Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Shale gas - the political impact.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14-05-2013, 20:16
Sniffle774
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Planet Mongo.
Posts: 19,349

Source.

A steeper-than-expected rise in US shale oil reserves is about to change the global balance of power between new and existing producers, a report says.

Over the next five years, the US will account for a third of new oil supplies, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
The IEA said it expected the US to overtake Russia as the world's biggest gas producer by 2015 and to become "all but self-sufficient" in its energy needs by about 2035.

The rise in US production means the world's reliance on oil from traditional oil producing countries in the Middle East, which make up Opec (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), would end soon, according to the report.
If true, I wonder how this shift in politics will play out as the fuel bargaining chip starts to devalue in certain parts of the world.

Will the US start to turn away for the Middle East and path the way for increased influence by china if they pick up the slack in oil sales ?

With petro-dollars being so influential in recent world events could shale yield some strange seismic shifts and not of the literal sense.
Sniffle774 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 14-05-2013, 20:24
PrestonAl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7,185
We're rich!

Well we would be if we would get the stuff up ourselves. Instead we're too busy building windmills.
PrestonAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 20:25
jenzie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: BUDDIETOWN
Posts: 17,069
RIGHT UP to when they start selling it on the worldwide market .....
jenzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 20:27
David Tee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 16,753
Source.If true, I wonder how this shift in politics will play out as the fuel bargaining chip starts to devalue in certain parts of the world.

Will the US start to turn away for the Middle East and path the way for increased influence by china if they pick up the slack in oil sales ?

With petro-dollars being so influential in recent world events could shale yield some strange seismic shifts and not of the literal sense.
I wouldn't ignore the literal aspect. I think we'll see all kinds of seismic activity resulting from shale exploration and mining.

It's an interesting question, though - thanks for posting. I'll be curious to see whether the US use it as an opportunity to maintain low prices at the pumps (a political winner) or as the financial platform for a new economic strategy.

One thing I am sure of - there's shale gas/oil all over the world. The US will get through their reserves first. That's a given.
David Tee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 20:51
BrokenArrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 16,224
Its good news for the US economy and should drive down worldwide prices as they will not need to import.
BrokenArrow is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 20:54
Aneechik
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 15,844
I'd reserve judgment on this, we do seem to hear about new reserves of fossil fuels that will provide x billion whatever quite often but then it turns out that only 10% is recoverable or something like that (like Lancashire shale gas for example).
Aneechik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 22:18
Hypnodisc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 18,744
I'm shocked that more people aren't incredibly angry at our politicians (and those in other countries) for encouraging fracking.

Shale gas extraction (fracking) is shockingly bad for the environment and we will live to regret the day we introduced tax breaks actually encouraging this monstrosity.

It's like a bad joke, except it's not...
Hypnodisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 22:43
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 22,090
I'm shocked that more people aren't incredibly angry at our politicians (and those in other countries) for encouraging fracking.
It's been used in the North Sea for decades..

Shale gas extraction (fracking) is shockingly bad for the environment and we will live to regret the day we introduced tax breaks actually encouraging this monstrosity.
Yeh, because anything that reduces our energy costs and reliance on foreign suppliers is evil and must be banned. Or smeared.

It's like a bad joke, except it's not...
The only bad joke is we probably won't get the benefit because the gas will get exported.
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 22:55
Hypnodisc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 18,744
It's been used in the North Sea for decades..



Yeh, because anything that reduces our energy costs and reliance on foreign suppliers is evil and must be banned. Or smeared.



The only bad joke is we probably won't get the benefit because the gas will get exported.
I'm well aware, and that is bad enough, but now fracking is occurring in land (and is actually being encouraged with tax breaks) is bloody shocking in my eyes. I honestly believe we should be building more nuclear plants and I'd be a hell of a lot happier if they gave tax breaks for nuclear power over shale gas extraction.

