David Icke's Official Forums (https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php)
-   Today's News (https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=263740)

monklink 06-08-2013 02:46 PM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
I once heard the process of Fracking described as trying to get alcohol in a pub by extracting it from the carpets. Surely its an incredibly energy intensive process? By the time you've drilled, lined, fractured, refined and distributed its hard to see where the net fuel gain comes from?

I'm wondering whether the corporate profits come from the stuff being dumped underground rather than any fuel scavenged?


Perhaps the idea is to profiteer from the last few clean water reserves? The share values of mineral water companies will make interesting monitoring.

fanof2012 20-10-2013 07:17 PM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
If you ask me, the best way for people to put a stop to fracking is to expose the fact that the government conceals hidden technology which if used would put the oil/coal/fracking companies into the dustbin of history.

monklink 24-10-2013 09:58 AM

foreign firms to frack UK

A FRENCH energy firm unable to drill for shale gas in its home country because of a ban on fracking has shelled out £24million to drill 14 wells in the British countryside.

GDF Suez, part owned by the French government, is to buy a 25 per cent stake in shale and coal gas methane licences in the Bowland Basin near Blackpool owned by Australian firm Dart Energy....

The French Government banned fracking for shale gas in 2011 because of concerns that the process, which involves pumping water, sand and chemicals at high pressure to break up rocks, could damage water supplies and the environment.

However the UK has set up a series of tax breaks to tempt billions of pounds of investment by explorers to help boost domestic energy supplies.

The move follows this week’s £16billion deal between French utility EDF and the British Government to build a new nuclear plant in Somerset.

beechtree 24-10-2013 10:49 AM

Seems to be a money-making scheme for anyone who doesn't live anywhere near it or doesn't want free gas from their taps!

Explanation of how it works:
National Geographic video: What is fracking?

Experiences of people living near fracking:
How the North Dakota fracking boom shook a family
Video: Flaming faucets - when fracking goes wrong :eek:

Don't Be Swayed By Faucets On Fire And Other Anti-Fracking Propaganda "Propaganda" :confused:


When Conservative peer Lord Howell said "uninhabited, desolate" parts of the North East were ripe for fracking he seemed to have inserted foot firmly into mouth.

But might he have a point? Could the region unlock cheap energy and create jobs by exploiting shale gas under the ground?
Perhaps he was also putting his foot in it by implying that it would not be safe or suitable on inhabited or picturesque land.

defendfreedom 29-10-2013 02:25 PM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
Ian R. Crane presents the first episode of the Fracking Nightmare

Watch here....

stompk 31-10-2013 01:38 PM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
I've been trying to warn folks for years about the bacteria used in fracking. It's called MEOR (Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery) and is what blew out the BP oil well in the Gulf of Mexico.

You see, they inject a synthetic bacteria that will grow without sunlight, only needing carbon to consume. When they consume the carbon, they fart CO2, which in turn creates the massive amounts of pressure needed to crack rock.

This is why nearly 30% of all gas produced through fracking is flared (burned) off. Nobody is addressing the pollution factor of burning billions of gallons of nat gas, and politician will say, don't worry, it's perfectly safe, but it's not.


Note, the top chemical are biocides. These shut down the growth of the bacteria, but the wells are flared off until they can get the well under control. In the BP spill, they couldn't control the bacteria being used, and the pressure became to great to control. Remember, they were flaring heavily before the explosion.

Now, we are seeing increased poisoning of the waters.

Curtis Island residents reported seeing large numbers of dead fish wash up on shore in the past week.

A department spokesman says the annual spread of blue-green algae, which usually takes place at this time of year, is likely to blame.

Why do they call it blue-green algae. It's not algae at all, it's cyanobacteria. It looks like paint floating on the water.

Cyanobacteria that produce toxins populate about 33 percent of all the lakes in the United States that are larger than 10 acres in size according to the last EPA National Lakes Assessment. Cyanobacteria of many species form the green scum on lakes and in the ocean. Toxic species of cyanobacteria are replacing species that are not toxic.

