Fracking banned in UK as government makes major U-turn

The recent boon in fracking has become one of the biggest economic and environmental advantages our country has gained since its founding. We should all be celebrating its inception, and supporting its continuance.

The UK ban on fracking shows just how insane the mind can become. It's like burning the lottery ticket that won you the lottery.

 

Don't you think we should start respecting that same concept of freedom and democracy in foreign countries, and stop all our regime changes when their elected leaders are not doing our bidding?

For that matter shouldn't we respect that freedom here in the US and stop the politically correct BS. Our government was formed so the States and the people would have more freedom, yet we're being forced to accept laws that go against our sensibilities and conscience - and they are the same laws we're trying to impose on other nations.

On Ode To Our Strategic Ambiguity Foreign Policy

.​

I'm singing now a wondrous song
To tell the world that right is wrong
and what you thought was naught before
was just a lie that you had bought -
from us - Jeannette

​

 

yes, but there may be exceptions

 

I guess you're invested in the fracking industry. Wouldn't it be smarter to make amends with nations that have oil and gas, instead of drilling holes in the earth's crust and pumping in sewage?

Anyway as I said, fracking might be a god send for us in that it releases pressure before it gets to the New Madrid fault. That fault is way bigger than the San Andreas and can literally split the continent in two.

 

Nikola Tesla's only purpose in life was to give the world free energy so there would be no wars. JP Morgan turned on him and destroyed him when he said he didn't want electric meters - either that or because he wouldn't marry his daughter.

Nikola Tesla could have been the richest man in the world, but not only were his patents stolen by Edison, Marconi and others, but he tore up his contract with Westinghouse when they told him the company was short on funds. He lived 20 years as a pauper, and isn't even mentioned in our history books - and yet everything we have today from our lights to remote control is because of Nikola Tesla.

I read of a school where all the electricity they use comes from their gym. There are other sources of energy, but they're not profitable to the corporations..

 

It may be an economical boom but money isn't everything. Environmentally is why the UK has currently suspended it. That is in connection with earthquakes though there are other negative effects for those close at hand of shale work. Methane is far more extreme in the harm it does regardless of the fact it only lasts for 20 years.

It is no answer if you want a future.

 

I think you're overplaying your hand, and overstating the risks; by a huge margin. Every new technology has some unknown effects; like with direct current vs. alternating current in the 1880s; with AC eventually winning out. But if we had gone with your type of negativism in the 1880s, we'd have no current at all, because each had some negative issues related to it.

 

I am glad that it appears you do not have a problem in doing what is necessary to make this planet liveable in to old age for the children of today.

I think your concerns about National Sovereignty are more to do with the current US (and other countries) psychology. Sometimes it is necessary to work together. This is one of those times. The only way I see the EU affecting you in any way is that I think we ought to give whatever is set up some power. Hence if the US was not acting as is needed, the EU would go against the US, hence forcefully hoping the US to comply - for the good of all. This would not happen now. Of course the same situation would be there for everyone else, not just the US.

 

You support fracking and earthquakes and all the other problems it brings. That is the difference.

Mind you we could say that it is to do with our refusal to listen to people explaining what our industrialisation was doing from the 1880's which has brought us to the situation we are in now so yes there is something in what you say.

The UK has seen sense. I hope for the people of the US they do to.

Ever heard of the middle way. So by the 1880's we were already aware the effect Industrialisation was having on the planet. In the 1970's an Australian Computer worked out we would be in the situation we are in today.



There was no more pretending it was not true. The difference in what they thought in Australia and what has come to pass is that they never imagined we would carry on and do our worse damage once we knew exactly how bad the situation was in the 80's. In those days they believed humans were intelligent.

and in 81 or 82 Exxon accurately predicts the situation we will be in now



and goes on to fund people to tell lies so that we continue not to deal with the situation.

Yes, we have been harming the planet since Industrialisation. The problem is we are running out of time very quick despite all the warning. Some people always wanted to put it off till tomorrow when someone else would need to deal with it. The buck stops with us.

 

Stupid, idiotic, without merit, no scientific validity, a prescription by environmentalists for thinning the herd. It is stunning that there any human beings who can count to 10 but still fall for this BS propaganda from those who have nothing but hatred of human existence. You know what else can't be ruled out? Life without humans, which this will bring about if followed to its logical conclusion.

I guess 95 million dead because of DDT ban is insufficient (http://21sci-tech.com/articles/summ02/DDT.html). Only the extermination of the entire human race is acceptable sustainability to the wackos. Good policy, enviro-wackos.

They won't admit it. They'll deny it. But the bodies keep adding up, and new mosquito-borne diseases keep spreading to America.

MFKN bastards.

I want my oil, from the dead fkn dinos, and don't give a fck who the fck says no.

Just think, please, for one moment--is it possible to state with a hundred percent certainty that a new born won't grow up to be the next Hitler? And based on that fear, wouldn't it be reasonable to outlaw newborns? Because that is the same reasoning being applied here to fracking. We can't say it for certain fracking won't cause catastrophic problems, so let's just ban it so it for sure can't.

