This is fracking unbelievable, restart the gravy train, Leitrim to the rescue

gbee

loveisdivine wrote: »

it makes me question societys morals.

Been that way since God sent Fire & Brimstone and destroyed those biblical cities of lust and loose morals > in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah < been that way since before then too and since we've had Holocausts, Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing and so on and so forth, I don't think a little thing like fraking has influenced their morals at all, TBH.

nedzer2011

Another recent report here for anyone who is interested in getting a balanced view on things:

http://energy.utexas.edu/images/ei_shale_gas_regulation120215.pdf

It addresses the issue of real Vs. perceived consequences of shale gas development. It's by far the most comprehensive report thats out there IMO

tuppence

Good piece of juornalism in this
http://www.sligotoday.ie/details.php?id=18758

tuppence

Warning from an international perspective today.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0220/breaking30.html

Paddy De Plasterer

I see O Cuiv wants a new enquiry into Fracking. This man has gone strange since he went into Opposition from being a gov minister under Bertie & Biffo, when Corrib gas was sanctioned. He backed Frank Fahey to the hilt then.

pcworldisajoke

paddy thats the problem- our public officials arent required to act in the public interest- only their own.

Primetime tonight, that canadian woman was excellent, That dithering english man showed hes lying through his teeth, and RIchard Moorman reminded me yet again of the existence of incarnate evil on planet earth.

nedzer2011

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

paddy thats the problem- our public officials arent required to act in the public interest- only their own.

Primetime tonight, that canadian woman was excellent, That dithering english man showed hes lying through his teeth, and RIchard Moorman reminded me yet again of the existence of incarnate evil on planet earth.

How could you possibly conclude that the Englishman was lying? He is simply an industry expert who is visibly annoyed by the amount of mis-information that's out there!

Looking at things objectively - who has more to benefit through the outcome of the debate in a worldwide context - the experienced Englishman or the Canadian who is currently in the middle of a multi-million dollar legal battle with the industry??

If it were a debate on any other topic I know who the majority of us would side with!?

GetWithIt

Company behind €7bn gas fracking plan has never used process before

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/company-behind-7bn-gas-fracking-plan-has-never-used-process-before-3032904.html

I was going to quote chunks but ended up copying nearly the entire article.

Suffice it say that there is nothing here that you couldn't have learned from just looking at their web site. I wouldn't necessarily hold any of the points made against them. You just have to take them into account when they're making statements.

They're in the business of identifying areas of geological interest, getting planning, and selling on the rights to a big player. That's the exploration business for you.

Australian (ABC) documentory about fracking.
http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2012/s3441606.htm

Meet the Frackers
Another programme that highlights worries about fracing!

deCourcey chick

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Is their any actual independant scientific data on the environmental harm (or lack thereof) that fracking does.

It's seems to be one of those issues that all of the research is either done by the mining company themselves to make everything seem sunshine and lollipops or by eco-warrior pseudoscientists to show how the whole thing is going to kill us all again because the climate change angle sort of fizzled.

There is very very little peer reviewed scientific date on the environmental harm. However, Duke University has produced a paper and you can watch an interview with the author, Rob Jackson, at the following. Like a real scientist he is very cautious, yet the data are non the less damning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq0LFhw-klM

Andy!!

When the OP mentioned fracking, I thought he was a Battlestar Galactica fan. But no, apparently its a real thing. I'm intrigued.

Voodoo_rasher

Paddy De Plasterer wrote: »

I see O Cuiv wants a new enquiry into Fracking. This man has gone strange since he went into Opposition from being a gov minister under Bertie & Biffo...

he can also have a chin-wag with the junior minister colleague who signed off

on the granting of fracking licences; who as soon as was booted out of

office high-tailed it to distant Moscow..

Duggys Housemate

Rabidlamb wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0201/1224311046794.html?via=mr

The good.



The seemingly good but on second read, not so much.



Summary:
Private firm find €55 billion woth of gas in Leitrim.
Irish government only gets 10%, if we're lucky.

