The Sanders fracking experts in here....
Hillary wants to end it too...just over a period of time instead of immediately.
So is she wrong about fracking...or do you think she is just saying she will eventually end it to get votes.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Hillary wants to end it too...just over a period of time instead of immediately.
So is she wrong about fracking...or do you think she is just saying she will eventually end it to get votes.
You don't return water to the well. You inject water from the frac and production to massive injection wells. Which, when they coincide with old fault lines, causes instability.
I don't have a source on my iPad, just my years of experience in the field.
I'm against ended it because of the benefit to the economy. The US now the world's leading oil producer with more to come once prices rebound. What we can do is improve the technology to ensure its safer and more environmentally friendly.
while we perfect the technology, we kill people. sorry. End it now and then perfect the technology. The economy Is about All people btw.
Well, the reason abortion remains controversial isn't because of an abstraction: the idea that a fertilized egg cell is human from the moment of conception because it has the potential to be human. That may or may not be arguable from a purist, philosophical point of view, but isn't the reason people of good heart, who allow themselves to think about the reality of abortion, feel a natural revulsion. They are repulsed by the deliberate killing of human infants.
So, for me, the duck test should apply: if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and says its a duck, then it's a duck.
In respect of abortion, that translates to a simple (in principle) criterion: If an in utero infant, abstracted from the womb, is recognizably human, so that a person looking at that infant recognizes him/her as a fellow human being, and instinctively feels their mutual kinship and common humanity, then that child's rights as a member of the human race have to be respected.
Where the line should be drawn is inevitably subjective. From the little I've seen, I'd say 6 to 10 weeks.
https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tag/earthquakes/
I edited my post while you responded. What is going on in Oklahoma? Why the sudden rise in seismic activity?
You're right it is about people and jobs for the people. We can make it safer and everyone will benefit.
Wha...I just explained it in the post you quoted. For like the 3rd time.
And Hillary would never end fracking despite any rhetoric. She is too smart, and too tied into big business. Besides, de-leveraging ourselves from the Middle East (read: Saudi Arabia) is rather high on our foreign policy list.
I don't see where you talk about the sudden rise in seismic activity.the point I am making is there will always be jobs so long as we make decisions that benefit all Americans. But as we know the people in power think of what benefits themselves not all Americans.
Well guess what, energy jobs are jobs that benefit a large swath of Americans. You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater on fracking, you improve the technology to make it cleaner and safer and allow the economic benefits to take place.
Injection wells injecting massive amounts of produced water from oil producing wells (not fracking) in formations near previously non-active fault lines.
So this practice of injecting the water is new since 2009? Or there has been a sharp increase in the practice?
I've seen different versions of this plot but here is an example:
A sharp increase due to the need of dewatering formations and other tight oil plays in the region coming into focus due to economics.So this practice of injecting the water is new since 2009? Or there has been a sharp increase in the practice?
I've seen different versions of this plot but here is an example:
She was Secretary of State and in her husband's administration she was more involved than most First Ladies. Wasn't she responsible for trying to bring in a health care program that was more comprehensive than Obamacare?
I guess the press is like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. I have a hard time watching CNN because I find it too left wing.
How about making more of a commitment to green energy and the massive jobs it will bring instead of cashing in on this industry that is not for long and is poisoning our water systems and affecting health issues. Are you not concerned about our fresh water supply in this day and age. How about not throwing out our fresh water with frack water.
And how is it you seem to know more about fracking and energy than Bernie?
Guy´s been in the highest echelons of government for yonks and appears to be quite intelligent, curious, concerned, well informed, has loads of resources at his will, and is obviously not whored out to this industry which by its nature will be ma$$ively biased?The market based approach to the environment is beginning to prove a disaster.
Last edited:
Lost me. Does that mean going after tough sources of oil because of high oil prices?
Yes. Mainly, shale plays. But also limestone that has to be dewatered before the in-situ pore pressures will allow the oil to flow
Even Saudi Arabia are preparing for running out of oil. Quite a coinkydink I was reading this as you lot were talking about fracking.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/saudi-arabia-oil_us_56fea15ce4b083f5c60788d7?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/saudi-arabia-oil_us_56fea15ce4b083f5c60788d7?
How about making more of a commitment to green energy and the massive jobs it will bring instead of cashing in on this industry that is not for long and is poisoning our water systems and affecting health issues. Are you not concerned about our fresh water supply in this day and age. How about not throwing out our fresh water with frack water.
And how is it you seem to know more about fracking and energy than Bernie?
The market based approach to the environment is beginning to prove a disaster.
