Bishop Hill Diary dates - here we go again edition
Apr 29, 2015 BBC Diary dates Energy: gas Greens The BBC is going to look at fracking again today, with a programme by Scotland Environment Correspondent David Miller.
Scotland has a decision to make: to frack, or not to frack. The controversial technique could be used to release gas and oil from the shale rock which lies beneath central Scotland. Large energy companies are keen to do this, and say it is important for both our economic growth, and energy supply needs. But fracking has a bad reputation. Its opponents believe it is dangerous, with the potential to cause pollution and even earthquakes. The Scottish Government has announced a temporary ban, but for some that is just not enough. David Miller reports from the front line in the war over fracking, where the two sides are locked in a fierce battle for the hearts and minds of the nation. He sets out to find out whether shale gas extraction can be safe, and whether Scots can be convinced to give it the go ahead.
What's the betting we see the "flaming faucets" on screen again? There are some clips here to whet your appetites.
Reader Comments (23)
The BBC has remembered to include the phrase "controversial technique." We all know that when that phrase is used it will be in connection with fracking. It is a good job that there is nothing at all controversial about covering the countryside with wind turbines and their associated pylons, or fields full of solar panels. There is also nothing controversial about converting a power station sitting on top of a coal field to run on wood pellets imported from the United States where forests are cleared to satisfy the demand for "green" energy.
If there were anything controversial about other methods of energy production the public might get confused. The BBC continues to fulfil its public service role of "educating" the plebs.
The opponents of fracking have created its bad reputation, which they now reference.
The opponents of fracking have exhausted their reserves of common sense, and deserve their bad reputation.
The answer, is not, blowing in the wind. The solution is not a ray of sunshine either.
As the lady says: 'Its not tried; its not tested..'
Nope - its only been used for the last seventy years, and in the UK for thirty years....
Better give it a bit longer.....
Fine lets ignore the consensus of experts now and just ask a deluded, anti-industry, recent import living up the braes in California, nowhere near the proposed well-sites in the Forth valley. Sure let's just close down Grangemouth's industry because looking at it is clearly offensive, just never mind the jobs.......and we'll replace it with what exactly?
Once upon a time jobs were the most important thing on the councils agenda. Now it's cowtowing to enviro-loons!
I think you should start writing "Controversial broadcastor" in front of "the BBC".
More jaw-jaw. It's obvious the only way we will discover for certain whether fracking is viable and safe is to test drill. It's also equally obvious that environmentalists are desperate to stop any test drilling, precisely because they strongly suspect it will prove to be viable and safe. And once that happens it will make 'renewables' look seriously stupid. Hence they obstruct at every turn not because they fear it will fail, but because they fear fracking will be a runaway success.
Coming from the nation that gave the world the Industrial Revolution, our fretting and dithering is a complete embarrassment.
I think flaming faucets ought to be a poster campaign highlighting how fraudulent environmental campaigners thought they were right to deliberately contaminate drinking water supplies with inflammable gas.
What next? Deliberately contaminating domestic electricty supplies with drinking water, to show how dangerous it is?
From today's BBC radio output it was clear that they had already decided how people should be voting. They were hyping up Nicola in Scotland and Ed for England.
... I hope the voters "stick it" to the BBC.
Yesterday I heard Steyn pointing out that Scotland 5.3m has a lower population than London 8.6m
..Hey but it is still around same popn as Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Ireland
...only 8 EU countries are bigger that the 16m of London&SE )
shalegas extraction takes the methane OUT of water.This is what our BBC propagandists will not tell you.
It was always there..The Romans already had very stiff regulation not to approach water wells with torches..it had a reason.
WSJ has a very interesting nuclear industry article today
note china has officially 28 nukes in development BUT 200 on the board
We completely destroyed an industry to make leftists feel important and parasite a bit..just like the healthcare and education industries have been corrupted degenrated and turned into DISservices by corrupt leftists.
2 million wells and counting...
A real journalist would investigate whether or not the accusations against fracking are credible. Instead it is framed as honest opponents vs. greedy big oil.
It isn't as if they are dealing with some theoreical concept. Jump on a plane, go to the US and do some honest fact gathering.
Geckko
With the BBC's and their journalists' love of jetting off round the world with only a marginally related reason I'm surprised they haven't been several times already. Naturally they'd find earth tremors happening every half hour and flaming faucets in every home.
Give the BBC some due – the interviewer did raise some valid questions with the lady. It would be interesting to see his response to her description of Grangemouth being a blighted community, not least quite what she meant by “blighted community”.
Mind you, her smug expression at the end of the clip is one that just demands a good slap.
Gekko: they have already done that (can’t remember what programme it was, but I am sure it was the Bish that brought it to our attention). It was a radio programme, and the lady reporter sent to the USA did try very hard to find someone involved for whom fracking had caused problems, but failed abysmally – all she could get was people who could only tell her of the benefits. The frustration in her voice was quite tangible.
Venus: the Romans were not so daft:
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbeystead_disaster“The gas was then ejected into the valve house by the sudden pressure of water as the pumps were switched on. The cause of ignition has never been determined.” However, quite why they could not link those two points is a mystery.
Does Freedom of Information extend to the expenses of the BBC? It is taxpayer funded after all.
It would be nice to know how envionmentally friendly the BBC are, when they are not on camera, but spending the viewers money.
The flaming faucet is falsely attributed to fracking. Water well was 530 feet deep. Well completion report shows it penetrated 4 shallow coal seams. Colorado's Oil and Gas Commission tested the well in 2008 and confirmed it was coal bed methane. The Niobrara shale in Weld County Colorado is at depths of 7000-8000 feet. Details in essay No Fracking Way.
Polls and surveys show that the majority of the public don't give a s**t about fracking. Greens think it's the end of the world, the rest of the world think it's nothing of consequence.
Surveys ask if people would like a beautiful countryside and of course many will answer affirmatively. But I wonder how many would answer positively to the question about wanting cheap energy & fuel. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
“The gas was then ejected into the valve house by the sudden pressure of water as the pumps were switched on. The cause of ignition has never been determined.” However, quite why they could not link those two points is a mystery.
One would think the cause of ignition would have been the electric motors running the pumps.
"One would think the cause of ignition would have been the electric motors running the pumps."
Extremely unlikely as they are 99.9% certain to have been induction motors which have nothing to create a spark, and there would have been evidence.
More likely to have been the control gear if it was in the valve house itself, but again there would have been evidence, covers blown off or damaged etc.
Well thought! You figured it out with most imperative and helpful explanation here. Actually impress from you!
here
About time we remembered to mention "the BBC, controversially funded by a compulsory licence fee".
Unfortunately my video stream stalled before I found out how long the sympathetically-presented "long term campaigner against fracking" had been campaigning but I bet it wasn't 22 years which is how long it's been since I first took part a frac job in the Forth Valley. I suspect it was less than five years, since nobody outside the industry had even heard the term until that dumb anti-shale propaganda film came out.