Fracking in the Karoo - why it's bad

JStrike said:
Maybe. I agree with conservation, in part, except where the economic benefit is too big to ignore. In that case, people come first
Click to expand...

The problem is that the only people who will see economic benefit are the oil giants and the ANC. The karoo farmers who will have to deal with poisoned groundwater for generations, will see nothing but hardship.
 
If the amount of money that is brought in is great enough, then buying our produce from elsewhere is an easy option.
Click to expand...

Buy produce - as in buy clean healthy water to come out the taps and to water the land ?
 
JStrike said:
Maybe. I agree with conservation, in part, except where the economic benefit is too big to ignore. In that case, people come first
Click to expand...

I get the feeling that you are just trolling for a laugh? Please tell me I am right?
 
Nod said:
Only, not the people that actually lives there ...
Click to expand...

Yep. They need to adjust to the new reality. If it means millions of people get economic benefit, those few people that live there need to get into a new business or move their business elsewhere
 
The_Assimilator said:
The problem is that the only people who will see economic benefit are the oil giants and the ANC. The karoo farmers who will have to deal with poisoned groundwater for generations, will see nothing but hardship.
Click to expand...

No, what you are doing is making assumptions, and then basing your argument on those assumptions
 
shogun said:
I get the feeling that you are just trolling for a laugh? Please tell me I am right?
Click to expand...

No, not at all. The positives and negatives need to be explored and weighed against each other.
The government can simply not throw something as potentially massive as huge gas reserves away because of potential damage to the environment. It needs to be analysed
 
Naks said:
And when you are paying R200/kg for lamb? Will you be singing the same tune? :whistle:
Click to expand...

I have no idea what lamb costs. It might be that already. :)

But seriously, we now import a vast amount of chicken into SA from Brazil. It is actually lowering prices, not increasing them
 
Nicodeamus said:
Since when is wind energy not dependable on renewable energy? It has a turbine, that thing requires lubrication, that uses oil.

The exact same can be said about solar panels, it is made out of Metals, they are not infinite.

My guess is that the people who promote these products have never really used them or have no idea what they are talking about. Even biological systems have a finite lifespan. Every metal or element in one way or another has a durability, even diamonds deteriorate.

The most economical and environmental friendly method of power-generation currently is Nuclear power, but the greenies will k@k their pants full if we mention that. They are trying to have their bread buttered on both ends.
Click to expand...

You asked what sustainability means. It's the energy source that is sustainable, not the technology used to harness it. You don't go get a new car engine every week, your engine lasts - engines themselves can be sustained - it's the petrol that is unsustainable. If you could convert your engine to give out petrol as a 'waste' product of burning petrol it would sustainable. If you could convert your engine to use air and give out air as a by product it would be sustainable - the engine, or solar panel or wind turbine itself does not define if the system is sustainable or not. A badly made, inefficient wind turbine or solar panel will be unsustainable just like a badly made, inefficient engine would use more petrol - but the energy source - petrol, wind or sunshine is the important factor here.

The amount of oil we have would last for thousands of years if it was only used to lubricate windmills!

The technology to harness these sources of energy are improving, becoming more efficient, more sustainable.
We will never run out of wind or sun. If the amount of money and energy had gone into these technologies as has gone into petroleum based technologies they would be totally sustainable by now. You can see even in petroleum engines how much more efficient they have become over the years.

And yes, eventually the sun will explode or implode or whatever it does, but in practical terms, the amount of sunshine available to us is unlimited.

And it is the sun that is the source of solar energy, not the solar panel. The solar panel will last many many years if maintained so you don't need to renew solar panels every week, liker you have to fill up your car with petroleum every week.
 
JStrike said:
If we can generate billions of revenue, then polluting water sounds like a pretty small compromise
Click to expand...

Who is 'we' exactly? I doubt any of us will see 'billions of revenue' but many of us will have to deal with a polluted environment and food scarcity...
 
joelus said:
Who is 'we' exactly? I doubt any of us will see 'billions of revenue' but many of us will have to deal with a polluted environment and food scarcity...
Click to expand...

We would benefit in Tax revenue much the same way the USA, Russia, etc benefit from gas revenue. Just the same way we benefit from Mining taxes. Just because you don't personally see money from it, doesn't mean you don't benefit massively from it
 
So we're going to potentially have a Karoo wasteland but there is money to be made out of this.

Fence it off and accept the worlds nuclear waste and we can all benefit from the tax revenue.

Make it available for filming Mad Max 5, 6 and 7 and any other scorched earth / apocalypse movie.

Discovery channel can document the destruction over time and we can all watch it in HD.

So many ways to make money here - for the benefit of all of us.

It's going to be a real bugger driving from Cape Town to JHB without a petrol station though - unless our vehicles will run on gas.
 
Oh, and it's unfortunate that the Square Kilometre Array project is in the same area as the proposed fracking.

One will have to go.
 
daveza said:
Oh, and it's unfortunate that the Square Kilometre Array project is in the same area as the proposed fracking.

One will have to go.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I notice the hippies are very quiet about how the SKA will scar the surface landscape
 
Last edited:
JStrike said:
Yeah, I notice the hippies are very quiet about how the SKA will scar the surface landscape
Click to expand...

It won't! The SKA will be beautiful and quiet and will not pollute the available water...
That you can even compare the two in terms of damage to the environment is ridiculous :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X