts when the bottom fell out of the market.  Today, with lots of idle equipment and $93 oil, it can chug along and make a buck.  Starting from scratch in a country with tighter environmental restrictions, higher labor costs, lack of available equipment, lack of investment $$ and lack of expertise is just not gonna happen.   You can repeat what Fox tells you that all of Europe's cold winter woes are due to them being stupid green sissies, but the reality is that fracking's not the magic bullet they're painting it as.  

As I'm about to start field testing a system used for frack operations, I hope I'm wrong....it'd be good to have another market.  I hit up a buddy in Argentina to get a feel for how things are going in Vaca Muerta last week, and he said their annual operations amount to a shitty month's worth of work in West TX.  

 

[lippy 771]

19 minutes ago, Slim King said:

I think fracking is pretty good. With the German pipelines now destroyed by terrorists how will Europe keep millions from freezing to death this winter? I'd frack till they were all saved!!!!! Over 50 froze to death in one weekend in Texas because of these insane Green Policies that are deadly as hell.

Please frack harder.......for the babies.

 

FFS, you have no fucking clue and your entertainment value is past spent

[billvon 2,396]

5 minutes ago, lippy said:

As I'm about to start field testing a system used for frack operations . . . .

I believe that makes you unquailifed to have an opinion on fracking, since Tucker Carlson has already spoken on the subject.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

On 9/8/2022 at 11:05 AM, brenthutch said:

And I live in the Marcellus shale formation and we have dozens of wells here in Happy Valley.  

No kidding? You live in the heart of fracking? I'd have never guessed.

Edited October 12, 2022 by JoeWeber

[Phil1111 910]

26 minutes ago, lippy said:

Please frack harder.......for the babies.

 

FFS, you have no fucking clue and your entertainment value is past spent

What about those poor 50 Texans that froze to death?

Debating with a fracking idiot? A dry hole if there ever was one.

[wmw999 2,121]

7 hours ago, Slim King said:

Yep .. Texas got duped and it cost them 50 citizens... Fossil Fuels are back on the table baby!!!! CO2 is what the plants eat .. It's a NUTRIENT!!! Not a pollutant. If you lower the CO2 in our atmosphere by 60% we all die since all the plants will die .. That's why it's a GREENHOUSE GAS!!!!

You'll say anything, won't you? Water is essential for life, too, yet there is such a thing as drinking too much of it. Vitamin A is essential for life, and there's such a thing as too much of it, too.

Texas suffered mainly because it isn't hooked up to the rest of the national grid. No resiliency there. Note the lack of similar damage in Louisiana (Oklahoma and NM both deal with cold weather far more regularly). There's more information, but I have a feeling that you don't actually look for information, only weapons.

Wendy P.

[billvon 2,396]

9 hours ago, Slim King said:

Yep .. Texas got duped and it cost them 50 citizens... 

They got duped by politicians who told the sheep that it's better to rely on a completely independent Texas grid powered by fossil fuels that freeze in winter.  And the sheep bought it - and 50 of them paid the price.

[mistercwood 287]

17 hours ago, Slim King said:

CO2 is what the plants eat .. It's a NUTRIENT!!! Not a pollutant. If you lower the CO2 in our atmosphere by 60% we all die since all the plants will die .. That's why it's a GREENHOUSE GAS!!!!

Literally you: Idiocracy: Brawndo Has What Plants Crave! - YouTube

[jakee 1,254]

On 10/12/2022 at 2:43 AM, brenthutch said:

Question.  Would Europe be closer or further away from their gas needs if they fracked as much as they could?

The ‘adult’ in 10 Downing Street is now attempting to reclassify a huge amount of Britains low grade farmland as ‘best and most versatile’ quality land…. purely to block the construction of solar farms. This goes against the principles she claims to hold in so many ways.

It contradicts her claim to want UK energy security because it will block gigawatts of planned power generation. It contradicts her claims that she will cut regulation and red tape by blocking farmers who want to lease their land to solar companies from being allowed to do so. It contradicts her claims that all her policies will have economic growth as their prime concern and her lifelong position as a free market zealot because it will block an estimated £20Bn worth of private investment that is ready to go and thousands of jobs in the sector. It contradicts her plans to dismiss environmental concerns and rip up countryside protections in every other industry, because the only real reason she’s blocking solar is that she doesn’t like the way it looks. It’s even forced me to agree with cartoon Victorian gentleman Jacob Rees-Mogg about something, which is very upsetting.

 

So how grown up is she being right now, and how much does she really care about the UK’s energy supply?

[olofscience 420]

On 9/8/2022 at 3:18 PM, brenthutch said:

When faced with the decision to address an imaginary crisis, (Global warming) or an actual one (energy poverty), the adult at 10 Downing St.

"the adult at 10 Downing St." has crashed the UK economy within a month of getting into power and will probably be kicked out soon.

And you probably still think the policies you support are the financially sensible ones 

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

"the adult at 10 Downing St." has crashed the UK economy within a month of getting into power and will probably be kicked out soon.

I wonder if Brent can remember how long it took for GHWB's 'read my lips' speech to come back and bite him. I'm genuinely curious at the comparison, because the time gap between Truss's conference speech saying this "First of all, we will lower our tax burden... The Conservative Party will always be the party of low taxes. Cutting taxes is the right thing to do morally and economically." And her new Chancellor saying this "some taxes will have to go up"?

 

10 days.

Edited October 16, 2022 by jakee

[brenthutch 383]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

"the adult at 10 Downing St." has crashed the UK economy within a month of getting into power and will probably be kicked out soon.

And you probably still think the policies you support are the financially sensible ones 

I only agreed with the decision to reverse the fracking ban.

 

[olofscience 420]

6 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I only agreed with the decision to reverse the fracking ban.

Fair enough.

[jakee 1,254]

18 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I only agreed with the decision to reverse the fracking ban.

No, you didn't only agree with it. You considered her to be the 'adut in the room' because of it. 

How many followers of British politics do you think consider Truss to be adult in the room right now? How many of them would say she's demonstrated a tendency to make rational, evidence based policy decisions?

Edited October 16, 2022 by jakee

[billvon 2,396]

2 hours ago, jakee said:

"First of all, we will lower our tax burden... The Conservative Party will always be the party of low taxes. Cutting taxes is the right thing to do morally and economically." And her new Chancellor saying this "some taxes will have to go up"?

Why does that matter?  If anyone asks Truss she will say "I wanted to lower taxes but the failing incompetent Chancellor couldn't handle a simple request!  It's the Deep State.  Drain the swamp!"