The actual revenue to the Government, including taxes on all jobs etc. will be much higher.

howwedoin wrote: »

Sounds like the usual! If it profits...its privatised, but if its debt...it's nationalised.

WEll, debt should not be nationalised, but the difference between banks and extractive industry should be understood a bit better I think.

A lot of this $55B will flow around the economy. Anti-fracking is the new anti-Mobile masts. That died off because of it's economic and scientific illiteracy and because people preferred to have signal. Anti-Fracking will die off too, once the benefits come online.

meenaghman

All of this 55bn is unproven resources at this stage.
Its also unclear from recent announcements if this figure is for the whole basin ( NW carboniferous basin which stretches Donegal,Sligo,Leitrim,Fermanagh,Cavan,Roscommon,Monaghan,Tyrone,Mayo) or whether its for the N Leitrim portion of gas. In the initial press release it was for just N Leitrim portion, but recently Tamboran keep talking about the basin. This wouldn't surprise me- They talked about 4 acre pads in press release and 500 wells in N Leitrim in press release but a January paper since presented to government talks about 7 acre pads with 24wells / pad .. ie 1440 wells for N Leitrim. There's no mention of the 120 mile gas pipeline and compressor network needed to collect the gas. Nor is there any mention of truck logistics by 2015 we're looking at 20000 extra truck journeys in the N Leitrim/W Fermanagh area annually.. by 2018 112000.
We're effectively looking at rezoning of agricultural land to industrial use. And it will happen.. eg in Fermanagh Farmers have already been informed their insurance won't cover them if fracking takes place on or near their land so forcing families off the land.
One wonders whether this is a land grab or a Shale gas company. Tamboran is firmly in the former camp, wanting to grab licenced areas for onward sale to the big gas producers. I can only think once they've a foothold, then other areas will follow as "targetted secondary, tertiary etc.. areas of exploration and development".

And once the government starts this it cannot stop it. lets be clear on that - the terms of the licences in the Republic would guarantee that. Its all well to say --- its only Leitrim.. but there are other great swathes of the island sitting on Shale..

meenaghman

We all heard about Poland being Shale Gasland of Europe ..
Reserves slashed by 80 percent.. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-26/shale-boom-in-europe-fades-as-polish-wells-come-up-empty-energy.html
In the US companies are producing gas at uneconomical levels -- because they have to..
Front loaded debt and unconventional financing -- derivatives and complex financial instruments underpinned by SEC ruling allowing companies to borrow against unproved resources are leading to a Shale gas timebomb similar to the sub prime mortgage current price of gas in US = 2 dollars mcf... price to produce = 8-9 dollars mcf.
3 trillion QE by the FED had to find a home somewhere...

JONJO THE MISER

In the U.S.A i think the drilling companies have to buy the mineral rights to your land, tens of thousands of landowners are getting monthly checks north of $100,000 per month.
I think in Ireland the goverment own the mineral rights under your land so the landowner would not get anything.

JONJO THE MISER

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

In the U.S.A i think the drilling companies have to buy the mineral rights to your land, tens of thousands of landowners are getting monthly checks north of $100,000 per month.
I think in Ireland the goverment own the mineral rights under your land so the landowner would not get anything.

Ye, we don't have any mineral rights, that is clearly stated on the land registry document.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17726538
A controversial gas extraction method which triggered two earth tremors near Blackpool last year should continue under strict conditions, a government-appointed panel of experts says.
The process - fracking - involves pumping water and chemicals into shale rock at high pressure to extract gas.
Shale gas is seen as a way of ensuring relatively cheap energy supplies.
But critics have warned of possible side effects - including the contamination of ground water

The Fracers are back!

old_aussie

Any sign of the US led invasion yet?

I wonder what reason the US will use to invade Ireland to get your gas.

meenaghman

old_aussie wrote: »

Any sign of the US led invasion yet?

I wonder what reason the US will use to invade Ireland to get your gas.

