Friday, November 4, 2011

Fracking

I’ve written about this before. (And no, it’s not a sex tale).
It’s about extracting natural gas from deep shale rock formations. Last Sunday there was a long article in the Daily Mail’s colour supplement.
From the article:
Here are two visions of the future.
The first one lies at the end of a muddy track in the village of Banks, a 20-minute drive from Preston, Lancashire. It consists of a derrick about 60ft high, a few temporary buildings, a generator and some specialist machinery in a fenced square compound.
Powering the derrick and the drill at its centre is an eerily quiet electric motor. Today, on the first Friday of October, the bit it turns at the end of the drill pipe lies about a mile beneath our feet, boring steadily downwards at a rate of up to 500ft a day, depending on the hardness of the strata. It’s heading for a thick deposit of carboniferous shale, a rock made from the compressed mud which lay on a prehistoric seabed more than 300 million years ago, its upper edge some 7,500ft below the dark green fields of ripening cauliflower that surround the compound.
Locked within the fissures inside that rock is an immense quantity of natural gas – virtually pure, unadulterated methane, of a quality so high it could be pumped direct to domestic and industrial users, and to electricity generating stations……………………….
And 
The second vision is taking shape at the end of the Thames Estuary, where the foundations are being laid for the 217 turbines of the London Array, the world’s biggest offshore wind farm.
Covering 90 square miles, this too will have the capacity to generate 1GW (one billion watts). The turbines’ construction has been priced at £2 billion, four times as much as the Kentish gas plant, although this does not include the cost – perhaps a further £500 million – of connecting them to the National Grid, via 300 miles of undersea high-voltage cables.
Without the labyrinthine system of ‘green’ taxes and Government subsidies known as the Renewables Obligation, which is already adding an estimated £100 to the cost of every British household’s electricity bill, and an average 20 per cent to the charges paid by businesses, the wind farm could never be built, because it would be hopelessly uneconomic…………….
Which one do you think makes sense?
How it’s done animation Click on the Link  to see the active Animation
And the scenario in the sidebar

 If only

4 comments:

  1. It's beyond me why we put up with letting these ghastly wind turbines dominate when we have such riches virtually on tap. Somebody, (Huhne the hoon and pals) obviously have shares of some kind.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd like to be pro-fracking v wind turbines but they still haven't sorted out the waste water issue yet.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Or the carbon emissions from turbine base concrete, James.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This might be of interest:

    Continuing my 'churnalism' research I decided to check the activist group 'Frack Off' for churn:

    http://i-squared.blogspot.com/2011/11/churnalism-churning-frack-off.html

    ReplyDelete