One of the most common toxins produced by cyanobacteria that are toxic is a potent liver toxin and may be carcinogenic. Toxicity is conferred by the amino acid microcystin. The majority of known species of cyanobacteria are capable of increasing levels of microcystin as a protection against oxidative stress

I can't stress enough how this practice needs to be stopped immediately.

monklink 01-11-2013 04:10 AM

List of the Harmed

Originally Posted by dentedarthur (Post 1061800221)
Fracking is safe enough
Unless you're British gas

Are all these personal stories just made up???


monklink 01-11-2013 04:30 AM

Grangemouth is a lever

John McGoldrick, who last week secured the backing of French energy giant GDF Suez in a £24m deal, said he hoped to begin drilling for shale in early 2015.

The company believes there could be 110 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of shale gas within its licence areas, with 60 tcf in the 13 blocks in which GDF has taken a 25pc stake. These span an area of 500 square miles, from Wrexham to York.
Grangemouth was saved from closure this week after unions agreed to a survival plan.

Ineos now plans to invest £300m at the site, mainly in a new shipping terminal to bring in cheap US ethane as feedstock, replacing dwindling North Sea supplies.

Mr McGoldrick said that the US market had been transformed by the increasing amounts of feedstock for the chemical industry as a result of the shale gas boom.

He said: “That’s a pertinent thing when you look at Grangemouth and our manufacturing base. If you can’t get the baseload for your chemical factories or plants then you are in trouble.”

He said Britain “absolutely” risked losing more industry if it was not able to exploit domestic shale gas. “Ineos is one of the biggest private companies in the UK and they are terribly fearful of the future because of the feedstock situation,” he said.

“This isn’t just the UK, it’s all of Europe. So from their perspective they want to see shale developed as quickly as they can.”
He welcomed moves by the Government to streamline the authorisations process which he described as “quite tortuous”.

Mr McGoldrick also predicted there would be further deals in the sector. Interest in Dart’s own process to seek a partner had “heated up” after British Gas owner Centrica’s £160m deal to buy into Cuadrilla’s Bowland shale licence in June.

“People realised this was a relatively small playground and with the Centrica-Cuadrilla deal a chunk of it has disappeared.

“The playground has got a lot smaller through our deal but there are bits and pieces still available. I would imagine there is potential for one or two more deals.”

Just love the way he considers our resources a "playground". :mad: Meanwhile Shell's (departing) CE claims cheap shale gas imports from US are a myth...


But Mr Voser said that the idea of "cheap US gas going into the rest of the world and therefore changing the pricing structures across the world" was a "myth".

The price impact of US exports would be "not that significant" because the additional costs of liquefying, transporting and then re-gasifying the gas would mean its eventual cost was comparable to existing market prices, he said.

...and that Shell's investment in them had not paid off...


Shell has invested at least $24bn in so-called unconventional oil and gas in North America. But it is a bet that has yet to pay off. Its North American upstream business has struggled to turn a profit and in August Shell announced a strategic review of its US shale portfolio after taking a $2.1bn impairment. “Unconventionals did not exactly play out as planned,” Mr Voser said.

He will be replaced next year as head of Europe’s largest oil company by market value by Ben van Beurden, the company’s current head of refining and marketing.

monklink 02-11-2013 05:56 PM

Lord Howell plots fracking in Windsor dungeon

Originally Posted by dentedarthur (Post 1061814942)
That's what that Howell chap said

Howell was a junior minister in the Heath govt (so he's probably got a thing for taking advantage of the vulnerable). Thatcher put him in the Privy Council and he wrote the book "Blind Victory: a study in income, wealth and power" before being selected for Foreign Affairs. He's now a member of Windsor Energy Group, a Fracking lobby.

Fracking has been a topic on WEG’s agenda for years. An invitation to the summit held in 2011 listed ‘‘European energy security concerns and shale gas’’ as topics to be covered. Individuals promised to attend included the chief economist at BP, the former chairman of Shell and ‘Barclays Capital, Exxon, Kuwait Petroleum and private security firm Aegis’.

I'd rather not be associated with the creep thanks.

monklink 17-11-2013 10:48 AM

Balcombe protesters move to Council Offices
After being evicted from the roadside at Balcombe, on grounds of safety, protesters have pitched-up outside the West Sussex Council Offices who ordered the eviction.


fluxed 18-11-2013 03:07 PM

shite, after shite, after shite.

Coal, oil, gas - poor earth, and poor grand children.
Any excuse and the scum will sustain this rotten

Where is the true innovation, away from this Earth
damaging shite.

They want to screw the world, and they will take us with

So they drill down verticle, then horizonal. Releasing
chemicals and water to fracture the surrounding
rock and release this gas.

