Climate change

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#21
An article by journalists Stephen Moore showing that if you are selective enough when it comes to reporting on analytical statistics you can "prove" any point you want.

I have scanned the full review: it's a long and comprehensive report but worth the effort to get the full detail. I'll always be wary of reports produced within an industry (in this case by BP) but even taking into account that there may be some built in bias in favour of the hydrocarbons industry it is interesting and informative. It does point out that following unnaturally good figures for previous years which were due to known factors, 2017 has particularly skewed values by comparison.

The speech delivered by Spencer Dale, Group Chief Economist of BP, gives a fair overview of the Statistical Review if you want to see a more compact version: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/e.../bp-stats-review-2018-spencer-dale-speech.pdf
I don’t have a lot of faith in a report put out by an International company like BP. They have a bias to their shareholders before any community need.
The report also points out that world energy demand grew last year and in China more than other countries.

Who’d have guessed that China the country with half the worlds population and has the best economic growth that they would be using more of the worlds power and resources ?
The Chinese government knows they have a problem with polluted air over their cities, they are doing something about it. Not because they care about other countries it is in their own interest to clean up their act. There are many more solar and environmental programs active and working in China than most other countries. For 1, a flooded disused open cut coal mine is now being used to float solar panels.

The rise of China is changing geo political debate.
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#22
An article by journalists Stephen Moore showing that if you are selective enough when it comes to reporting on analytical statistics you can "prove" any point you want.

I have scanned the full review: it's a long and comprehensive report but worth the effort to get the full detail. I'll always be wary of reports produced within an industry (in this case by BP) but even taking into account that there may be some built in bias in favour of the hydrocarbons industry it is interesting and informative. It does point out that following unnaturally good figures for previous years which were due to known factors, 2017 has particularly skewed values by comparison.

The speech delivered by Spencer Dale, Group Chief Economist of BP, gives a fair overview of the Statistical Review if you want to see a more compact version: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/e.../bp-stats-review-2018-spencer-dale-speech.pdf
i will agree that statistics can be manipulated.. they depend on what and who is gathering them
another good example is the coating put on cereal and how dangerous it is to humans..turns out the study was done by an organic group
and only put in there study a half truth...turns out is can be a health hazard..if you eat 750 bowls everyday
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#24
Roadkill

I didn’t know people of the political right wing, the coal burners, the oil worshippers, I’ll supersize that hole for you type people, worry about environmental damage after the minerals, oil or gas has been extracted and the profit made.

Why show a picture of oil sands site, there’s plenty of oil still to pump out of the ground or the ocean ? You can even import it from the Middle East.

So you’re another fracker who doesn’t care about ground water contamination and all the other perils farmers have to put up with once the frackers take their land off them.

Manipulating the Facts.

Pictures can be manipulated, take your 2 pictures. Top one, this is a mine where lithium is extracted. Aren’t the mine operators obligated to do the environmental reclamation once finished ? OR....... Is it still an operating mine ?
The second picture, looks great, doesn’t show the pictures of local farmers whose ground water now has flammable gas in it or their ground water has GONE once they frack the earth to death.


Lithium also comes from salt pools, those pictuers look more environmentally friendly than your picture.

Yeah, I think there should be more electric cars, the hydrogen powered cars that China is producing will hopefully be available when I need to buy a new car. Let’s hope you don’t need a new computer because most will have rare earth minerals in them so they operate more efficiently.
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#25
let me enlighten you..1 that Alberta oil sand is a drilling operation not a fracking facility
2 fracking for gas is what the environmentalist morons are saying causes flammable ground water with no proof fracking causes it.. not oil
3 if you dont like the truth just keep living in your make believe world..i personally dont give a shit about your opinion
facts are facts theory is just propaganda
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#26
let me enlighten you..1 that Alberta oil sand is a drilling operation not a fracking facility
2 fracking for gas is what the environmentalist morons are saying causes flammable ground water with no proof fracking causes it.. not oil
3 if you dont like the truth just keep living in your make believe world..i personally dont give a shit about your opinion
facts are facts theory is just propaganda
There was no explanation provided about your graphic photo of oil sands.
Tell your story of no gas in ground water to those already affected by Fracking.

