Article: No fracking for now

[daveza]

I do agree that it should require some element of transparency though...

Which I'm sure you will agree has not exactly been forthcoming from the fracking companies.

The industry objected to any rule that would force drillers to reveal the chemicals used in fracking, during which chemical-laced water and sand are blasted deep below ground to release oil and natural gas trapped within rock formations.

Because ?

 

[DJ...]

Which I'm sure you will agree has not exactly been forthcoming from the fracking companies.

To date, yes. Because the studies are yet to be completed. What do you expect them to do until then?

Because ?

Because it is proprietary intellectual property that any company would protect, in much the same way that mining companies don't openly expand on the chemical recipes they use for the same reasons...

 

[Vegeta]

That happens every week in the mining sector. Some areas cannot be built on; some cannot have infrastructure pipes laid through them; some wells are closed off entirely for certain periods of time; some become radioactive safety hazards etc. This happens every day, in every country around the world. It's not a message to the rest of the world that we don't care about anything - it is simply a matter of how we deal with the risks. Without you knowing, this has been happening for years already and is the reality of doing business. Luckily in this case, it behoves the oil companies NOT to contaminate. So at least they're on our side with this one in ensuring it is safe, even if their motivation is different. Theirs is profit, ours is safety, luckily the goals align...

I know this happens everyday in the mining sector... and I wish they could be held accountable properly and rehabilitate the areas they fark up. Knowing that it happens today with mining why would we want, potentially more of it? As a logical person I want LESS of it

 

[daveza]

Because it is proprietary intellectual property that any company would protect, in much the same way that mining companies don't openly expand on the chemical recipes they use for the same reasons...

Yet the US are actively legislating that they do reveal the full details.

When we purchase medication we get the full details on the box - there are other ways to protect intellectual property.
Secrecy is not one of them.

 

[DJ...]

I know this happens everyday in the mining sector... and I wish they could be held accountable properly and rehabilitate the areas the fark up. Knowing that it happens today with mining why would we want, potentially more of it?

Because it's deep down where no inhabitants live? And we agree that for the sake of the economy, mining risks are acceptable? By the same logic, we should shut down all mines now. But you're also assuming that contamination is inevitable and there is nothing we can do about it. That is an opinion based on conjecture, not fact...

 

[DJ...]

Yet the US are actively legislating that they do reveal the full details.

When we purchase medication we get the full details on the box - there are other ways to protect intellectual property.
Secrecy is not one of them.

Medicine works very differently and is not simply about the chemical composition - it is about how they are synthesised, metabolic absorption, delivery mechanisms and they are protected legally. Chemical composition of fracking could potentially expose all of the mechanisms involved, but I'm simply guessing here. We're talking about mining here, where the chemical make-up of a pivotal aspect of your operation is incredibly sensitive information that your competitors could use to your detriment. We can discuss the ethics surrounding that if you like, but I don't think it has much pertinence to this discussion.

But again, we're moving on from a discussion around the safeguards and on to one of assuming it is going to happen and behind the scenes big oil is secretly trying to screw over everyone. I don't buy into that hooey so it's going to be tough to continue this discussion if we go down that path...

 

[daveza]

We're talking about mining here, where the chemical make-up of a pivotal aspect of your operation is incredibly sensitive information that your competitors could use to your detriment.

Yet the US govt appear to have decided the need for disclosure trumps one's intellectual claims -

“President Barack Obama pledged in the State of the Union address last week that the government would develop a road map for responsible natural gas production and roll out new rules to ensure drillers protect the environment.

Companies would be required to disclose the “complete chemical makeup of all materials used” in fracking fluids under the Interior Department’s draft rules

Does this not imply the secrecy around fracking chemicals has been looked at and found wanting ?

 

[McSack]

Well we are in agreement then. I disagree that the economic impact is unknown. It is from a dollar and cents perspective, but from an economic impact we know it is positive. Having studied economics I can assure you that is how private investment in a country works. But we are in complete agreement regarding analysing actual risks to the Karoo and making an informed decision. Your mistrust of big business irks me a little though. What exactly are you worried they're going to do?

I'm more worried about what they are not going to do. Considering the way in which contaminated water has been handled by mining companies in the past until they were "caught out" as it were, I don't see any reason to trust big business with anything other than making money. I agree with you, if it is in their best interests from a fiscal standpoint they'll make a plan, but beyond the bottom line business is an entity with shareholders who demand a return

I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion without being privy to the behind-closed-doors meeting that have been taking place over the last few years. You're simply assuming government are going to cock it up. This is not a government project. This is a private project that, just like mining once again, requires government approval. You simply cannot claim it has been a cock-up without having sat in on all of the meetings and analysed the evidence. I do agree that it should require some element of transparency though...