My opiniion, sad stuff on the way.

monklink 18-11-2013 09:01 PM

fracking protests widen (uk)

Anti-fracking protesters have set up camp at a planned gas-drilling site in Salford.

A small number of green campaigners have pitched tents in Irlam where company IGas has permission to explore for methane.

People involved in the anti-fracking camp in Balcombe, West Sussex, last month promised to move to the iGas site in Salford and neighbouring Trafford.


The first meeting of a new anti-fracking campaign has taken place in a Lancashire town.

Longridge Against Fracking was set up by a local grandmother this year, who invited residents to attend the first meeting.

Established campaigners Residents Action on Fylde Fracking presented their case at the public event and then answered questions from concerned people.

Meanwhile outside West Sussex County Council offices...

The campaign has been going since yesterday (Saturday, November 16), and more are set to turn up tomorrow morning.

‘Peaceful’ Dan is among the members of the group, aged 15-47, all of whom met at the Balcombe protest camp.

Dan said: “We are a collection of individuals who feel that WSCC has failed its constituents miserably.

“They have failed to answer our questions - maybe they will answer us if we occupy their front lawn.

“We will submit our statement to councillors tomorrow. If they choose to sneak inside the Hall, it will show us how they feel.

“This is a country-wide problem but WSCC is failing the people they claim to serve.

“The ultimate question we are asking is, ‘Who do you serve?’”

Balcombe residents praise Protectors...

monklink 24-11-2013 10:29 PM

Protesters leave Chichester Council Offices...

“We've achieved the objectives we wanted and so will withdraw from the camp tomorrow [Tuesday].”
A further meeting will be held with the council involving pressure groups from Balcombe, Wisborough Green and Fernhurst on December 18.

Meanwhile looks like more gathering at Barton Moss...


Friends of the Earth said no environmental impact assessment (EIA) had taken place and permission did not allow for shale gas exploration.

IGas said the proposed development did not currently require an EIA.

Helen Rimmer, from Friends of the Earth, said in the letter it believed there were "major discrepancies between the original planning permission and IGas's current plans".


It would require around 3,600 CBM wells to extract the amount of gas IGas claim could be recovered. Now IGas have also become interested in Shale Gas and plan to drill a well at Barton Moss near Manchester through both the shallower coal seams and the Bowland Shale. An additional 4,000 plus wells might be needed to extract the gas claimed. IGas have been trying to sell the rights to shale gas extraction in their blocks to a larger company (with Exxon as the leading contender).

blackwolf 26-11-2013 10:58 AM

Fracking Nightmare - Episode 5

Another excellent show from Ian R Crane, this really does affect us all.
Get informed .....


Louise Goldsmiths email is [email protected]

West Sussex case thrown out of court

Barton Moss - Camp progress

I- gas meeting at Barton Moss

Requests for hay/straw bales, donations of wood, floor coverings, anything to help keep the protection camp warm.


legalcrimes 28-11-2013 04:50 PM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
Texas rocked by 16 earthquakes - Fracking to blame?

Northern Texas towns are experiencing an intense string of earthquakes – the last of which was one of the most powerful in 5 years. As unusual tremors have been going on for over 3 weeks now, many suspect fracking might be to blame.

On Thursday, the region experienced two tremors, with one of them registering 3.6 magnitude, 55 km west of the town of Azle at 07:58:36 GMT, as recorded by the US Geological Service, and the other 2.8 at 08:41:07 GMT, with the epicenter not far from the first one. USGS records show that the 3.6 tremor was one of the strongest earthquakes to hit the region in 5 years.

“It sounded like a sonic boom, and then the house started shaking,” Keith Krayer, a local resident who felt the effects of the quake, told RT.

Krayer said he had no doubt the quake was sparked by fracking. “When they frack, they inject all that water and chemicals into the ground, then they pump it back up and separate the gas from the water, then they have to dispose of that water 13,000 feet down. It causes the plates to slip, the lubrication from the water.”

Residents like Krayer are having their nerves put to the test as the region chalked up its 16th this month. In the last four days, there have been six recorded quakes.

Between 1970 and 2007, the area around the Texas town of Azle (pop. 10,000) experienced just two earthquakes. The peace and quiet began to change, however, at the start of 2008, when 74 minor quakes were reported in the region.

