Fracking banned in Victoria.

[Rorschach]

One more time for the retard in denial...

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2010/06/ ... nia-201006
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victo ... r44li.html
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/ ... /dobb-text
http://www.ecowatch.com/pennsylvania-fr ... 66816.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-23/c ... mp/7352578
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/61961
http://dontfracktheterritory.org/fracki ... -fracking/

[Rorschach]

Expert opinion...

[Rorschach]

http://www.ecowatch.com/meet-anthony-in ... 80606.html

Ingraffea has been a principal investigator on research and development projects ranging from the National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) through Schlumberger, Gas Research Institute, Sandia National Laboratories, Association of Iron and Steel Engineers, General Dynamics, Boeing and Northrop Grumman Aerospace. Having been an industry insider for so long, he’s a formidable opponent of anyone who dares to go against him in a debate about high-volume hydraulic fracturing.

[Rorschach]

Let's review four of the myths exploded by Dr. Ingraffea:
Myth One: “Fracking is a 60-year-old, safe, well proven technology”

Dr. Ingraffea writes:

Yes, fracking is 60 years old. But using this shorthand obscures the truth that what’s at issue here isn’t really just fracking. It's the entire process of coaxing gas from shale using high-volume, slickwater fracking with long laterals from clustered, multi-well pads.

Myth Two: “Fluid migration from faulty wells is rare”

Ingraffea dismantles this one:

Fluid migration is not rare. For example, industry researchers Watson and Bachu, in a Society of Petroleum Engineers paper in 2009, examined 352,000 Canadian wells and found sustained casing pressure and gas migration…Most recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found benzene, methane and chemicals in water-monitoring wells in Pavilion, Wyoming…

Myth Three: “The use of clustered, multi-well drilling pads reduces surface impacts”

Ingraffea:

Such pad sites are large and growing, up to 10 acres or more. Newer sites, in Canada, are bigger than 50 acres, and each will leave behind clusters of wellheads and holding tanks for decades.

Cluster drilling facilitates and prolongs intense industrialization and leaves a larger, more concentrated, and very long-term footprint, not a smaller and shorter one.

Myth Four: “Natural gas is a 'clean' fossil fuel”

This one would be laughable if so many people did not believe it. As the old adage goes, “A lie can travel halfway 'round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

Ingraffea on this whopper:

NASA climate scientist Drew Shindell’s work, published in the prestigious journal, Science, shows that methane – natural gas – is 105 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a global warming contributor over a 20-year time horizon, and 33 times more powerful over a century.

He proceeds to explain that methane gas is prone to leakage, which is not taken into account when proponents tout gas as a “clean” source of energy:

Leaks happen routinely during regular drilling, fracking and flowback operations, liquid unloading, processing, and along pipelines and at storage facilities.

The rate of leakage is anywhere from 3.6 per cent to 7.9 per cent of the lifetime of production of a shale gas well, which means from three to 200 per cent greater leakage rate than from conventional gas wells.

Exposing Other Mythology, Making a Plea For Truth

Dr. Ingraffea also discusses other myths the gas industry relies upon on a daily basis, including “jobs created,” “gas for energy independence,” gas as a “bridge fuel” toward renewable energy, among others. All of these lies and misdirections have been debunked on multiple occasions, by numerous sources.

Concluding where he began his article, Ingraffea makes a plea to his readers: “keep asking questions, dig for the truth, and you’ll get the whole story.”

[Super Nova]

Fracking is not risk free.

Simples. To say it is, is just Bullshite.

However, that doesn't mean it should be banned. The risk need to be managed and if they cannot or the risk to the local environment is not acceptable (ir, risk to drinking water) then it should not occur in some areas.

[IQS.RLOW]

One more time for the retard in denial...

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2010/06/ ... nia-201006
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victo ... r44li.html
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/ ... /dobb-text
http://www.ecowatch.com/pennsylvania-fr ... 66816.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-23/c ... mp/7352578
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/61961
http://dontfracktheterritory.org/fracki ... -fracking/

Reposting your fuckwit links to green left weekly and other assorted shit posts doesn't make them any more viable than when you first posted them.

It only underscores that you're a fuckwit.

[IQS.RLOW]

Fracking is not risk free.

Simples. To say it is, is just Bullshite.

However, that doesn't mean it should be banned. The risk need to be managed and if they cannot or the risk to the local environment is not acceptable (ir, risk to drinking water) then it should not occur in some areas.

No one said it is risk free but science says it is generally very safe.

Unfortunately, some sad fucks take their uneducated opinions from the ABC and Green left wankly and think they have a clue.

[Rorschach]

[IQS.RLOW]

Another shit post from the shit poster.

Googling up your shit links and faux "documentaries" only show you have less of a fucking clue than even I gave you credit for. Fail.

[Rorschach]