Visit the NT! - Honest Government Ad - The Juice Media
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#28
these are the facts on fracking in Canada
Fracking Truths - Canada Mines

this is the image used by anti-fracking groups..problem is it is a lie
1536039753188.png
The Image on the right is a widely publicised and shared picture that clearly shows the dangers of fracking which would affect the most people. There is only one small problem with this diagram – it is completely false and misleads the viewer completely.
I have decided to make this page as to share actual facts with those willing to learn them before making decisions, voting or protesting something that has been proven safe for decades, brings economic prosperity to regions and allows for much more green energy than say the Oil sands. Oh and it lowers oil/gas prices.
I am utilising specific arguments from the Windsor area fracking debates as this is where I grew up, however alot of the information is universal.
Disclosure…
Should you believe anything I have said? Nope, do some real research, look at the facts and don’t be led by emotions and or well spoken individuals. I am biased, of course I am – everybody is to some extent. I have presented my interpretation of the facts from a logical/scientific side. You the reader should do the same.
The large glaring fact in my mind is the fact that the majority of fracking occurs in Alberta and Saskatchewan. The provinces who are economic powerhouses are Alberta and Saskatchewan (mostly related to oil/gas). The provinces who complain/protest the least about fracking are Alberta and Saskatchewan. Where are most Nova Scotians moving to work? Alberta and Saskatchewan to work in the oil/gas fields.
Fracking truth
What is fracking?
“Fracking” is a word made up by the TV show Battlestar Galactica to be their worlds “F” word. It seems to have been adopted to replace “Fracing” is short for fracturing which refers to hydraulic fracturing as we know it. – I guess the first lie but as I was a BSG fan – I’ll keep it.
Fracking is the hydraulic fracturing of non-porous rock deep in the earth creating voids into which oils and gas will migrate to and cumulate in those newly opened cracks. This allows for a “pool” of oil/gas that can then be extracted to the surface via pipes and well heads. 90% of oil/gas wells are fracked to some extent. Fracking has even been used to create water wells where rocks don’t allow for fast recharge of the water table.
Fracking takes place 1000m-2000m (6000-10000 feet), well below any known water aquifer which due to physical restrictions are confined to an average 200m depth.
A drill is used to drill deep into the target shales which hold the oil/gas, then the drill continues drilling horizontally through the shale (in most cases shale are near horizontal). The drill is removed, and its casing is secured/cemented and lined and then under strict environmental regulations fluids (95-99% water) are pumped into the well at high pressure which will fracture the shale on contact. This may be repeated over a couple of days but usually is accomplished within one day. The fluids are then removed and stored for re-use or are processed to remove contaminants, both man made and natural.
The newly fracked well has a well head and containment system as well as safety sensors/etc. set-up and oil/gas is extracted in the usual manner.
History of fracking
Fracking is nothing new – fracturing rock to allow for pooling of fluids has been around for centuries – this is why we put sand/gravel/boulders around and underneath dug water wells. Well fracking itself has only been around for (1949 commercially) 60-70 years or so. 2.5 million fracked wells have been drilled to date, the majority of them in North America (Canada / USA).
In 2008-2009, engineers made the process much more economically viable through new technologies and especially directional/horizontal drilling techniques developed in deep oil wells. Suddenly known oil/gas reserves locked tight in non-porous shales became economically extractable. An a large increase in the price of oil/gas in 2000 to 2008 didn’t hurt either.
Fracking Today
Today shale oil and gas is the number one method of extracting oil and natural fas in North America. In Canada Alberta and Saskatchewan have benefited greatly economically from the widespread use of fracking in their oil/gas wells. They are the provinces with the strongest economies and where most other provinces are sending their youth for jobs.
Fracking is new untested technology
Although fracking has been economically viable in some areas since 1947, most fracked wells were “easy” fracks and used conventional water and basic fluids as well as strictly vertical drilling to extract oil/gas. Since the fracks were vertical, it required allot of holes and surface disturbance.
The new form of fracking uses directional drilling which allows one vertical mother hole through which numerous horizontal wells can be drilled along the targeted rock. This makes the new drilling technology much cleaner with a smaller surface disturbance. A single well can feed out to 1-2 km radius around the well-head. The horizontal drilling part of the wells is the primary new drilling technology that is allowing for extraction of previously un-recoverable oil/gas reserves. Drilling is a physical act, not a polluting act. Most drilling fluids are plant based due to environmental regulations – Vegetable oil for the most part.
The other new aspect of the new fracking is the fluids used to fracture the rock. 98%-99.5% water and the other 2% – 0.5% is made up of “chemicals” with each well requiring a different cocktail for best results.
The trick:
Calling something “new” because of some small change in the process. Fracking physically is the exact same process as when it started. Directional drilling and better understanding and use of fluid additives.