Fracking causes seismic activity (ie. earthquakes) and drinking water contamination but has also been linked to other issues (eg. air quality, radiation, methane). In short then it can cause serious damage to people, animals, the environment and property. What's worse is a lot of the evidence for this seems to get buried or goes un-reported.

But ah what's a little more rape of the planet, we've already ruined that much of it that maybe it just doesn't matter anymore eh?
Hypnodisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:06
onefineday
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,714
... bloody shocking in my eyes. I honestly believe we should be building more nuclear plants and I'd be a hell of a lot happier if they gave tax breaks for nuclear power over shale gas extraction.
If only we had a nuclear industry - cosy deals for foreign powers to control our high-tech energy is surely madness. And fracking beneath an aquifer used for water supply is surely madness. How did we get to here?
onefineday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:15
Andy2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vault 101, Cheshire
Posts: 8,370
We're rich!

Well we would be if we would get the stuff up ourselves. Instead we're too busy building windmills.
Why the hell aren't we getting this stuff out of the ground with all urgency? Is it the green lobby bringing up their stupid, spurious objections again? Don't tell me, a rare species of toad has been found living at the drilling site
Andy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:19
onefineday
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,714
Why the hell aren't we getting this stuff out of the ground with all urgency? Is it the green lobby bringing up their stupid, spurious objections again? Don't tell me, a rare species of toad has been found living at the drilling site
No toads, just towns of humans and their water supplies. Terrible inconvenience I know, perhaps they should all drink bottled water.
onefineday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:27
Andy2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vault 101, Cheshire
Posts: 8,370
No toads, just towns of humans and their water supplies. Terrible inconvenience I know, perhaps they should all drink bottled water.
Proof please, and I don't mean those cooked-up films of water catching fire from the States.
Andy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:38
onefineday
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,714
Proof please, and I don't mean those cooked-up films of water catching fire from the States.
I think the onus is upon the proponents to prove it is safe, given what is at stake.
onefineday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:44
Biffo the Bear
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Existential hell
Posts: 23,847
If only we had a nuclear industry - cosy deals for foreign powers to control our high-tech energy is surely madness. And fracking beneath an aquifer used for water supply is surely madness. How did we get to here?
Yep - we should have started down the path of nuclear and renewables on a mass scale a long time ago. There is more initial capital investment needed, but the long-term advantages are much higher in terms of lower long-term energy prices and less damage to the environment.

Reliance on fossil fuels is absurd. It's a finite resource and long-term alternatives are needed, rather than taking a short-termist approach. Unfortunately most idiots can't see further than the end of their own nose these days.

The 100 year legacy is most important, not 1 year.

Future generations will regard us with scorn if we don't change our ways.
Biffo the Bear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:46
Andy2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vault 101, Cheshire
Posts: 8,370
I think the onus is upon the proponents to prove it is safe, given what is at stake.
They can't prove it's safe as they've had to stop exploratory drilling due to objections from the greenies.
Andy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2013, 23:47
Damanda
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270

Shale gas extraction (fracking) is shockingly bad for the environment and we will live to regret the day we introduced tax breaks actually encouraging this monstrosity.

.
None of us will live to regret it, the impact, if it matters, will manifest after we are dead.
Damanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 01:06
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 26,208
None of us will live to regret it, the impact, if it matters, will manifest after we are dead.
Not necessarily, drinking water contamination or earthquake damage would manifest quite quickly.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 03:49
Majlis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Sandpit
Posts: 18,752
I'd reserve judgment on this, we do seem to hear about new reserves of fossil fuels that will provide x billion whatever quite often but then it turns out that only 10% is recoverable or something like that (like Lancashire shale gas for example).
There is no shortage of reserves in the US which they have been extracting quite happily for years.