It's called track record. Accountability does not appear to be a part of the picture when decisions are made. More like political expediency and self-enrichment are the order of the day. Now I may be wrong ... (god wouldn't it be wonderful to be pleasantly surprised by government actually doing something properly with the interests of the populace coming first) ... but based on decisions and inaction currently doing the rounds, that's just seems highly doubtful

I was reading a report from the CSIR recently regarding AMD water that has polluted surface water around the country and one of the points that kept coming up was security of water supply - how it has become a key strategic issue affecting all future continued and sustained economic growth and service delivery. As a water-stress country, I think we really should be looking very closely at anything that might affect our supply

 

[McSack]

Because it's deep down where no inhabitants live? And we agree that for the sake of the economy, mining risks are acceptable? By the same logic, we should shut down all mines now. But you're also assuming that contamination is inevitable and there is nothing we can do about it. That is an opinion based on conjecture, not fact...

Thing is, it isn't deep down where no inhabitants live. It's seeping out all over the place.
Randfontein and Wonderfontein spruits are polluted beyond use. There are severe pollution problems in the Loskop Dam , Olifants river catchment area and waterberg coalfield areas. Krugersdorp nature reserve is picking up problems and there were reports recently of AMD affecting the whole Cradle area

Unfortunately a solution proposed and accepted back in 2009 was dumped recently by mining companies in spite of foreign investment of 70million rhondt through the DWAF

 

[DJ...]

I'm more worried about what they are not going to do. Considering the way in which contaminated water has been handled by mining companies in the past until they were "caught out" as it were, I don't see any reason to trust big business with anything other than making money. I agree with you, if it is in their best interests from a fiscal standpoint they'll make a plan, but beyond the bottom line business is an entity with shareholders who demand a return

It's called track record. Accountability does not appear to be a part of the picture when decisions are made. More like political expediency and self-enrichment are the order of the day. Now I may be wrong ... (god wouldn't it be wonderful to be pleasantly surprised by government actually doing something properly with the interests of the populace coming first) ... but based on decisions and inaction currently doing the rounds, that's just seems highly doubtful

Basically you're saying they've fscked it up already because I assume they've fscked it up. I'm the harshest opponent of this useless ANC dickwaddery, but I don't assume to know what's gone on behind the scenes. The is a private venture though, not a government venture...

I was reading a report from the CSIR recently regarding AMD water that has polluted surface water around the country and one of the points that kept coming up was security of water supply - how it has become a key strategic issue affecting all future continued and sustained economic growth and service delivery. As a water-stress country, I think we really should be looking very closely at anything that might affect our supply

Luckily the Karoo doesn't form a part of SA's major water supplies. In fact if memory serves correct, the tables they're discussing don't currently supply anything whatsoever...

Yet the US govt appear to have decided the need for disclosure trumps one's intellectual claims -

Does this not imply the secrecy around fracking chemicals has been looked at and found wanting ?

Good for them. It doesn't mean anything until accusations are backed up. It could mean that BP have representatives in Congress who have lobbied for this. It doesn't mean anything at all yet. Again, conjecture...

Thing is, it isn't deep down where no inhabitants live. It's seeping out all over the place.
Randfontein and Wonderfontein spruits are polluted beyond use. There are severe pollution problems in the Loskop Dam , Olifants river catchment area and waterberg coalfield areas. Krugersdorp nature reserve is picking up problems and there were reports recently of AMD affecting the whole Cradle area

Unfortunately a solution proposed and accepted back in 2009 was dumped recently by mining companies in spite of foreign investment of 70million rhondt through the DWAF

Luckily we're not talking about AMD here, nor a water supply that is any way a part of our national distribution. So we're a-okay on that front...

 

[Mila]

Isn't it easier not to start something than to shut it down.

Water deep down is what feeds our forests, crops and rivers, just because its where you can not see it doesn't mean it doesn't come out in somewhere. Yes mines are doing it. Look how hard we are fighting to make someone responsible for the acid water issue we have now.

How long does a fracking plant stay for? How long before the gas is finished?

 

[DJ...]

Isn't it easier not to start something than to shut it down.

I don't think you've understood my argument at all so far...

Water deep down is what feeds our forests, crops and rivers, just because its where you can not see it doesn't mean it doesn't come out in somewhere.

Luckily the Karoo doesn't feed anywhere else. We're talking about underwater wells there, not thousands of kilometres of water superhighways...

How long does a fracking plant stay for? How long before the gas is finished?

Surely that is an operational concern for the company and not one that should concern you much in the slightest?

 

[Mila]

One Litre of Used Motor Oil can Contaminate a Million Litres of Drinking Water.
Things like this makes me say think twice please.

As a company and a government that has $$ in their eyes and nothing else. How far reaching is this pollution? No do not worry it will be just a little bit. A little like one litre used motor oil?
We hear about water shortages but in the same breath they tell us fracking is a good idea.

 

[Mila]

I don't think you've understood my argument at all so far...



Luckily the Karoo doesn't feed anywhere else. We're talking about underwater wells there, not thousands of kilometres of water superhighways...



Surely that is an operational concern for the company and not one that should concern you much in the slightest?

Maybe I have not.

How do you know it doesn't feed to somewhere else?

Of course it does, you all preach it will bring money to the area. It will create jobs. And I'm all for jobs but for how long? 5 years - 10 years? Then everything goes back to ghost towns and the people move back into shacks in the city. I'm asking to know if it is sustainable. I'm asking to find out how much gas can there be and how long till it is finished?