Tamboran have stated that they need a "strategic partner" to exploit the gas field - Whether that be Shell or Haliburton no one knows. Interestingly they will have to drill outside their initial target area - that's obvious from the figures they're giving - so this ain't just N Leitrim/W Fermanagh - They talk of 100-200 K acres of Bundoran shale, and using their estimate of recoverable gas for the field then 170K acres is approx whats needed. Their initial target area was approx 70K acres, so we're already looking @ 2-3 times that area. Indeed in the initial target area they were looking at nearly 3000 wells - 24 wells/pad, with 3 horizontal legs (Multilaterals - another first) - 72 Fracks per pad. So its no wonder that they admitted that its now 9000 wells that are required to exploit the shale.

To put that in perspective.. 10 million litres of water (2 million gals) are required per frack [ low estimate]. So we're looking at 270 Billion Litres of water minimum requirements - or a lake 4 1/2 times the size of Upper Loch McNean which sits in the middle of this gas field. [If we calculate average depth of water in L McNean @ 6Metres].

The other problem is frack flowback - given 25%-50% comes back - then we're not looking @ 5 gallon drums sitting on these sites to capture the flowback - we're looking at large enough containers to hold more than the volume of water in Loch Mc Nean. ... but don't worry there's nice pictures for the politicians of a little christmas tree arrangement with a small plastic container in Tamboran's ''footprint'' slides.

So We in Fermanagh and Leitrim feel duty bound to share this bountiful waster water with the rest of Ireland. We're told its harmless, and can be spread on the roads to de-ice them. I figure we've enough here so the rest of the district/county councils are welcome to have it spread on the roads and pavements in the winter. Think about it - with frost free roads, your car insurance will go down. City dwellers can go from their gas heated homes, along frost free roads to buy imported food and water from gas powered shops - all thanks to Leitrim and Fermanagh gas.

meenaghman

Right now everyone's calmed down about the 55 bn .. perhaps we could spot the mistake...
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0201/1224311046794.html

2.2 Trillion cubic feet / 1000 = 2.2 Billion cubic feet.
multiplied by 2.50 dollars = 5.5 billion dollars of Gas... Hardly worth getting out of bed for :-)

Banditoo

smash wrote: »

Better than nothing. Plus, they'll create jobs.

You'd make a great business man.

meenaghman

Remember its over 30 years.. I think the Agri sector is worth over 8 Bn Euros (not dollars) / year, and this would threaten it.

meenaghman

meenaghman wrote: »

Right now everyone's calmed down about the 55 bn .. perhaps we could spot the mistake...
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0201/1224311046794.html

2.2 Trillion cubic feet / 1000 = 2.2 Billion cubic feet.
multiplied by 2.50 dollars = 5.5 billion dollars of Gas... Hardly worth getting out of bed for :-)

That price of $2.50 is as a result of a temporary glut in gas supplies, it won't stay that low for long!

deCourcey chick

What I find extremely worrying is that Tamboran has given one group of locals in Manorhamilton a 20K investment towards the building of a hotel; clearly NOT part of Tamboran’s core product. Naturally this has been seen “more than somewhat” to resemble a bribe causing serious local stress and division. Divide and conquer has been used many times by business to get rich. In a small place like North Leitrim this could well destroy local communities. Beware North Leitrim!

http://www.leitrimobserver.ie/news/local/tamboran-invest-20k-in-manor-enterprise-forum-1-3794370

Mycroft H

meenaghman wrote: »

To put that in perspective.. 10 million litres of water (2 million gals) are required per frack [ low estimate]. So we're looking at 270 Billion Litres of water minimum requirements - or a lake 4 1/2 times the size of Upper Loch McNean which sits in the middle of this gas field. [If we calculate average depth of water in L McNean @ 6Metres].

The other problem is frack flowback - given 25%-50% comes back - then we're not looking @ 5 gallon drums sitting on these sites to capture the flowback - we're looking at large enough containers to hold more than the volume of water in Loch Mc Nean. ... but don't worry there's nice pictures for the politicians of a little christmas tree arrangement with a small plastic container in Tamboran's ''footprint'' slides.