Contrast the US policy of cheap energy with the UK policy of expensive energy - might help explain why the US is growing at a faster rate than the UK
Majlis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 04:59
thms
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 54,192
Fracking: Weir Group boss says Scotland 'well placed'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...iness-20725887

Weir is the world's largest provider of special equipment used in the process.
thms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 06:35
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 22,090
Not necessarily, drinking water contamination or earthquake damage would manifest quite quickly.
Strangely, this hasn't happened in the most famous location-

http://www.epaosc.org/sites/7555/fil...Report%202.pdf

Those are the test results from Dimock, famous (or infamous) location of the docudrama Gasland.

As for earthquake damage-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...thquakes-basel

It was supposed to be an environmentally friendly way of generating electricity. When geologists in Switzerland drilled deep into the ground, they planned to pump water into the shaft and use the steam generated by hot rocks to power 10,000 homes.

But the geothermal power plant had to be abandoned after a series of earthquakes, one registering magnitude 3.4, damaged properties in the city of Basel, a court heard today.


A much bigger earthquake than any that's been caused by fraccing. Pumping water deep into the ground to extract gas is bad. Pumping water deep into the ground to extract heat, with the risk of thermal expansion/contraction is bad.

Strange double standards in this debate. Here's an explanation-

http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwate..._hydrowhat.cfm

Hydraulic fracturing is a well stimulation process used to maximize the extraction of underground resources; including oil, natural gas, geothermal energy, and even water.

Here's an explanation of a system anti-humans like Greenpeace promote-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system

This process, termed hydro-shearing,[3] perhaps to differentiate it from an equivalent procedure, never the less is substantially the same as hydraulic tensile fracturing used in the oil and gas industry.

So Greenpeace and other environmental nutjobs promote fraccing when it's for hot water, but not for gas. Any idea why this might be?
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 06:37
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 22,090
None of us will live to regret it, the impact, if it matters, will manifest after we are dead.
Yeh, your kids or grandkids might have jobs and then be able to afford to boil a kettle.
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 10:39
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 26,208
Strangely, this hasn't happened in the most famous location
So?
As for earthquake damage-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...thquakes-basel

It was supposed to be an environmentally friendly way of generating electricity. When geologists in Switzerland drilled deep into the ground, they planned to pump water into the shaft and use the steam generated by hot rocks to power 10,000 homes.

But the geothermal power plant had to be abandoned after a series of earthquakes, one registering magnitude 3.4, damaged properties in the city of Basel, a court heard today.


A much bigger earthquake than any that's been caused by fraccing. Pumping water deep into the ground to extract gas is bad. Pumping water deep into the ground to extract heat, with the risk of thermal expansion/contraction is bad.

Strange double standards in this debate.
How so? Both have been halted by earthquake damage for further investigation.
Here's an explanation-

http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwate..._hydrowhat.cfm

Hydraulic fracturing is a well stimulation process used to maximize the extraction of underground resources; including oil, natural gas, geothermal energy, and even water.

Here's an explanation of a system anti-humans like Greenpeace promote-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system

This process, termed hydro-shearing,[3] perhaps to differentiate it from an equivalent procedure, never the less is substantially the same as hydraulic tensile fracturing used in the oil and gas industry.

So Greenpeace and other environmental nutjobs promote fraccing when it's for hot water, but not for gas. Any idea why this might be?
Er, default position, you're lying and Greenpeace only promote non fraccing Geothermal?
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 10:49
Phil 2804
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 13,775
We're rich!

Well we would be if we would get the stuff up ourselves. Instead we're too busy building windmills.
Using gas to generate electricity is an extremely wasteful use of a precious resource, especially when there are numerous other ways of doing it.

Gas should be solely for the use of industry and domestic heating.
Phil 2804 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2013, 17:46
Sniffle774
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Planet Mongo.
Posts: 19,349
Was more interested in the politics of shifting energy players but looking at the safety side then, where there brass, there's ways to cut through pesky concerns like exploding people. If the potential is that great will we see greater pressure to start frakking ?
Sniffle774 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15.