Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...

To frack or not to frack

Reply
Created by ockanui > 9 months ago, 15 Aug 2011
ockanui
VIC, 1301 posts
16 Aug 2011 12:43AM
Thumbs Up

There seems some conjecture around at the moment about the extraction of gas from farmlands whilst running the potential of polluting the underground aquifers once damaged the ramifications are immense on the production of crops. It also seems that the political consensus is divided once again , is the opposition really opposing it based on ethical grounds or is it another way of Just being the opposition ? either way I just do not trust the processes in place when the consequences can be so dire. On lighter note I hear there is a process called a horizontal "fracking" I would assume it can also be done in other positions as well.

jetstream
WA, 57 posts
15 Aug 2011 10:56PM
Thumbs Up

ockanui said...

There seems some conjecture around at the moment about the extraction of gas from farmlands whilst running the potential of polluting the underground aquifers once damaged the ramifications are immense on the production of crops. It also seems that the political consensus is divided once again , is the opposition really opposing it based on ethical grounds or is it another way of Just being the opposition ? either way I just do not trust the processes in place when the consequences can be so dire. On lighter note I hear there is a process called a horizontal "fracking" I would assume it can also be done in other positions as well.


fraccing is just the process of cracking the formation to enable more gas flow. It is then kept open by propant that can be any granular type sand that keeps cracks open. Drilling / Petroleum Engineers are supposed to stop cross contamination of different zones and is mandatory requirement. But then again there are some that just f... it up.

Dawn Patrol
WA, 1991 posts
15 Aug 2011 11:09PM
Thumbs Up

Many problems are arising related to fracking in the US. They've started doing it in the eastern states here aswell. It is not a very environmentally friendly way to extract gas from the ground.

Mark _australia
WA, 22423 posts
15 Aug 2011 11:14PM
Thumbs Up

I like fracking.

The main obstacle is finding a partner who enjoys fracking also.

busterwa
3777 posts
15 Aug 2011 11:21PM
Thumbs Up

Seems like a pretty industry specific Question to the petro chem exploration /drilling industry


WOW ^ !! from a independent point of view the media hasn't really given it a good wrap !
Sounds like the solution's Pumped in and product gas could be uncontrollable under extremely high pressure when it dissipates.
sounds like if engineers fluff it its gonna be Hiroshima#2

Sabalo
WA, 15 posts
15 Aug 2011 11:28PM
Thumbs Up

Frack the fracking Frackers.

SandS
VIC, 5904 posts
16 Aug 2011 7:23AM
Thumbs Up


Is this the same procedure as for coal seam gas extraction ?

plenty of that fraccup about to occure in sth gippsland, to run power hungry Desal.

saltiest1
NSW, 2496 posts
16 Aug 2011 10:07AM
Thumbs Up

SandS said...


Is this the same procedure as for coal seam gas extraction ?

plenty of that fraccup about to occure in sth gippsland, to run power hungry Desal.




yeah they do it in south of sydney and stuffed up.

FlySurfer
NSW, 4453 posts
16 Aug 2011 11:32AM
Thumbs Up

I saw Gasland last year... you should too.

choco
SA, 4034 posts
16 Aug 2011 11:09AM
Thumbs Up

ockanui said...

There seems some conjecture around at the moment about the extraction of gas from farmlands whilst running the potential of polluting the underground aquifers once damaged the ramifications are immense on the production of crops. It also seems that the political consensus is divided once again , is the opposition really opposing it based on ethical grounds or is it another way of Just being the opposition ? either way I just do not trust the processes in place when the consequences can be so dire. On lighter note I hear there is a process called a horizontal "fracking" I would assume it can also be done in other positions as well.


Unreal, how can they justify stuffing up food production for $$, when there's no food they'll find out you can't eat money

CMC
QLD, 3954 posts
16 Aug 2011 12:46PM
Thumbs Up

It is a versatile word though.

Simondo
VIC, 8020 posts
16 Aug 2011 1:47PM
Thumbs Up

"The Horse Has Already Bolted" on this one. There are a few major players already spending multiple millions of dollars, with full commitment to ramp up to a few billion, each. I'm referring to the Surat Basin in Queensland, in a region all around Roma, QLD, plus the pipelines up to Gladstone, and the Gladstone Liquified Natural Gas Plant (GLNG).

Fracking isn't always required.

Yes, the world isn't perfect, and the Coal Seam Gas Industry has some issues...

But most people in the entire world, including developing nations, want most of the following - iPhone, computer, wireless internet, a nice car, a nice home, a vacuum cleaner, and bicycle, and other toys / worldly possessions.... Associated with all of these items is energy consumption! LNG & Coal Seam Gas is part of this equation....