I don't think you understand how this "fracking" operation works. You only need enough fluid to open up a fracture within the rocks. This depends on the geology of the area - shale is ideal as fractures tend to run across horizontal bedding plains where the poppant (which is the stuff left behind from the hydraulic fracturing fluid, typically something like sintered bauxite or a ceramic material) supports this fracture open so the gas can flow out.

You really do not need to inject fracking fluids along the entire area of the gas field.

Mycroft H

meenaghman wrote: »

The other problem is frack flowback - given 25%-50% comes back - then we're not looking @ 5 gallon drums sitting on these sites to capture the flowback - we're looking at large enough containers to hold more than the volume of water in Loch Mc Nean. ... but don't worry there's nice pictures for the politicians of a little christmas tree arrangement with a small plastic container in Tamboran's ''footprint'' slides.

So We in Fermanagh and Leitrim feel duty bound to share this bountiful waster water with the rest of Ireland.

Where do you think water used in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry goes? It’s treated on on-site water treatment plants which remove any harmful elements that would reduce the quality. Water treatment is heavily regulated by the EPA. You would be a fool to think that the Tamboran are going to be exempt from any of this.

Surprise, surprise that the main water polluters in Ireland, polluting our precious groundwater supplies is the agricultural industry.


Before Tamboran pumps any water back into the groundwater supply it is obliged by law to apply for a Waste Water Discharge Application from the EPA. These are stringently controlled and are subject to random inspections for water quality.

deCourcey chick

While water regulation and treatment protocols are of course terribly important these may not be sufficient to prevent accidental spills due to either Murphy’s law or indeed bad practice. Cowboy workmanship is not unheard of in Ireland. Nor has enforcement of regulation.

Mycroft H

deCourcey chick wrote: »

While water regulation and treatment protocols are of course terribly important these may not be sufficient to prevent accidental spills due to either Murphy’s law or indeed bad practice. Cowboy workmanship is not unheard of in Ireland. Nor has enforcement of regulation.

Evdence has shown that contaimated water spillage is a far more likely to happen in an agricultural environment in Ireland. Heavy industries have a decent record here. Enforcement of water qualiy is one thing we are actually good at.

deCourcey chick

BX19, I assume you are not suggesting that because other spills also occur (such as in agri) we should not worry about a fracking-related spill? You may be right about spillage being more likely in agri than in fracking, however the seriousnous of a potential spill must also be a factor when assessing risk. Perhaps a single avarage-sized fracking spill could be more environmentally damaging than 10,000 avarage-sized agri spills? I would be very interested if you had some literature about the realative risks.

deCourcey chick

Preliminary environmental assessment raport performed by univ of Aberdeen for the EPA is available http://www.epa.ie/downloads/pubs/research/sss/UniAberdeen_FrackingReport.pdf

pcworldisajoke

deCourcey chick wrote: »

Preliminary environmental assessment raport performed by univ of Aberdeen for the EPA is available http://www.epa.ie/downloads/pubs/research/sss/UniAberdeen_FrackingReport.pdf

University of Aberdeen has been in the pay of big oil for over 30 years. Its not a conspiracy, its a pretty well documented fact. I won't spew a load of links at you, just the one from the university itself. They are heavily funded by Shell and Halliburton.
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mediareleases/release.php?id=410

The Irish times made the point in February (ctrl+f aberdeen)
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0206/1224311334943.html

meanwhile back at the ranch-

Another major lawsuit on Fracking in the US-

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=132480

Fracking is simply unsafe- anyone who says otherwise has a vested interest. The evidence is everywhere. Bans from across the world, and Pat Rabbite has the nerve/corrupted gall to say there's a study being done for the EPA at the University of Aberdeen, and alot of weight for decisions will come from that 'study'?