Now an increasing number of people, including scientists, are speculating that natural gas production by fracking - a process that forces high pressure water and chemicals into rock in order to extract natural gas reserves - is the culprit. The problem, however, is proving the claims.

Cliff Frolich, earthquake researcher at the University of Texas, said waste water injection wells from fracking could be responsible for the recent spate of earthquake activity.

"I'd say it certainly looks very possible that the earthquakes are related to injection wells," he said in an interview with KHOU television.

Frolich left room for doubt when he said thousands of such wells have operated in Texas for decades with no quakes anywhere near them.

Frolich co-authored a 2009 study on earthquake activity near Cleburne, just south of Azle, which concluded: "The possibility exists that earthquakes may be related to fluid injection."
A recent government study lent credence to Frolich’s findings.

The use of underground storage wells to get rid of waste water produced by fracking is “almost certainly” to blame for the jump in earthquakes in Midwestern states in recent years, a recent Geological Survey study has found.

The report said the number of magnitude-3 earthquakes or greater occurring in the mid-region of North America surged from 29 in 2008 to 134 last year.

The USGS study pointed to an unusual surge in tremors near wastewater wells in many US states, including Arkansas, Colorado, Texas, Oklahoma and Ohio.


monklink 10-12-2013 01:04 PM

shale gas quickest way to lose money
Seems to me the Fracking industry is entirely reliant on the belief of its investors that it will provide a profitable return. If its investors were to realise the true situation (massive losses), the whole thing would come tumbling down like a pack of cards...

The world's oil and gas giants have struggled in the third quarter of this year.
Royal Dutch Shell (LON: RDSA), for example, reported an increase in third quarter profits, but the company struggled when it came to shale gas.
Chevron Corp. (NYSE: CVX) struggled with low oil and gas prices as well as a refinery fire, all of which cause huge setbacks in net income.
And Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM), the world's biggest energy company, suffered losses for the same reasons – lowered prices and the subsequent result of closed refineries.
But Chesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK) may have suffered the worst in the third quarter.
Already struggling from a heavy funding shortfall and a scandal surrounding CEO Aubrey McClendon, the company reported a net loss of $2.01 billion, or $3.19 a share.
Just a year ago, in the third quarter of 2011, Chesapeake had reported a profit of $922 million, or $1.23 a share. But this year has thrown more obstacles in the way than the company could handle.
The earnings report, released Thursday, showed the company has $16 billion in long-term debt. Meanwhile, the company's 2012 drilling budget was raised to $8.75 billion – a 9.4 percent increase.
Shares plummeted 8.62% on Friday afternoon to $18.34.
The company's shares have lost as much as 17.09% this year, hitting a 2012 low of $13.55 in mid-May.

Fracking industry leader Cuadrilla recently released its accounts for the 2012 financial year. They show a revenue of £392,000, and loss of £18.7m.

According to Bloomberg just two days ago, ‘The spending slowdown by international companies including BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP) and Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) comes amid a series of write-downs of oil and gas shale assets, caused by plunging prices and disappointing wells.’ “Writedowns” and “disappointing wells” are not the stuff of public offering scrambles. Bloomberg added that ‘fields bought during the 2009-2012 flurry remain below their purchase price.’ Uh-huh.

The Energy Policy Forum recently noted as follows:
"Free cash flow of Continental Resources, a big player in the Bakken, has dropped from a loss of ($430M) to a loss of ($2.4B) since 2010. And Continental is not the only one. Devon Energy’s free cash flow has dropped from ($1.2B) to a significant ($3.5B) over the same time frame. Range Resources, who are drilling primarily in the Marcellus, booked a negative free cash flow of ($556M) in 2010 and this has deteriorated to ($1.0B). Kodiak Oil and Gas, another Bakken player, had negative free cash flow in 2010 of ($170M). It has now deteriorated to ($1.0B). Chesapeake is interesting because its free cash flow for 2012 ($3.3B) is now roughly equivalent to its level in 2010, ($3.4B). But over the last two years Chesapeake has liquidated approximately $13 billion in assets with no commensurate gain to free cash flow. Management still needs to move outside the company to generate cash to continue operations. And yet, shareholders have had their underlying assets disappear to the tune of $13B to pay down debt."

monklink 12-12-2013 09:41 AM

esoteric protection
I was wondering whether anyone on this forum had ideas for tackling Fracking esoterically?
I was thinking along the lines of visualizing a drill jamming or a kink in the well.
If we are the Creators of consciousness, and everything is One, then perhaps the Frackers represent an exploitative aspect of ourselves. How then might we deal with that?

