Well one relevant thing is it is so far underground that no radioactive stuff has ever escaped. They know that becaysuse all teh various isotopes are in the proportions they should be since the original reaction.
In other words, no water got in and no isotopes got out. And its millions of years old.
The problem is that such public consultations become showcases for propaganda.
IANAE. There is plenty of information on the interweb ! Yes of course some of it will be anti-propaganda but there does seem to be a lot of concern over contamination and where huge profits and subsidies are concerned, I think it's natural to have suspicions.
Well in the building I was in, the ceilings vibrated and the items on the desks moved about. Fortunately it was an industrial style build with loose slat ceilings, but had it been of more rigid construction or the tremors a little more vigorous, there would definitely been cracking at the very least.
I honestly can't see the comparison between a geological event millions of years ago and someone drilling a hole today and pumping a mixture of chemicals down it. Clearly I'm missing something.
We're saying that here was a (long lasting event) where the "waste" materials haven't moved in the environment, so the automatic assumption that pollution is inevitable is a foolish one. But then perhaps you work for Health & Safety.
One of the purposes of the drilling at Balcombe is to determine the geology, from which an assessment can be made as to the level of risk of such pollution.
There is no realistic chance of structural damage from the magnitudes of earthquake likely to result from fracking. The Richter scale is logarithmic and structural damage is unlikely under magnitude 4, as compared to the 2.0 that has been associated with a fracking operation.
It is fairly irrelevant what is injected, although the bulk of what is injected will still be water. It is the lubrication of the fault that is the release mechanism.
Colin Bignell
and what caused that? lorries on the main road 50 yards away? The underground train running underneath?
The WORST earth tremors I have experienced were in a flat over the central line. The next worst were on Johannesburg when they were blasting in the gold mines a couple of miles away, the third worst was a routemaster odling at a bustop under the window of a flay I lived in for a mercifully short time. the fourth worst was the UK's largest earthquake for 30 years.
All were 100 times worse than fracking would ever cause.
No comment...
There is no economic benefit when they make houses unaffordable. Also health, education, employment all suffer.
Just about everybody by the looks.
Ok, time will tell but I'm not convinced there is any comparison between a material laid down millennia ago and relatively stable, with drilling a hole, pumping down chemicals and then extracting from the same well. We obtain much of our water from aquifers so I hope their testing is sufficiently robust.
I was in a training block at the BT Training school, Stone, Staffordshire. I had a feeling it was centered in North Wales but the only one I can find about that time is this...
9 August 1970 Kirkby Stephen, Cumbria, England 4.1If you're right about the tremors produced by fracking, then perhaps the concerns are indeed unwarranted.
Makes no difference whether you comment or not. The fact remains they're disturbing the geology with a new technique which is relatively untested. If you'd be happy for them to drill behind your home, all well and good.
I think the regulatory limit is set at Richter 2. Remember this is all deep underground.
Now look at how many earthquakes over Richter 2 are recorded in the UK every year.
No one complains that these are causing structural damage.
And there is no fracking going on at all.
This is the one I felt
Richter 5.8. That did cause minor structural damage.
Or maybe not.
a tried and tested technology that's been around at least 50years.
"The relationship between well performance and treatment pressures was studied by Floyd Farris of Stanolind Oil and Gas Corporation. This study became a basis of the first hydraulic fracturing experiment, which was conducted in 1947 at the Hugoton gas field in Grant County of southwestern Kansas by Stanolind."
You really do talk some crap sometimes
Note the headline
"Fracking could have caused"
Not did, could have. And as we well know, magbnitude 5.8 earthquakes occur in the UK every 30 years and more frequently elsewhere.
Nowhere in the article is there ANY evidence that this was caused by fracking.
Tyipcal alarmist crap from DumbHarry.
So what chemicals do *you* think they use?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.