Page 1 of 3
#1
This has been a bit of a topic in the UK lately.

I know it's been done in the US with some claiming it's the greatest thing ever, others claiming it's the devil.

Similar things apply over here, but people also say the UK won't benefit from it like the US has, and others saying it'll be done in a safer method in the UK.

I don't know who or what to believe.
#7
Desperate and short-term attempt at delaying the inevitable move away from non-renewables. On the other hand it allows more countries to ease being trolled by oil cartels and the like. It's quite inefficient in resources and materials used to extract, especially with water in this case, for the output fuels gained. Same thing with shale gas.


Fossil fuels/non-renewables only really make sense to me in the long term with we're mining asteroids and disposing of the waste products in space/the sun.
O.K.

“There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want.”
~ Bill Watterson


O__o
#8
Quote by korinaflyingv
yep.


The possibility of windfarms in my local area is dimiahing unfortunately, because of the elderly countryside brigade who are probably going to be dead by the time it happens, because they won't like the view. F*cking coffindodgers.
#9
It's a good thing.

People are complaining there's no jobs. This would bring jobs to the country.
People are complaining and worried about our energy future. This would secure it.
People complain about burning coal. Burning gas is much cleaner.
People complain about the cost and the blight on the landscape of windfarms too.

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
#12
There was a thread about this on here a long time ago.


I'm really really really really against it.
cat
#13
I'll be interested to see how this thread goes because on the face of it it seems to be a home-grown energy source which creates jobs, and that can only be a good thing in my opinion, but I haven't really looked too much into the pros and cons.

Slightly off topic, people who moan about wind farms really piss me off. They aren't unsightly at all and nobody ever offers a decent alternative. It's all self-serving "I only care about what's happening on my doorstep" bullshit.
My old signature was too long. Have a daisy.

#14
Quote by RAB11
I'll be interested to see how this thread goes because on the face of it it seems to be a home-grown energy source which creates jobs, and that can only be a good thing in my opinion, but I haven't really looked too much into the pros and cons.

Slightly off topic, people who moan about wind farms really piss me off. They aren't unsightly at all and nobody ever offers a decent alternative. It's all self-serving "I only care about what's happening on my doorstep" bullshit.


They're quite graceful it's just that they cost a fortune and don't offer good energy for the price.

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
#15
My family received almost 320,000 dollars from leasing our land (about 130 acres) to a gas company for possible future sites for it. If they ever start drilling or fracking on it we stand to make much more. So in terms of economically I'd say yes but from what I've seen it can mess some stuff up but it will never happen. The lobbyist and government puppets from down state NY with never let the view from their vacation homes in upstate NY get ruined so it will never happen.
#16
Id rather that than the power station I live 2 mins away from
You hit 'em and they get back up
I hit 'em and they stay down
- Frank Castle
#17
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2182179/Sherry-Vargsons-blames-fracking-flammable-tap-water.html

this is reason enough for me to be against it; you can bitch and complain about the economy all you want, once the environment is messed up bad enough the "economy" will cease to exist and will no longer be something for you to even worry about

as a community that primarily compromises of left wing musicians I am surprised so many people are not rushing to damn fraking here, some things are more important than the o'mighty dollar$$ i.e. the planet ****ing earth
#18
Let's just pour cyanide into all the rivers and oceans instead. It's so much cheaper, and the results are the same.
#19
Quote by Super-Peanut
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2182179/Sherry-Vargsons-blames-fracking-flammable-tap-water.html

this is reason enough for me to be against it; you can bitch and complain about the economy all you want, once the environment is messed up bad enough the "economy" will cease to exist and will no longer be something for you to even worry about

as a community that primarily compromises of left wing musicians I am surprised so many people are not rushing to damn fraking here, some things are more important than the o'mighty dollar$$ i.e. the planet ****ing earth


Or maybe a lot of us don't subscribe to hard left/hard right, and are far more central in their orientation? Only gimps deal in absolutes. Obi Wan Kenobi said that.
#22
I know what fracking is, they're doing it in my neck of the woods and it's been a hot topic in the news for a long time but I STILL thought this thread would be about battlestar galactica style sex
#24
It's great for the oil companies, terrible for the environment, not great to live next to.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#25
Quote by Super-Peanut
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2182179/Sherry-Vargsons-blames-fracking-flammable-tap-water.html

this is reason enough for me to be against it; you can bitch and complain about the economy all you want, once the environment is messed up bad enough the "economy" will cease to exist and will no longer be something for you to even worry about

as a community that primarily compromises of left wing musicians I am surprised so many people are not rushing to damn fraking here, some things are more important than the o'mighty dollar$$ i.e. the planet ****ing earth

Stopped reading at "dailymail.co.uk".
Your flesh means more than you.
No profit...
For once no profit...


Quote by She
That's what.




