Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Be Careful with Fracking Opponents!

I got into an argument with a woman on Facebook today about fracking to retrieve natural gas from shale. She was trying to claim fracking is the cause of recent mild earthquakes we have had in Oklahoma recently. I have no idea if this is true or not, but I know there is a fault line near here, which is likely the cause of the earthquakes.

So, I asked her what her evidence was to support her theory, she got quite agitated and finally gave me this:

"How about this - I come over to your house & I put several large sticks of dynamite under your house & light the fuse - we will both stand back - watch the explosion & see if your house suffers any damage. What about this for your proof?"

She actually believes fracking is done with dynamite. I guess I should be grateful she doesn't want to blow up my house with me in it?

Jun 20, 2014 at 4:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterJames McCown

She probably got the idea from media reports such as this .

The original paper was published in Geology , linking a jump in earthquake activity with water injection into wells.

Jun 20, 2014 at 8:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

How much damages have green activists won in the courts when they proved fracking earthquakes had damaged their property.... billions surely ?

Jun 21, 2014 at 12:06 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

stewgreen
Follow the Parr v Aruba link in the sidebar. Something of a cautionary tale!

Jun 21, 2014 at 1:13 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

The dynamics of the media meant it reported that a family had won a court case against fracking.
1. It didn't win for fracking, it won $3m against an oil company
2. The mefia failed to report that the case has not finished and has been sppealed
"headline writers have felt increasing pressure to include the word in the headline of any story about basically any subject related to the oil and gas industry, regardless of how misleading the usage of that word might be. The goal, of course, being for the story’s headline to turn up whenever anyone does a Google search on the word “fracking”.."
"Texas District Court case styled Parr v. Aruba. In that case, a six person jury awarded the plaintiffs, who live in Wise County, Texas, in the heart of the Barnett Shale play, a total of almost $3 million, ostensibly as compensation for health issues and property loss that the family claimed had resulted from Aruba’s operations in the general vicinity of their home.

The following day and sporadically since, we have seen story after story written about this case, almost all of which have very predictably contained the word “fracking” in their headline. All of which would lead unsuspecting readers to the belief that the jury decided that hydraulic fracturing had somehow caused damage to the Parr family.

The problem? At the end of the day, this case had absolutely nothing to do with “fracking”. Parr v. Aruba - The Fracking Case That Wasn't

Jun 22, 2014 at 1:44 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

stewgreen
The "mefia"? Love it! A word whose time has come.

Jun 22, 2014 at 6:50 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Spelled me-fear ?

Or rather the media is really the "me-scare , you-fear"

Jun 22, 2014 at 8:30 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

I was thinking in terms of a cross between 'media' and 'mafia' actually.

Jun 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson