Current Affairs EU In or Out

[orchard]

Agricultural use is equivalent to a few cows in the field. Livestock is believed to produce as much methane as oil and gas, so I'd say it's a fair comparison, especially if the field that is now fracked was previously used for livestock.

Fields don't get fracked Bruce. WTF is a few cows in a field??? What sort of ley ? Density of stock, inputs ??? You obviously don't take truth seriously enough to try to understand what's being stated. Probably better off re-opening the fracking thread if you'd like to continue.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You seem to be doing the same thing, arguing against well renowned institutions with un-referenced, un peer-reviewed commentary. Are experts bad here or is it only certain experts?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Fields don't get fracked Bruce. WTF is a few cows in a field??? What sort of ley ? Density of stock, inputs ??? You obviously don't take truth seriously enough to try to understand what's being stated. Probably better off re-opening the fracking thread if you'd like to continue.

http://www.refine.org.uk/ is the home of the study. Maybe read it.

"They found that estimated levels of methane escaping from the wells were low when compared to levels of the gas produced by any grazing animals on the land once returned to agricultural use."

 

[Joey66]

Point by point then mate:
1. Your opinion is all well and good but it's not nearly as powerful as science.
2. Yep, lots of places burned coal. Now we have a 6 billion people and a global majority who eat beef (methane from cattle is a bigger problem than carbon dioxide from chimneys and cars), add the CO2 from engines burning and the methane being released by the melting of the ice caps - something of a self serving prophecy - and you have a problem. These gases trap heat in the earths atmosphere.
3. The evidence is entirely there, you can read about it, but some simple back garden science over a decade would probably prove it anyhow.
4. The hole in the Ozone layer is on the mend because most countries banned the CFCs that reacted with the ozone. This is good news, but is not nearly enough to slow global warming significantly now.
5. The big super powers put two fingers to it all for several reasons. One is that they need to develop fast to keep up with and overtake one another - particularly big developing countries like the BRICs. They are in no rush to put down buring fossil fuels at the behest of the rest of us when they need this development.

Quite simply mate, CO2 and methane trap heat, and they don't disappear when they're emitted.

The experts in 1971 forecast an ice age explain that one then?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The experts in 1971 forecast an ice age explain that one then?

Just as an aside Joey, do you:

a) prefer to make your decisions having thought it through as thoroughly as possible (hopefully with some research and evidence to back your thoughts up)?

b) believe that even having done that you will be correct 100% of the time, and if you're not then you discard doing A ever again (in which case what on earth do you replace it with?)

 

[peteblue]

I'll just throw this in as it has more relevance to the thread than most recent posts.......

Those nice Brussels chaps taking all the credit...

 

[orchard]

http://www.refine.org.uk/ is the home of the study. Maybe read it.

"They found that estimated levels of methane escaping from the wells were low when compared to levels of the gas produced by any grazing animals on the land once returned to agricultural use."

I'll tell you what Bruce, you read it, and if in their analysis of carbon usage, they factor in the logistics and transportation of the millions of litres of fluids, degradation of the road network, and the carbon used to refine the toxic chemicals, then i'll believe that the writer may well be an expert of some sort and read it myself. If they don't, you won't have wasted my time reading guff written by someone who/is considered(s) an expert.
Please report back on that.

 

[ilikecheese]

The experts in 1971 forecast an ice age explain that one then?

Yes and the smartest folks on the planet once thought the Earth was flat.

 

[Joey66]

You seem to be doing the same thing, arguing against well renowned institutions with un-referenced, un peer-reviewed commentary. Are experts bad here or is it only certain experts?

Ask Michael Gove Bruce he ignores experts, even when Sweded abandoned free schools he introduced them in the UK?
The toffs rave about them untill infriltrating jahdist got on the boards in Birmingham?
I worked under an expert in Horticulture in a Nursery who could do the job inside out a complete plantsman l went for my city and guilds for four years with lecturers who were bookworms had to learn utter rubbish to pass out at the highest levels with distinction what did I take on to become a top nurseryman not what I did at college under certain professors no from the Plantsman who could do it with his ability in practice!
I was fortunate to learn off a master a dying breed in every industry we have nowadays!

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'll tell you what Bruce, you read it, and if in there analysis of carbon usage, they factor in the logistics and transportation of the millions of litres of fluids, degradation of the road network, and the carbon used to refine the toxic chemicals, then i'll believe that the writer may well be an expert of some sort and read it myself. If they don't, you won't have wasted my time reading guff written by someone who/is considered(s) an expert.
Please report back on that.

It's not looking at those things, it was designed to explore methane leakage from wells. They are a research centre looking into the implications of fracking in general, so it's quite possible that they have studied the wider logistical issue, but you'll have to search yourself. To be fair though, it does appear as though you've made your mind up already so I'm not sure what the point of you reading the site (or the reports I linked to earlier) would be.

This is who they are though. Ragtag bunch if ever there was.

"The consortium, led by Professor Richard Davies, Professor of geo-energy at Newcastle University, in conjunction with colleagues at Durham, Cambridge, Stanford, Strathclyde, Keele and Hull universities"

 

[Joey66]

Yes and the smartest folks on the planet once thought the Earth was flat.

Come on Cheesy be fair in 1971 they did acknoledge the world was round, I am retired but not that oldlol
Tried that Yarg cheese yet?

 

[Joey66]

It's not looking at those things, it was designed to explore methane leakage from wells. They are a research centre looking into the implications of fracking in general, so it's quite possible that they have studied the wider logistical issue, but you'll have to search yourself. To be fair though, it does appear as though you've made your mind up already so I'm not sure what the point of you reading the site (or the reports I linked to earlier) would be.

This is who they are though. Ragtag bunch if ever there was.

"The consortium, led by Professor Richard Davies, Professor of geo-energy at Newcastle University, in conjunction with colleagues at Durham, Cambridge, Stanford, Strathclyde, Keele and Hull universities"

Old school tie post hey Bruce read my other post

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Every house burnt coal not gas I am not having that plus industry plus power stations hence the fling pickets!
Experience is better than your googling!

So you lived through an era when most UK houses burnt fossil fuels, so what mate?

It's got precisely jack to do with global warming and the current global Co2 output, which is 6 million metric tonnes greater than it was in the 1950's. It's a simple fact, your 'experience' is therefore not worth a light.

 

[Joey66]

So you lived through an era when most UK houses burnt fossil fuels, so what mate?

It's got precisely jack to do with global warming and the current global Co2 output, which is 6 million metric tonnes greater than it was in the 1950's. It's a simple fact, your 'experience' is therefore not worth a light.

So you say there are plenty of professors who do not believe in Global warming, Corbyns brother is one!

 

[orchard]

I haven't made my mind up,except that the precautionary principle ought to be upheld, and i'm not going to accept what a salesman says at face-value just because he wears a lab coat.

It's not looking at those things, it was designed to explore methane leakage from wells. They are a research centre looking into the implications of fracking in general, so it's quite possible that they have studied the wider logistical issue, but you'll have to search yourself. To be fair though, it does appear as though you've made your mind up already so I'm not sure what the point of you reading the site (or the reports I linked to earlier) would be.

This is who they are though. Ragtag bunch if ever there was.

"The consortium, led by Professor Richard Davies, Professor of geo-energy at Newcastle University, in conjunction with colleagues at Durham, Cambridge, Stanford, Strathclyde, Keele and Hull universities"