LNG (Liquified Natural Gas - which is the end product from Coal Seam Gas) - is easy to transport and store. It compresses to I think 1/600th of Natural Gas.

However, there are probably some future Coal Seam Gas Projects with "question marks" over whether they will get up and going....

http://www.glng.com.au/ (a market player - Gladstone LNG Plant)
www.santos.com/coal-seam-gas.aspx (a market player)
www.qgc.com.au/01_cms/details.asp?ID=305 (a market player)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquefied_natural_gas
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalbed_methane (Coal Seam Gas)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing (fracking)

Simondo
VIC, 8020 posts
16 Aug 2011 1:52PM
Thumbs Up

CMC - an oldie but a goody !

As almost every word in a sentence;
F#ck the f$cking f#ckers !

ockanui
VIC, 1301 posts
16 Aug 2011 3:20PM
Thumbs Up

whilst there is a need to explore new possibilities of power sourcing, there is also a need to harness that activity until the safety of such is guaranteed and to mitigate future environmental impacts, when the use of chemicals such as Benzene, Toulene, Xylene together with many others are utilized into the process of Fracking then my own personal alarm bells ring. There are many other concoctions of chemicals used in the process that are not divulged with drilling companies citing 'trade secrets'
Given Australia's climate and the potential for long lasting droughts, the last thing that communities need is contaminated water and the chemicals used have an alarming potential to do such. I just think there is as always a short sighted vision propelled by the stealth of large companies in the guise of job creation.... albeit in the health industries

Simondo
VIC, 8020 posts
16 Aug 2011 7:34PM
Thumbs Up

ockanui said...

whilst there is a need to explore new possibilities of power sourcing, there is also a need to harness that activity until the safety of such is guaranteed and to mitigate future environmental impacts, when the use of chemicals such as Benzene, Toulene, Xylene together with many others are utilized into the process of Fracking then my own personal alarm bells ring. There are many other concoctions of chemicals used in the process that are not divulged with drilling companies citing 'trade secrets'
Given Australia's climate and the potential for long lasting droughts, the last thing that communities need is contaminated water and the chemicals used have an alarming potential to do such. I just think there is as always a short sighted vision propelled by the stealth of large companies in the guise of job creation.... albeit in the health industries


Well said ! Health, Evironment, etc.

It does create jobs, and quite a bit of collateral spending within the country, but some serious profit amounts end up sitting with The Development Contractors (Theiss, Leighton, etc), and more again for the likes of British Gas who own a healthy chunk of Queensland Gas Company (QGC). Other profits also rest with various pipeline suppliers, and some money even flows out to Caterpillar via hire/purchase of plant/equipment.

SandS
VIC, 5904 posts
16 Aug 2011 8:16PM
Thumbs Up

ockanui said...

whilst there is a need to explore new possibilities of power sourcing, there is also a need to harness that activity until the safety of such is guaranteed and to mitigate future environmental impacts, when the use of chemicals such as Benzene, Toulene, Xylene together with many others are utilized into the process of Fracking then my own personal alarm bells ring. There are many other concoctions of chemicals used in the process that are not divulged with drilling companies citing 'trade secrets'
Given Australia's climate and the potential for long lasting droughts, the last thing that communities need is contaminated water and the chemicals used have an alarming potential to do such. I just think there is as always a short sighted vision propelled by the stealth of large companies in the guise of job creation.... albeit in the health industries


Spot on ocka, we will soon have the largest desal water factory in the sth hemisphere.

If it ever stops raining enough for them to finish it !

Thanks to all previous pollies short sightedness [ real word, dont think so , but i dont fracken care , my ] short sightedness] .

now how the hell will we power this sucker ? short sightedness we shall see !

coal seam gas ? nuclear ? or burn more coal ?

so who will pay the carbon tax on this little desal fracker ? who gives a rats bottom short sightedness

is this going to affect the water quality in the local area ? They say no . short sightedness we shall see

are we still pouring usable rainwater out to sea ? of course we are . short sightedness

do we care about water quality in our local coastal areas? no fracken way short sightedness

sorry , but i needed that .

japie
NSW, 6937 posts
16 Aug 2011 9:55PM
Thumbs Up

SandS said...

ockanui said...

whilst there is a need to explore new possibilities of power sourcing, there is also a need to harness that activity until the safety of such is guaranteed and to mitigate future environmental impacts, when the use of chemicals such as Benzene, Toulene, Xylene together with many others are utilized into the process of Fracking then my own personal alarm bells ring. There are many other concoctions of chemicals used in the process that are not divulged with drilling companies citing 'trade secrets'
Given Australia's climate and the potential for long lasting droughts, the last thing that communities need is contaminated water and the chemicals used have an alarming potential to do such. I just think there is as always a short sighted vision propelled by the stealth of large companies in the guise of job creation.... albeit in the health industries


Spot on ocka, we will soon have the largest desal water factory in the sth hemisphere.