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Anyone who believes in this environmental nonsense, deserve the hell of famine, riots, cannibalism, disease, and poverty it will create.

 

This is a good article on Fracking and the difference between the US and the UK. It does appear that it did reduce energy prices in the US but the article argues that was only because the US was not exporting and certainly in the UK it would not and indeed Fracking depends on high energy prices. Still trying to work out what is in it for the UK, who is paying who for what. It appears we give them tax breaks, have removed liability from them and leave it to those who have been harmed to deal with sorting that out or not - fracking leaves a trail of destruction in its path

https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-fracking-lower-energy-bills-myth.html

 

Once people figure out that they will be living in the stone age if fracking is banned in the U.S., I doubt it will happen...ever. Literally everything is powered or made as a product of fracking.

You name it, some portion of it is made from plastics derived from fracking.

 

Really? Well I feel sorry for you because it is one hell of a disruptive and inefficient way of doing things. I was wondering why the hell the UK even looked at it and it appears it is conflict of interest between members of the government and fracking investors.

https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2013/07/fracking-tories-osborne-howell-browne.html

I really find it difficult to believe that this is good for the US in any way and to have disposed of all but this gross way of obtaining energy which seems to be what you are saying, seems unbelievably stupid. Possibly you should do what I just did and check out who is making money from destroying your country.

 

You wouldn't know what the process of fracking is if it slapped you upside the head. The computer you are using to type your rantings uses plastics made from fracking. So does you TV. So does your car. So does the wiring in your house....good luck with no electricity. You would be hard pressed to find something not made with plastics.

 

Well you can still charge your cell phone with Tesla's invention, but that's about it.

 

The government should ban beans - they cause significant release of methane gas into the atmosphere.

 

just make a law that any fracking done that causes damage, the oil company has to pay for ALL the damage and not the tax payers getting stuck with the bill

 

Practically every major world power will simply ignore your world body and arrest any of its bureaucrats trying to enforce their edicts.

What then? Invade or back down.

 

So why has the US chosen to have as, according to people on this thread, its only source of energy, a method which experience shows causes massive damage to the earth so much so that at least for the election cycle the UK is pretending to ban it - why is it doing that and from what you say despite the reality that it is known to leave a trail of devastation in its path is your government not expecting it to be liable for this but the taxpayers instead?

Andrea Leadsom who I am assuming was the Minister who let it out that this so called ban was a scam claimed that with fracking we would be able to get another 50 years of gas for the UK - now never mind that we have just been told that the safety to the UK cannot be guaranteed if we indulge in fracking, never mind the fact that it is looking very likely that fracking is responsible for the massive increase in methane emissions, belonging as she does to a Government that has accepted that we are in a climate emergency, she clearly has not learned the first thing about that.

It is ridiculous to assume the US the richest country in the world could not have invested in renewables and a secure and safe energy future for its people. If you support the destruction of the world as long as you do not need to pay for it carry on with your thinking.

 

We shall see. It simply depends on whether we wish to see the end of this world and humanity or not. If we are so thick that we believe it only matters as long as we ourselves are alive and even on that deny science, then of course we can instead engage in wars for the ever more scare resources and make it happen a little sooner. Given the stupidity of human beings up till now you may very well be correct. That however will mean the end of humanity.

Another way to look at things could be this. While Trump is trying to make the US do everything possible to destroy the planet, totally doing everything which will lead to climate destruction, Americans and many American states themselves are moving as fast as they can to zero emissions. Possibly Trump and his minions who do not believe there are any experts, any facts, who believe scientists are liars and that the only way humans can be happy is if they are fighting each other for the biggest slice of the cake with no morality attached and no responsibility - and the reality that Trump has even put in laws to keep the American people ignorant and the fact that their newspapers do the same...it may be that there is intelligent life in the US and that is what is silently working for the US now and will be the voice of the future. It is for the future to see but we are on the precipice.

 

You obviously saw, or heard about, the interview with Andrea Leedson - at least we can give her some acknowledgement for some honesty.

The British Government has stated that we are in a Climate Emergency. The Labour Party is working to get us to zero emissions by 2030 - which is probably the target we need to be aiming for. We have a General Election. Polls have suggested 66% of the British people now believe the climate emergency is the No 1 Priority.

Lets assume the real position of Johnson is the same as Trump. Climate denial. Leedson's position would suggest that. Fighting an election with such a position would be unlikely to result in a win even if they were not having the Brexit Party against them which they are.

It certainly looks like this is just another scam so that the Tory Party can stop the UK working to be a leader in climate survival and instead join in with the US on a suicide route. I am lost at the insanity. According to an article I read last night it would appear the politicians who brought in fracking in the UK had a conflict of interest in their choice.

https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2013/07/fracking-tories-osborne-howell-browne.html

 

This is the likely reason for Johnson's assumed scam regarding a fracking ban. The article is 3 months old.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...e-pressing-than-brexit-say-71-of-britons-poll

 

There is no bigger scam on the planet or in history than "man-made climate change", and it will likely retain the title forever.

It is now a catch-all for things peeps find icky, like fracking.

 

The pieces start to fit together

https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/

 

Why? Because humanity has gone insane. Proof? The ban on fracking.