I'm all for green energy as well. This idea that we have to choose between the two is ridiculous. Just pursue both and work to improve the technology to make fracking safer.
It´s not choosing between the two. It´s having to realistically phase out one and phase in the other. In a steady, rational manner. Let´s put the lion´s share of the tech improvement into green. We can´t keep going on at this rate. Let´s not fool ourselves about the cleaness/dirty issue of fracking. It´s fecking filthy to air, land and water and has a negative impact on climate change. And not sustanable nor renewable. It´s what´s to be expected when we´ve gone so heavily to produce our own fossil fuels, instead of importing it - it´s poisoning this country. We have to change this market based approach in this day and age.
Last edited:
So as oil prices decline, and these tight oil plays no longer make financial sense, we should start seeing declines in seismic activity?
Isn't every indication that we're already used too much non-renewable power? Like, to the extent where we've destroying the planet day by day and we need to do something drastic about it to at best slightly mitigate the result?
Last edited:
Yes, the earthquakes can be paused until WTI hits $55/b and then promptly resume once the Shale players fire up their equipment.I think the environmental and economic interests can be balanced out. Continue full speed ahead with green/renewable and continue to develop safer, cleaner fossil fuel technologies.
I bet a plot of $WTI vs #OK earthquakes is reminiscent of #pirates vs. global temp.
The trouble with that though is that too many right wing politicians are in complete denial about climate change and also are completely against a lot of green/renewable/sustainable energy sources. Look at the shit Obama got for his renewable energy initiative, and anyone here in the UK will know the shit that the wind farms are getting from the right wing parties. I personally feel because of this not enough money is being invested in finding other renewable sources or not enough is being spent in making some others financially viable. We also have to ensure that we elect as many people who understand and accept all of this.
On a personal note, as most know I grew up and live in the largest fishing and one of the largest farming areas of England, and being an ex fisherman know the trouble that industry is in, but that aside, I would think that about 75-80% of my friends who were fishermen, are now working in some form on offshore wind farms. I could be doing it myself, and the money they get paid is outstanding, so it's definitely a lucrative business.
There'd be no correlation to prices in the near term, as these wells are still producing. It would be a delayed correlation, unless we've somehow gone past the point of no return which there's no way of knowing yet because this is all new (and difficult to interpret) science.
the point is she has been steadfast in nothing. all sides of every issue. she has achieved nothing. she is simply riding on her husband's coat tails.
Fox would be more to your liking probably.
Yep, we see the same delayed correlation in cancer (e.g. smoking/lung cancer). It is really fascinating to see how global pricing, driven by many factors (e.g. Saudi upping production), can influence what happens locally here.
Also, @langster I learned a new word today "coinkydink"
And now back to US politics. Sorry for derailing.
Really don't think they're gonna let him have the nomination. Then again, Teddy as nominee and whole bunch of pissed off Trumpers isn't going to do much better, other than being sure to win Texas.
Well they are in a catch 22 then aren't they, because I think he will probably win NY and should win California too, and if he gets to the convention at around 1050-1150 ish and then doesn't get the nomination, well, in his own words. There will be riots! I reckon that's odds on at the bookies.
I think Kasich has a better chance of being the nominee than Trump or Cruz. They will reach the convention with Trump being short on delegates and neither Trump, nor Cruz will win the first round of voting. It will go to a 2nd round and delegates will coalesce around Kasich, mainly based on electability issues. This would probably be a nightmare scenario for the Dems, as Kasich will be a "normal" candidate who will win Ohio.
What kind of job do you get windfarming?
Kasich v Hillary will be a more normal election.
He has a much better chance obviously.
Think they may try and get him nominated.
He has a much better chance obviously.
Think they may try and get him nominated.
Hillary's lead in NY goes from 48 to 12 in one week.
That would depend on how far Cruz is from 1,237. There's a better chance of him gaining the delegate count after a couple of rounds if Trump doesn't do it in round 1 than Kasich doing it anytime. It would take a lot of internal maneuvering to get Kasich the required delegates and at that point the Republicans would look like they ignored the primary voters completely, which would only stoke the anti-establishment crowd and probably open doors for a Trump third party run.
They all work as either engineers, or patrol boat skippers, or skippers that take the engineers back and forth to the farms or deckhands on any of those boats. The guys doing the patrol boats basically get paid for doing feck all, as they just sit anchored in an area or occasionally circling the farm, and they are usually at sea for a month at a time.
The establishment are backing Cruz at the moment but he is still massively hated and they will dump him like a hot rock once they are free to vote for whoever they want. The logic of course will be that he would lose to Hillary and would also threaten the GOP's majority in the House and Senate.
- Status