If it ever stops raining enough for them to finish it !

Thanks to all previous pollies short sightedness [ real word, dont think so , but i dont fracken care , my ] short sightedness] .

now how the hell will we power this sucker ? short sightedness we shall see !

coal seam gas ? nuclear ? or burn more coal ?

so who will pay the carbon tax on this little desal fracker ? who gives a rats bottom short sightedness

is this going to affect the water quality in the local area ? They say no . short sightedness we shall see

are we still pouring usable rainwater out to sea ? of course we are . short sightedness

do we care about water quality in our local coastal areas? no fracken way short sightedness

sorry , but i needed that .




I don't think it is short sighted at all. In actual fact it is quite easy to understand when you think it through.

The energy companies, along with other corporations such as big pharma and the banks, run this country with an iron rod. In actual fact they own it. Completely.

There will come a time in the future, if they have their way, when they sell us electricity from geothermal energy. Which our tax dollars will have paid for.

But they will do it their way. Have a look at the petroleum companies involved in geothermal exploration and research. How much do you have to research drilling three holes, pumping water down one and harvesting the steam off the other two. The bastards have probably been running heat exchangers on oil rigs for years.

We will be fracked. At the same time as we are being fracked they will sell us the product at a profit.

In thirty years time when the environment is really fracked and coal and oil bcoming very rare they will release this new wonder energy from the earth.

Same as they started selling us water.

In thirty years time everyone who used to think will be dead.




Mark _australia
WA, 22423 posts
16 Aug 2011 8:18PM
Thumbs Up

If we were serious we would ban some things. Things we don't need like:

Bottled water. We have a water supply but if you want more "pure", we have rain and filters so go buy yourself a rainwater tank. But noooo, in addition to the infrastructure and energy used to supply everyone with water to drink, we also use energy to make plastic bottles and truck it all over the country. Waste.

Little things that have changed like the foam trays we get meat in. The absorber thing used to be separate. You could throw that away after eating the meat, then wash the tray and re-use it. Now the absorber is incorporated into the foam tray but still using the same amount of materials, so the tray is useless after being used one time. Further, I doubt they can be recyled now as the foam tray contains blood.

Or like how you used to go and buy butter or meat or whatever (long before my time) and they cut you a chunk and you took it home. Now it is in boxes or wrappers etc. More wasted energy and fossil fuels to make it.

Look at Maccas. Used to be burgers wrapped in one piece of peper. Now it is boxes which have better presentation but do we need them? 3x more material used for no tangible result. More wasted energy.

Ban black roofs on houses. Legislate a requirement for eaves. All new houses have to have raiwater tanks.

No Govt has the balls though. They'd rather tax carbon.

morph89
SA, 54 posts
16 Aug 2011 10:38PM
Thumbs Up

from what i ve heard, most of the fuss is over gas and coal exploration and not acctually mining. The biggest impact of the the exploration process is a very deep hole in the ground somewhere around 200mm in diameter. also the vast majority of ground water in aus is completely useless for watering crops or drinking

newguy
654 posts
16 Aug 2011 10:18PM
Thumbs Up



After watching this on SBS some time ago, I am totally against it. Some may say it can go either way in argueing if its good or bad but I think anything that goes against nature is BAD.

Bluedog76
243 posts
16 Aug 2011 11:22PM
Thumbs Up

"Engineering is the art of modelling materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyse to resist loads we cannot properly assess in such a way that the community has no reason to suspect the extent of our ignorance."
- President, Scottish Branch - Institute of Engineering UK, 1946

c'mon.....what could go wrong??

ockanui
VIC, 1301 posts
17 Aug 2011 8:54AM
Thumbs Up

Bluedog that sounds more like a marketing campaign than an explanation! , the marketing of spin, most companies indulge, When I feel unwell I might go to the spin doctor

cisco
QLD, 12337 posts
17 Aug 2011 9:13AM
Thumbs Up

Mark _australia said...