Every day you lose more faith in our government.

pcworldisajoke

Just reading back through alot of the posts on this, and it always comes back to whether it's safe/unsafe, or 'has there been academic research etc. done to say its harmful/not harmful'?. This always makes me laugh, (otherwise i'd cry).

it's fairly intuitive when you think about it, contaminated water is ALWAYS going to escape;

1. Pumping millions of litres of water to BREAK UP shale formations at high pressure = never knowing where alot of the water will go when it does the required BREAKING up of the shale formations;

2. So massive cracks and fissures mean water has places to go, and it WILL go where it can. There's no way to get all or even MOST of the water back up the pipe. At the end of that pipe, the pressure comes out and there's never going to be equivalent pressure to push it back up, because the space has been enlarged. So some water comes back up the outsides (as well as inside) of the pipehigher up the strata, and goes down the broken fissures/newly created spaces into god knows how many watertables etc.

It's really a no brainer. And we're seeing the results of Fracking in the MASSIVE amounts of lawsuits all over the US.

The disinformation brigade are going to be out in full force when the prices start to rise again, we have to be ready to fight.

It's not safe. Simple as that. If our government let this happen, that'll be two treasonous governments in a row the Irish electorate have put in power. We're not the best judges of character are we?.

gara

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'm not normally one to jump to the defence of large corporations, they did actually find the gas, not the government, so I don't think it's such a bad deal

If a thief enters your home in the middle of the night and finds 500 euro, does it suddenly become theirs? Irish gas should equal mainly Irish profits!

--Kaiser--

gara wrote: »

If a thief enters your home in the middle of the night and finds 500 euro, does it suddenly become theirs? Irish gas should equal mainly Irish profits!

Moronic analogy.
They're not thieves, they are legally searching for resources (there's nothing stopping the Irish governemnt doing this either...except that it's incredibly expensive). Furthermore, extracting the gas requires time, effort and yes, even more money.

Better to let someone else find it and then tax them on the profits

nedzer2011

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

University of Aberdeen has been in the pay of big oil for over 30 years. Its not a conspiracy, its a pretty well documented fact. I won't spew a load of links at you, just the one from the university itself. They are heavily funded by Shell and Halliburton.
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mediareleases/release.php?id=410

The Irish times made the point in February (ctrl+f aberdeen)
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0206/1224311334943.html

meanwhile back at the ranch-

Another major lawsuit on Fracking in the US-

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=132480

Fracking is simply unsafe- anyone who says otherwise has a vested interest. The evidence is everywhere. Bans from across the world, and Pat Rabbite has the nerve/corrupted gall to say there's a study being done for the EPA at the University of Aberdeen, and alot of weight for decisions will come from that 'study'?

Every day you lose more faith in our government.

A valid point here - but you have to remember that Universities like Aberdeen, while they may have links with oil companies, do in turn have, by far, the greatest (and possibly the only valid) expertise/experience in exploration/hydraulic fracturing.

This is quite likely the reason they were chosen to perform the study. I'm not trying to say that the financial dependence on oil companies is not an issue... but just because you appoint a seemingly unbiased university to undertake a study doesn't necessarily mean that you will get the best results.

meenaghman

BX 19 wrote: »

I don't think you understand how this "fracking" operation works. You only need enough fluid to open up a fracture within the rocks. This depends on the geology of the area - shale is ideal as fractures tend to run across horizontal bedding plains where the poppant (which is the stuff left behind from the hydraulic fracturing fluid, typically something like sintered bauxite or a ceramic material) supports this fracture open so the gas can flow out.

You really do not need to inject fracking fluids along the entire area of the gas field.

Prepared to admit my initial sums were off. But not quite sure of your argument. Tamboran have stated they're going to drill between 3000 and 9000 wells.

10 million litres * 3000 = 30 billion litres.
10 million litres * 9000 = 90 billion litres.

Volume of water in Upper Lough McNean =~ 60billion Litres. So effectively they require fracking fluid in the order of between .5 and 1.5 times the amount of water in Upper Lough McNean. Ie 'the enough fluid to open up a fracture within the rocks' is cumulatively a large amount.