The other organization outside environmental activists that use this “its new” are the pharmaceutical companies who will change their drug in some tiny insignificant way right before its patents are coming to an end to avoid opening it up to cheaper generic versions.
Continued
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#29
The other chemicals
Sensationalist reports of companies being exempt from saying what’s in their fluids, they can put anything in there, they have big scary names like Alcohol Ethoxylate Surfactants – that’s bad, horrible stuff. Ok, I present a simple google search to: This site which has a handy little map feature and chemical search feature (chemical information supplied from the companies) shown by wells (USA Only). Search through, find lots of big scary looking names. The one listed above Alcohol Ethoxylate Surfactants with a simple google search results in this Wiki Page. Kinda takes the scare out of the big chemical name when you learn its in laundry detergent and cosmetics. Dihydrogen Monoxide is likely the most deadly and widely used chemical in fracking fluids. View more information here.
So yes, some chemicals are likely bad and horrible in their pure concentrated form, but don’t forget they are diluted so much in the water as to be statistically inert. The ocean is full of cyanide, deadly gasses and chemical, fertilizers, really nasty stuff – but with the dilution factors – they are no where near harmful.
The Trick:
Use of big scary chemical names makes something sound bad. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) is what we commonly call water.
Fracking uses water
Yep, sure does, 0.6 to 4 million gallons per frack. That’s up to 4000000 per frack and some wells require multiple fracks. That’s horrible – such a big number.
Well what does 4 million gallons of water look like? An Olympic sized swimming pool holds 600,000 gallons of water – seven pools worth, wow that’s allot of water right?
Lets take a small town, say Windsor Nova Scotia with a population of 4000 people. The average household use for water in Canada is 80 gallons per day (2004). That’s 320000 gallons of water per day. That’s 2240000 in a week for lil old Windsor. Now say Halifax with nearly 10 times the population is 20 million gallons per day – give or take.
That ads up fast, and that doesn’t account for normal industrial use. All industry uses water, its life. In 2007 the paper industry in Canada used 42098457888 gallons of water – and for the most part that water needs allot of cleaning before being released. That’s enough for 10000 fracks (without recycling and if all fracks took the most water.
There are some areas where fracking does use up the water and probably shouldn’t be used. Texas and southern states have had aquifers dry up from fracking water removal – and also from over irrigation for food. But as a rule those areas have limited or no water supply and their natural state is desert. Most of Canada has a great abundance of water – it truly is our national resource.
The trick:
Widespread use of huge scary numbers that the average human mind cannot comprehend with nothing true that it can be compared to for real people to understand. This is a common scare tactic for a number of “environmental” activists and causes.
Just for fun, it takes 1.8 gallons of water to make the plastic in one bottle of bottled water, not including the water inside. How many bottled waters do you see everywhere? How many are in your home?
Whats with NORM?
Naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORMS) are exactly what they sound like. As rocks erode are carried downstream and deposited in lake/rivers/streams they carry with them (depending on the rocks they come from) small amounts of radioactive minerals.
Sometimes these sediments even pick up organic matter like trees, grasses, animals, etc etc. Now these minerals create a sand/silt an are continually covered with new layers. Over millions of years the layers with increasing layers above them start to lithify (start forming rocks) and trap the radioactivity in their rock layers. Decomposition of natural organic matter, coupled with slightly radioactive minerals which are now “trapped” can concentrate radioactivity as well as natural gas/oil/coal.
Then we drill into the rock to take the gas out and BOOM – out comes the radioactivity as well.
The trick
Radioactive minerals are all around us, every day. In the local case in Nova Scotia/Windsor area there is an ancient mountain chain that has eroded away leaving this large granitic intrusion called the South Mountain Batholith (SMB). One cool thing about the SMB is that its well, slightly radioactive, especially around the Windsor area. Alot of granites are actually slightly radioactive as the have NORMs. SMB was explored for possible uranium mines in the 1980’s due to its radioactivity in airborne surveys. This lead to a ban on exploration for Uranium in Nova Scotia’
So where does the sediment come from that forms the NORMs in the fracking wells? well mostly from SMB erosion. Is the SMB still eroding? Well yes – has been for many millions of years, eroding and depositing sediments with NORMs downstream, and downstream includes the Windsor area.
Not just the deep gas producing rock layers hold NORMs, they are present in almost all layers of rocks, including the ones on and near surface, and surely the ones in direct contact with the water table.
So throw the term radioactive… anything out there without context is scary, just don’t tell them that its actually everywhere around them already, their cottage is built on the epicentre, their wells are dug into it, their basements concentrate it (RADON gas?)
 