If we were serious we would ban some things. Things we don't need like:

Bottled water. We have a water supply but if you want more "pure", we have rain and filters so go buy yourself a rainwater tank. But noooo, in addition to the infrastructure and energy used to supply everyone with water to drink, we also use energy to make plastic bottles and truck it all over the country. Waste.

Little things that have changed like the foam trays we get meat in. The absorber thing used to be separate. You could throw that away after eating the meat, then wash the tray and re-use it. Now the absorber is incorporated into the foam tray but still using the same amount of materials, so the tray is useless after being used one time. Further, I doubt they can be recyled now as the foam tray contains blood.

Or like how you used to go and buy butter or meat or whatever (long before my time) and they cut you a chunk and you took it home. Now it is in boxes or wrappers etc. More wasted energy and fossil fuels to make it.

Look at Maccas. Used to be burgers wrapped in one piece of peper. Now it is boxes which have better presentation but do we need them? 3x more material used for no tangible result. More wasted energy.

Ban black roofs on houses. Legislate a requirement for eaves. All new houses have to have raiwater tanks.

No Govt has the balls though. They'd rather tax carbon.


I get the feeling sometimes that the packaging industry makes more money than the producers of what they package.

I think it was the Germans who made the manufacturers responsible for packaging waste and made them stop using excess packaging.

As you say:- No (Aust) Govt has the balls though. They'd rather tax carbon.

getfunky
WA, 4485 posts
17 Aug 2011 10:51AM
Thumbs Up

FlySurfer said...

I saw Gasland last year... you should too.



+1

Farmers and residents can actually light up the water coming from their taps (no BS!!)
And the govt/industry's response? "Myeh.. whaddayagonnado..?"

Sure industry folks will always say "isolated incidents.. best trades practice..blah..blah..blah.." and we all know how that sh!te ends.

In Oz NSW has already shown it is potentially disasterous and not just the US that manage to completely cawk it up.

NO THANKS!! Go Frack yaself! [}:)]



BTW - Mark makes very valid points.. less usage = less demand = less inclination to extract every last ounce via dodgy methods.

SomeOtherGuy
NSW, 807 posts
17 Aug 2011 1:11PM
Thumbs Up

Mark _australia said...

Little things that have changed like the foam trays we get meat in. The absorber thing used to be separate. You could throw that away after eating the meat, then wash the tray and re-use it. Now the absorber is incorporated into the foam tray but still using the same amount of materials, so the tray is useless after being used one time. Further, I doubt they can be recyled now as the foam tray contains blood.


If you're talking about the red stuff covering your meat, it isn't blood. I'd guess that it's water and red dye but it definitely ain't blood. Blood would be black and solid long before the meat ever hit the shelf.

Which is a pet peeve of mine - the water is added to make the meat look fresh and also weigh a little more = higher charge to the consumer for zero product. A proper butcher doesn't have all that red stuff.

Little Jon
NSW, 2115 posts
17 Aug 2011 1:59PM
Thumbs Up

Gaslands says it all.

SomeOtherGuy
NSW, 807 posts
17 Aug 2011 2:35PM
Thumbs Up

cisco said...

I think it was the Germans who made the manufacturers responsible for packaging waste and made them stop using excess packaging.

As you say:- No (Aust) Govt has the balls though. They'd rather tax carbon.


Give it up! You'd be whining about a packaging tax.

Bluedog76
243 posts
17 Aug 2011 8:21PM
Thumbs Up

ockanui said...

Bluedog that sounds more like a marketing campaign than an explanation! , the marketing of spin, most companies indulge, When I feel unwell I might go to the spin doctor


Funny you say that.....last job mining engineer, current job, marketing.

cisco
QLD, 12337 posts
18 Aug 2011 12:36AM
Thumbs Up

SomeOtherGuy said...
Give it up! You'd be whining about a packaging tax.


I don't care what adjective you put in front of that three letter swear word, I won't whine about it. I'll curse it, object to it, fight against it and not pay it unless a gun is held to my head.

Even then I would have to be convinced the gun is loaded.

SomeOtherGuy
NSW, 807 posts
18 Aug 2011 12:46AM
Thumbs Up

cisco said...

SomeOtherGuy said...
Give it up! You'd be whining about a packaging tax.


I don't care what adjective you put in front of that three letter swear word, I won't whine about it. I'll curse it, object to it, fight against it and not pay it unless a gun is held to my head.

Even then I would have to be convinced the gun is loaded.




So you're in favour of unbridled packaging then? Make up your mind will ya?

cisco
QLD, 12337 posts
18 Aug 2011 2:18AM
Thumbs Up

OK. I give it up.



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...


"To frack or not to frack" started by ockanui