Incidentally there's an article on David's Headlines about Fracking today.

monklink 12-12-2013 02:13 PM

Thanks bluefool appreciate your kind words. I do worry that the whole topic is rather depressing and perhaps this is putting many off contributing? However, these dark times give us the opportunity to express the higher part of our humanity. Just found a number of clips from darkcityradio that are really nice and personal and actually quite positive in many respects...:)


I think we do need to be careful that we are not just sacrificial lambs for a predator that delights in dominance. The Cops seem to be adopting a God Cop, Bad Cop psychological strategy, but this works both ways. There are fronts that we can counterattack on. I think cutting the Investment Supply Line would be a good one - big impact for little effort.

monklink 15-12-2013 10:13 AM

fracking to dispose of nuclear waste

Total Insanity – Scientist sees fracking as the way to dispose of nuclear waste
The method, presented here Monday at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union, would mix nuclear waste with other heavy materials, and inject it a few miles below the Earth's surface into drilled holes. The key is that, unlike fluids used in most hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," the nuclear slurry would be heavier than the rock in which it is injected.
I flipping knew it!!! When I started this thread back 5 months ago at the beginning of August this was the agenda I highlighted in my OP...

Originally Posted by monklink (Post 1061658052)
I'm wondering whether the corporate profits come from the stuff being dumped underground rather than any fuel scavenged?

Perhaps the idea is to profiteer from the last few clean water reserves? The share values of mineral water companies will make interesting monitoring.

...from post #9...

Originally Posted by monklink (Post 1061658423)
On their website there's a license application for handling radioactive substances (+ details about their employees:p). They say this is because of natural radioactivity from the geology (which will probably end up on the surface:eek:). How would anyone know though if they were using low grade cooling water from a Nuclear reactor? I'm sure they could get paid a lot to take this off someone's hands.

I expect they'll argue, in a Ken Clarke style, that its completely unreasonable to expect transparency because of Shatham House rules (or geology). Like any business though its most likely to be the most economic option, i.e. whatever you can get paid to take away (and maybe dilute sufficiently to cover your tracks).

I've recently been looking into why they decided to ditch Europe's biggest offshore wind farm the Atlantic Array in the Bristol Channel (while at the same time publicly saying they want more offshore wind:confused:). Its because they are building a new Nuclear reactor at Hinkley Point in Somerset aka "Hinkley C". This particular design, a European Pressurised Reactor aka Pressurized Water Reactor, generates more waste than most modern reactors. What's the betting that most of it is low grade cooling water???


I understand that, with a project this big and timeframes this long, the government needs to pick a technology, but you would expect it to try to pick a winner. The clunky third-generation power station chosen for Hinkley C already looks outdated, beside the promise of integral fast reactors and liquid fluoride thorium reactors. While other power stations are consuming nuclear waste, Hinkley will be producing it.

johne444 16-12-2013 08:13 AM

FRACKING implications / technology MEGA THREAD
I am still undecided concerning fracking, so I followed the link in "Fracking hell - what it's really like to live next to a shale gas well" to try and get some more perspective on this topic.

The link was to a Guardian article that listed a catalogue of complaints, like noise, smell, dust etc., but it seemed no worse than I, and many thousands here in the UK experience in living near to what little industry remains (in my case it's a steel works). The article pointed out that regulations in the UK will be far tighter than in Texas, so on the strength of this article, I'm still not convinced that fracking dangers exceed benefits.

Then, towards the end of the article we get this -

"But Lucas's biggest fear by far is that launching a shale gas revolution in Britain will destroy any prospects of action on climate change. "Scientists are telling us that we need to leave four-fifths of already proven fuels in the ground if we are going to have any chance of avoiding two degrees' warming. Therefore to be hunting around for new sources of fossil fuel seems particularly perverse."

In other words, whether fracking is locally net good or net bad is irrelevant. The global warming eco-loons are determined to serve their globalist masters and drive us back into the stone age come what may.

This precision, to leave 80% underground to stop 2 degC warming is pure guess work. There is no science whatsoever that supports this.

If anything, after reading these lies and blatant propaganda, I'm more inclined to support fracking than I was before.

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:58 PM.