CHECK IT OUT NOW
FUNK SOUL BROTHER
#26
Quote by RAB11
I'll be interested to see how this thread goes because on the face of it it seems to be a home-grown energy source which creates jobs, and that can only be a good thing in my opinion, but I haven't really looked too much into the pros and cons.

Slightly off topic, people who moan about wind farms really piss me off. They aren't unsightly at all and nobody ever offers a decent alternative. It's all self-serving "I only care about what's happening on my doorstep" bullshit.


Yeah.. I never god the whole "but they spoil the landscape and look horrible!!! :'((((" thing with wind farms. I always thought they looked kind of cool.
#27
Quote by EndTheRapture51
It's a good thing.

People are complaining there's no jobs. This would bring jobs to the country.
People are complaining and worried about our energy future. This would secure it.
People complain about burning coal. Burning gas is much cleaner.
People complain about the cost and the blight on the landscape of windfarms too.


1) Jobs can also be created in the building of sustainable energy sources. Your point is invalid.

2) The gas reserves in the UK are predicted to last for around 40 years. That's hardly securing the "energy future". It just leads to a worse problem when, in 40 years or so, people have no other large enough energy sources, the population is probably going to be larger so there will be MORE need of reliable energy sources, and the ground is messed up and left unstable. Your point is highly invalid.

3) How about renewable/green energies, which are EVEN CLEANER once the sites have been set up? How about nuclear - fission is cleaner than any fossil fuels or gas and if fusion reactors can truly get working then they are as clean as "green" energies. Your point is invalid.

4) IMO Windfarms are ugly, besides being a hazard for birds (especially migratory flocks) and low-flying aircraft. Moreover, they take up huge amounts of space, only work in ideal conditions (wind can't be too weak or too strong), and potentially noisy, are inefficient and have huge issues with power loss if put out to sea. How about solar farms instead?
For the record, small, vertical-axis turbines can be quite efficient on buildings, such as warehouses, etc; they take up little space and are relatively cheap. Solar panels, as far as I can see, are the most efficient, easy to install, are unobtrusive and can be used for water OR electricity - great all round. So why have a nice big drilling & extraction station or two?! Your point is invalid.
#28
I know how you feel I was fracking it all last night
'93 Gibson LP Studio (498T/490R)-Ebony
'14 Gibson LP Standard (JB/Jazz)-Ocean Water Perimeter
Epi MKH LP Custom-7 (SD Custom Shop JB-7)-Ebony
+More

Maxon od808|Boss NS-2|Boss CE-5|
Line6 G55|Korg Pitchblack Pro

JVM 210h|1960a(V30/G12t-75)
#29
I dont understand why we don't use geothermal. We have the technology to harvest it and one hot spot can power large cities for decades, and there are thousands of hot spots in the US alone.
#31
Quote by AcousticMetal99
1) Jobs can also be created in the building of sustainable energy sources. Your point is invalid.

2) The gas reserves in the UK are predicted to last for around 40 years. That's hardly securing the "energy future". It just leads to a worse problem when, in 40 years or so, people have no other large enough energy sources, the population is probably going to be larger so there will be MORE need of reliable energy sources, and the ground is messed up and left unstable. Your point is highly invalid.

3) How about renewable/green energies, which are EVEN CLEANER once the sites have been set up? How about nuclear - fission is cleaner than any fossil fuels or gas and if fusion reactors can truly get working then they are as clean as "green" energies. Your point is invalid.

4) IMO Windfarms are ugly, besides being a hazard for birds (especially migratory flocks) and low-flying aircraft. Moreover, they take up huge amounts of space, only work in ideal conditions (wind can't be too weak or too strong), and potentially noisy, are inefficient and have huge issues with power loss if put out to sea. How about solar farms instead?
For the record, small, vertical-axis turbines can be quite efficient on buildings, such as warehouses, etc; they take up little space and are relatively cheap. Solar panels, as far as I can see, are the most efficient, easy to install, are unobtrusive and can be used for water OR electricity - great all round. So why have a nice big drilling & extraction station or two?! Your point is invalid.

Nuclear waste disposal is a bit harder, its not like the UK has a nice large desert where the waste can be kept far away from humans. Similarly solar power would be great in summer (16 hours of daylight) but pretty wasted in winter (8 hours of daylight) and would take up far more land, as solar panel farms compared to wind farms, in order to meet a similar peak output.
Fracking is a good short term, large solution until more efficient wind and solar power is available.
Quote by Renka
OddOneOut is an Essex S&M mistress and not a pirate or a computer program.

#32
Quote by OddOneOut
Nuclear waste disposal is a bit harder, its not like the UK has a nice large desert where the waste can be kept far away from humans. Similarly solar power would be great in summer (16 hours of daylight) but pretty wasted in winter (8 hours of daylight) and would take up far more land, as solar panel farms compared to wind farms, in order to meet a similar peak output.
Fracking is a good short term, large solution until more efficient wind and solar power is available.