Between 1/4 and 1/2 of this fluid remains downhole so effectively removing that water from the water cycle.
The remainder comes back up to the surface. Tamboran are claiming that they can use a process developed by Ecosphere. I'm not sure, due to the large amounts of minerals in the water in Leitrim and Fermanagh. At any rate the water will have to be treated before they send it down hole and then the flowback water needs to be either retreated (No idea of how many times it can be reused) or stored.

Its interesting to note that the only Shale Gas well so far drilled and fracked in the UK still has stored water contained on site.. so if this stuff is that easy to get rid of, I'm a bit confused why its still sitting there and Tamboran state that the UK is more switched on to oil and gas industry. We're unsure of the radioactivity of these shales.. Shales by their nature will have higher radioactivity - and we know that radon gas is an issue in the locality. In general there are other chemicals such as Benzene found in the vicinity of hydro carbons which will wash back up with the flowback water - Benzene's toxicity requires less than 5 parts per billion to be considered safe. ie 5Litres/Billion Litres or 5000ml/billion Litres = 5ml / million litres or a teaspoon / million litres !!!.


True Agricultural run off causes pollution - but building 7 acre concrete pads with lorrys will also cause major run-off problems (highlighted in the recent Pacific report). Even silt blocking up streams (there'll be a lot of sand involved in this operations) will severely disrupt the local eco-balance.

I see you trust the EPA completely. However the EPA is immune from prosecution and has made it clear it want's to facilitate business.
Finally its worth noting that neither governments North or South have written an SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) before issuing these licences as required to under EU law, which shows a complete disregard for the people affected, and a lack of understanding of high volume slick water hydraulic fracturing.

AnonoBoy

As far as I understand from my source inside the EPA fracking in Ireland is subject to much stricter regulations than fracking in the US.

shampon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Inb4 shell2sea bullshít or that propoganda tripe "my oil and gas" video

If anything the money from the gas and oil should go to the ancestors of prehistoric animals. Shell to Sea rarely if ever admit this.

pcworldisajoke

AnonoBoy wrote: »

As far as I understand from my source inside the EPA fracking in Ireland is subject to much stricter regulations than fracking in the US.

How do you regulate that amount of fluid?

how do you regulate above ground spills?

How do you regulate what happens 100-600 metres below the ground? Will we put mini-leprechauns down there in hard hats crawling outside pipes, and at the end of pipes, looking to see where the chemicals go? And then when the leprechauns find where the chemical fluid escaped, will we send them a load of kitchen roll down the pipe for cleanup????

Leprechauns have been intentionally used here, to indicate you're living in a fantasy world.

gara

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Moronic analogy.
They're not thieves, they are legally searching for resources (there's nothing stopping the Irish governemnt doing this either...except that it's incredibly expensive). Furthermore, extracting the gas requires time, effort and yes, even more money

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

Mycroft H

gara wrote: »

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

There is more to it then just that.

CruelCoin

Rabidlamb wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0201/1224311046794.html?via=mr

The good.



The seemingly good but on second read, not so much.



Summary:
Private firm find €55 billion woth of gas in Leitrim.
Irish government only gets 10%, if we're lucky.

And?

Were the government to do it themselves they'd fail miserably.

For examples you need only look at every single nationalised oil/gas company to see the levels of corruption/mismanagement that ensues.

--Kaiser--

gara wrote: »

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

Face, meet palm

gara

BX 19 wrote: »

There is more to it then just that.

There certainly is but the extraction of oil and gas by large MNC's has played a pivotal role in creating widescale problems. The onus should be on the Irish government to put this enterprise to tender and market it properly, as opposed to their typical laissez faire attitude that's bankrupted us.

How can we ever achieve optimum economic growth if we continue to outsource our most profitable ventures?

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Face, meet palm

Sterling response

pcworldisajoke

CruelCoin wrote: »

And?

Were the government to do it themselves they'd fail miserably.