Tsalagi

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
4,746
Likes
1,588
#30
Excellent explanation, Roadkill. It mirrors what has been explained here in Texas. Although there is a strong movement to use West Texas sand (very small particles to force down the well hole to cause the fracturing.
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#31
thanks Tsalagi..i get so sick and tired of the false claims made by so-called environmentalists..who have no scientific data to back up their claims
or the intelligence to do the real research for themselves..they follow a group of of made up reports based on emotions rather than the proven science
i believe the reason for using West Texas sand is because as the facts show..Texas is a desert state that over uses it's water supply to irrigate the farms to grow food
 

Tsalagi

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
4,746
Likes
1,588
#32
Correction. WEST Texas is a desert "state". Hurricane Hugo last year showed that East Texas is surely not. And we have had flash flood warning since Saturday.
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#34
Roadkill you didn’t have to go to so much trouble, I already know what the facts are about Fracking.

I keep hearing the USA is the leader of the free world, not that there was a vote. The rest of us Non Americans go about our daily business feeling inferior and almost subservient to the American machismo attitudes we are served up as daily news.

China leads the world in renewable technology.

Oil sands and fracking if all other resources were exhausted I’d say it was a worthwhile venture. There’s still plenty of gas and oil being pumped out of the ground around the whole planet no real need to be putting it online now.

I had a laugh recently about Arnold Schwarzenegger, one of the USA State ex-leaders of renewable energy. He sent the State broke buy building renewable energy resources and then had to buy electricity off the coal fire power generating States. I guess there’s any amount of reasons a celebrity can go bankrupt. Look at you President he’s been bankrupt several times, he’s certainly bankrupt when it comes to morality.

The USA has been left behind in the renewable energy market, good luck with your horse and buggy mentality approach to your future energy needs.
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#35
maybe you should be more concerned about the pollution in your own country and clean that up before making comments on other countries
btw i am not an American..but i do wish we had a Trump -like leader
i dont need luck..my horse and buggy mentality will be around well into the next millennium
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#36
maybe you should be more concerned about the pollution in your own country and clean that up before making comments on other countries
btw i am not an American..but i do wish we had a Trump -like leader
i dont need luck..my horse and buggy mentality will be around well into the next millennium

My apologies I didn’t realise you aren’t American, that must be really disappointing for you.
 

roadkill

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
24,511
Likes
6,778
#37
not at all ...i am a proud Canadian FIRST NATION PM TRUDORK IS DESTROYING CANADA playing mr dressup and open border policy...just like the libtards are doing to your country
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#38
not at all ...i am a proud Canadian FIRST NATION PM TRUDORK IS DESTROYING CANADA playing mr dressup and open border policy...just like the libtards are doing to your country

roadkill

Of course you do realise that Donald Trump uses Australia as example of what real Border policy should be. President Trump wants to implement the same immigration policy that we have in Australia to his beloved USA.

In political terms here in Australia the governing political party is the equivalent of The USA Republican Party. Google could have given you the answer, our governing Liberal party are right wing Republicans.

In the news today scientists were discussing how the rising temperature of the Atlantic Ocean is a contributing factor Cyclone Florence picking up more moisture and will be upgraded to a category 5 before it hits the USA mainland.

Amazing, global warming means more moisture being sucked out of the oceans which creates bigger storms. You’d think the melting ice in the Artic and Antarctic would chill the oceans but no, it just raises sea levels and the equatorial currents heat the cool water from the Nortehrn and Southern Hemisphere. The evaporation over our seas and oceans gets converted to storm clouds that ever seem to rain on the areas that are affected by a world wide drought.

They turn into Florence a tropical storm that will probably be a Cat. 5 Cyclone by the time it hits.
 

Flynn

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
11,681
Likes
200
#39
Hurricane Florence might even be down graded to a category 3 as the storm stalls over warmer than normal Atlantic Ocean water.

Some meteorologists are suggesting if the storm moves a bit to the north there will be record rain falls as the storm moves slowly over land areas and dumps all that hot Atlantic Ocean water inland.

Good luck and best wishes to all those in the path of this HUGE STORM !

'Storm of a lifetime': Hurricane Florence could be a repeat of Harvey
 

hortysir

Jokeroo Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
36,037
Likes
317
#40
Hate that my first reply to you, in ages, is to argue....but being a Florida native and, as such, a sort of hurricane expert,,,,,,warmer water only serves to Strengthen, NOT weaken.