We have Scotland.
#33
Quote by AcousticMetal99
1) Jobs can also be created in the building of sustainable energy sources. Your point is invalid.

2) The gas reserves in the UK are predicted to last for around 40 years. That's hardly securing the "energy future". It just leads to a worse problem when, in 40 years or so, people have no other large enough energy sources, the population is probably going to be larger so there will be MORE need of reliable energy sources, and the ground is messed up and left unstable. Your point is highly invalid.

3) How about renewable/green energies, which are EVEN CLEANER once the sites have been set up? How about nuclear - fission is cleaner than any fossil fuels or gas and if fusion reactors can truly get working then they are as clean as "green" energies. Your point is invalid.

4) IMO Windfarms are ugly, besides being a hazard for birds (especially migratory flocks) and low-flying aircraft. Moreover, they take up huge amounts of space, only work in ideal conditions (wind can't be too weak or too strong), and potentially noisy, are inefficient and have huge issues with power loss if put out to sea. How about solar farms instead?
For the record, small, vertical-axis turbines can be quite efficient on buildings, such as warehouses, etc; they take up little space and are relatively cheap. Solar panels, as far as I can see, are the most efficient, easy to install, are unobtrusive and can be used for water OR electricity - great all round. So why have a nice big drilling & extraction station or two?! Your point is invalid.


1. It's not invalid because jobs are still being made.
2. It's not invalid because 40 years is a long time to fuel the country whilst the next generation of renewable energy is build.
3. It's not invalid because renewable and green energy is highly expensive and people HATE nuclear power so good luck trying to convince them nuclear power is a good thing.
4. Solar power? In Britain? Good joke.

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
#36
Quote by fudger
My family received almost 320,000 dollars from leasing our land (about 130 acres) to a gas company for possible future sites for it. If they ever start drilling or fracking on it we stand to make much more. So in terms of economically I'd say yes but from what I've seen it can mess some stuff up but it will never happen. The lobbyist and government puppets from down state NY with never let the view from their vacation homes in upstate NY get ruined so it will never happen.

I heard somewhere (unsure where, so could be wrong info) that this works different in the US though. If you lease your land over there for fracking, you get income from the fuel as well as the rent.

Here in the UK, it works differently - we'd only get the rent as anything taken from the ground automatically belongs to the Queen or something like that. Nobody over here will be making that sort of money from it by leasing land.
Gibson LP Traditional, LP GT, LP Studio, SG Standard x2
Barber Tone Press > EHX Worm >TC Polytune > EXH Glove > EHX East River Drive > Zoom G3 > TC Spark Mini Booster
EVH 5150 III LBXII
Jet City JCA22H
.
My SoundCloud
#38
Risking contaminating ground water is a helluva thing to be ****ing around with - I'd rather have nuclear power to be honest. Yes, there's the risk involved is larger, but it's also much less likely to occur, much more actively preventable and much easier to work into pre-build models.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#39
Seeing as my dad is in the oil business and most of the stuff he has to deal with is fracking... Yeah, I'm a bit biased. Fracking has put a roof over my head, given me food to eat, given me so many things that I will admit I do take for granted.

So yeah.
Minecraft: Sonic
League of Legends: CinoSRelliK


Currently Playing/listening to/Reading:


Kerbal Space Program,
Binding of Isaac
Opeth - Orchid
S. by Doug Dorst
The Martian by Andy Weir
#40
Quote by AcousticMetal99
1) Jobs can also be created in the building of sustainable energy sources. Your point is invalid.

2) The gas reserves in the UK are predicted to last for around 40 years. That's hardly securing the "energy future". It just leads to a worse problem when, in 40 years or so, people have no other large enough energy sources, the population is probably going to be larger so there will be MORE need of reliable energy sources, and the ground is messed up and left unstable. Your point is highly invalid.

3) How about renewable/green energies, which are EVEN CLEANER once the sites have been set up? How about nuclear - fission is cleaner than any fossil fuels or gas and if fusion reactors can truly get working then they are as clean as "green" energies. Your point is invalid.

4) IMO Windfarms are ugly, besides being a hazard for birds (especially migratory flocks) and low-flying aircraft. Moreover, they take up huge amounts of space, only work in ideal conditions (wind can't be too weak or too strong), and potentially noisy, are inefficient and have huge issues with power loss if put out to sea. How about solar farms instead?
For the record, small, vertical-axis turbines can be quite efficient on buildings, such as warehouses, etc; they take up little space and are relatively cheap. Solar panels, as far as I can see, are the most efficient, easy to install, are unobtrusive and can be used for water OR electricity - great all round. So why have a nice big drilling & extraction station or two?! Your point is invalid.


"Your point is invalid"? What are you, 14?
My God, it's full of stars!
Page 1 of 3