For examples you need only look at every single nationalised oil/gas company to see the levels of corruption/mismanagement that ensues.

Chavez aint doing too bad, despite the recent explosion. ( probably caused by outside agents sending him a message)

And while there may be corruption elsewhere- privatised oil companies are THE most corrupt institutions on the planet. They destroy everything in their wake and clean nothing up after themselves (ecuador legal fight recently for example involving Chevron). They're currently trying to buy an election in the US through A.L.E..C. and funding Romney through the Koch brothers (openly).

So please, let's not let anyone be under any illusions that corruption only comes from state managed companies!!!!!

pcworldisajoke

gara wrote: »

There certainly is but the extraction of oil and gas by large MNC's has played a pivotal role in creating widescale problems. The onus should be on the Irish government to put this enterprise to tender and market it properly, as opposed to their typical laissez faire attitude that's bankrupted us.

How can we ever achieve optimum economic growth if we continue to outsource our most profitable ventures?



Sterling response

agree with all of this. Except I don't think it's laissez faire attitudes that will ruin us- if this goes ahead (just like the other oil licenses that are raping us at present) it will be entirely due to corruption in our government, and a large wedge going into a numbered account somewhere, or a nice consulting position guaranteed after being voted from office. I have NO faith in our politicians-they're not acting in our interests so they must be getting something for themselves.

The wishy-washiness of Pat Rabbite ( on the EPA study/ on the recent letter from the EU etc.) has only exacerbated my feelings on this.

AnonoBoy

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

How do you regulate that amount of fluid?

how do you regulate above ground spills?

How do you regulate what happens 100-600 metres below the ground? Will we put mini-leprechauns down there in hard hats crawling outside pipes, and at the end of pipes, looking to see where the chemicals go? And then when the leprechauns find where the chemical fluid escaped, will we send them a load of kitchen roll down the pipe for cleanup????

Leprechauns have been intentionally used here, to indicate you're living in a fantasy world.

How do I do it? I'm not going to do anything buddy. Just reporting what I was told by a member of the EPA. I'm sure some regulation is better than none but then again I'm sure you have loads of scientific qualifications and aren't just basing all your knowledge on stuff you read online.

But again I'm not the one stating anything about this, only telling you what the he scientifically-qualified PhD-holding member of the EPA told me.

Perhaps you should address your questions to them as opposed to ranting in an extremely irritating and condescending manner on boards to people who couldn't give a flying f*ck what you think anyway?

pcworldisajoke

AnonoBoy wrote: »

How do I do it? I'm not going to do anything buddy. Just reporting what I was told by a member of the EPA. I'm sure some regulation is better than none but then again I'm sure you have loads of scientific qualifications and aren't just basing all your knowledge on stuff you read online.

But again I'm not the one stating anything about this, only telling you what the he scientifically-qualified PhD-holding member of the EPA told me.

Perhaps you should address your questions to them as opposed to ranting in an extremely irritating and condescending manner on boards?

I apologise if i seemed condescending, i was joking a bit.

But seriously- nothing is ever regulated right in this country- it's one of the most bent countries on the planet.

My point in a nutshell is- you can't regulate the un-regulateable (if that's a word). Throw in corruption and the lack of any decent regulatory track-record in this contry, and it's all doomed to fail, and we'll pay for the consequences, long after shareholder value was maximised. Sounds like something in the past 6 years doesn't it?

You cannot regulate what you can't control.

(ps- i see you edited your post to include the word *f*ck) -Bravo..

AnonoBoy

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

You cannot regulate what you can't control.

You can regulate what you can control though. So I presume they'll regulate those bits that are controllable.

I don't really know enough about it to answer your questions. Again, I'm just saying what I was told by a member of the EPA. Have you thought of emailing some state body like that instead of asking people on the internet?

(ps- i see you edited your post to include the word *f*ck) -Bravo..

I edited it to include other words too. Read them all together. It's called a sentence. It carries meaning.

Hey! You learned a new thing!