Madupi power station a good example. They created jobs and when it was time for the people to go they turned violent.

 

[DJ...]

One Litre of Used Motor Oil can Contaminate a Million Litres of Drinking Water.
Things like this makes me say think twice please.

As a company and a government that has $$ in their eyes and nothing else. How far reaching is this pollution? No do not worry it will be just a little bit. A little like one litre used motor oil?
We hear about water shortages but in the same breath they tell us fracking is a good idea.

Emotional arguments don't sit well with me. We're not talking about used motor oil and you're simply skipping over all possible safety measures and assuming the water will be contaminated, and that it is a vital ecosystem and social conduit. If you want to have a discussion about this, then try to put together some well reasoned arguments as to why it should be outright banned instead of using ridiculous motor oil analogies that have absolutely zero bearing on the argument. Banana skins also pollute water. Yay, ban fruit...

 

[DJ...]

Maybe I have not.

You certainly haven't. Please read through my posts in this thread...

How do you know it doesn't feed to somewhere else?

Because the Karoo doesn't feed any water systems that we use. This is a known fact considering they would have the lowest possible yield. AMD seepage upwards cannot be used as an argument here - you're going to try to argue apples and motorbikes...

Of course it does, you all preach it will bring money to the area. It will create jobs. And I'm all for jobs but for how long? 5 years - 10 years? Then everything goes back to ghost towns and the people move back into shacks in the city. I'm asking to know if it is sustainable. I'm asking to find out how much gas can there be and how long till it is finished?

This is some of the worst reasoning I think I've heard so far in this thread. So if the project is only going to last 5 to 10 years, then we shouldn't bother? Please Mila, think your arguments through properly before posting. Clearly you either have an incredibly loose grasp of economics and business, or you're simply overlooking the benefits in favour of another emotional argument. This post of yours makes absolutely no sense...

Madupi power station a good example. They created jobs and when it was time for the people to go they turned violent.

Oh now I see. In case workers strike, we should never accept investment in our country. Your true colours are showing now, Mila. Back to the AWB drawing board with you...

 

[daveza]

Luckily the Karoo doesn't feed anywhere else. We're talking about underwater wells there, not thousands of kilometres of water superhighways...

But isn't that the point ?

There is a small and limited amount of precious clean fresh water in the Karoo.

IF there is contamination the Karoo, or parts of it, becomes a wasteland.

I have serious difficulty accepting that a company wants to come to our country to pump oodles of ****e into our earth and then tell us we are not permitted to know what they are pumping.

Can you imagine us going to the US and getting away with the same ?

 

[Mila]

Emotional arguments don't sit well with me. We're not talking about used motor oil and you're simply skipping over all possible safety measures and assuming the water will be contaminated, and that it is a vital ecosystem and social conduit. If you want to have a discussion about this, then try to put together some well reasoned arguments as to why it should be outright banned instead of using ridiculous motor oil analogies that have absolutely zero bearing on the argument. Banana skins also pollute water. Yay, ban fruit...

Oh and its not valid why?
Banana skins can not kill me.
And why can I not raise my concerns. You tell me oh its just a little polution. I'm asking how little?

 

[DJ...]

But isn't that the point ?

There is a small and limited amount of precious clean fresh water in the Karoo.

IF there is contamination the Karoo, or parts of it, becomes a wasteland.

Install a water pipe, like we have in many, many parts of the country. But we did this already, didn't we? I'm not a water distribution expert so I'm not going to proffer up solutions on a whim. I'll leave that to the experts who have been doing the same thing for the mines for decades already...

Oh and its not valid why?

Um, because we're not discussing motor oil pollution here. How is this not obvious to you? You can't simply claim that because other stuff pollutes, this definitely will and therefore must be banned. I just read over my previous post and it was incredibly clear. Not sure which part is a sticking point for you...

Banana skins can not kill me

Nor will the Karoo fracking if it does pollute the water wells there. It doesn't feed your drinking water. Oh, and bananas are radioactive - they can kill you. They also decompose into toxic chemicals which is why we have water treatment plants. Perhaps a solution is for Shell to build a water treatment plant there? Once again, I'll leave the solutions to the experts though...

And why can I not raise my concerns. You tell me oh its just a little polution. I'm asking how little?

Of course you can raise your concerns. Unfortunately all you've offered are emotional arguments, assumptions and conjecture. Very little of substance can be had with such an argument...

 

[daveza]

Install a water pipe, like we have in many, many parts of the country.

This is the area which Shell wants to explore for fracking - ( the yellow bit )

That is a vast and sparsely populated area where most of the inhabitants and livestock rely solely on rain and borehole water.

As it is we have insufficient sustainable fresh water in the country - without having to divert some to this huge area.

Where the million and millions of litres required to frack this expanse of land is to come from I have yet to hear.

The damage to roads, the industrial villages that will be created can all be fixed or removed.

But fresh clean water is life - call it an emotional point if you must