Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To understand the effects, you have to consider that all wells are framed in order to make them productive enough to justify the total cost of drilling the well. If they ban franking, they will effectively put the drilling industry out of business.
Then gradually our oil supply will start to dry up, that cuts world oil supply, and will start to drive up world oil prices. So we will put 10s of thousands out of work and increase gasoline and all fossil fuel prices, like your home heating fuel.
Nuts, obviously I intended to type FRACKING, not franking
It was obvious you meant fracking and not franking. I figured you were on a cell that changed it from facking to franking. Been there and done that.
By the way, to edit the title before edit time runs out, you want to click edit on your post like you did to add the "nuts, obviously I intended to type FRACKING..." then select "preview changes" instead of submit. It will then show the title at the top of the reply box so that you're also able to edit that, then hit submit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18
I also consider myself progressive (voted for Bernie Sanders twice) and I'm torn on fracking.
On one hand, I get the negative effects it has in the environment. On the other hand, it does create a ton of good-paying jobs in otherwise economically depressed areas for unskilled workers.
I don't think an outright ban is the answer, but there needs to be a national strategy in place to help quickly transition us from our dependency on fracking without harming the welfare of Americans who depend on fracking to earn a living.
I'm undecided too. I watched a special about it on earth day and still am unsure. There are positives and negatives
^^^^^That's a weird take on it. The people I know opposed to fracking, including myself, are opposed due to environmental reasons. Aiming to go more green, too.
We're not embracing any 3rd world countries nor do we ignore women's rights. Women's rights is a Dem platform, after all. Good grief.
The rub is an anti-fracking stance aids the scumbag countries the other guy is talking about. There is no way around it. Of course clear-logical flow isn't a small-l liberal strong-suit as we've just discovered.
I also consider myself progressive (voted for Bernie Sanders twice) and I'm torn on fracking.
On one hand, I get the negative effects it has in the environment. On the other hand, it does create a ton of good-paying jobs in otherwise economically depressed areas for unskilled workers.
I don't think an outright ban is the answer, but there needs to be a national strategy in place to help quickly transition us from our dependency on fracking without harming the welfare of Americans who depend on fracking to earn a living.
Done right, fracking really isn't any worse on the environment then conventional oil extraction. What was lacking in the early days were reasonable regulations on fracking and enforcement. It isn't the environmental catastrophe that some people make it out to be.
It was obvious you meant fracking and not franking. I figured you were on a cell that changed it from facking to franking. Been there and done that.
By the way, to edit the title before edit time runs out, you want to click edit on your post like you did to add the "nuts, obviously I intended to type FRACKING..." then select "preview changes" instead of submit. It will then show the title at the top of the reply box so that you're also able to edit that, then hit submit.
You can also hit the "report" button on the post and ask the moderator to fix the title if you are too late to edit.
Fracking is what you do when there is no other oil left. It’s a desperate move with potential dangers. Right now there is a lot of other oil available. Ask the Koch family. No reason to start fracking yet. Leave this emergency source for our children.
No fracking is not what a company does when the oil is gone
It is a way to harvest shale oil sands
No fracking is not what a company does when the oil is gone
It is a way to harvest shale oil sands
No, we turned to shale oil out of desperation.
Here's the difference between the 'old oil' and shale- with the old oil, ie the Texas oil fields in the early 20th century, you'd poke a hole in the ground and the oil would freely flow out. Each oil well cost $400K (in todays currency) to set up, and it would remain productive for decades, producing thousands of barrels everyday.
Now, with the 'new' oil, ie shale- each well costs between $6-$12M to set up, produces 2-3 hundred barrels of oil per day, declines by half after the first year, and is done completely after 3 years. And it is necessary to break apart and desteoy a ton of rock to get enough oil to power a single car for a measly 2 weeks.
We didn't turn to shale oil because we like polluting the water table, we did it because it's what's left. All the other oil has been depleted. And shale is a business model that has never been able to cover its own enormous production costs.
Last edited by Taggerung; 10-15-2020 at 08:21 PM..
To understand the effects, you have to consider that all wells are framed in order to make them productive enough to justify the total cost of drilling the well. If they ban franking, they will effectively put the drilling industry out of business.
Under what authority would the Democrats ban fracking?
Here's the difference between the 'old oil' and shale- with the old oil, ie the Texas oil fields in the early 20th century, you'd poke a hole in the ground and the oil would freely flow out. Each oil well cost $400K (in todays currency) to set up, and it would remain productive for decades, producing thousands of barrels everyday.
Now, with the 'new' oil, ie shale- each well costs between $6-$12M to set up, produces 2-3 hundred barrels of oil per day, declines by half after the first year, and is done completely after 3 years. And it is necessary to break apart and desteoy a ton of rock to get enough oil to power a single car for a measly 2 weeks.
We didn't turn to shale oil because we like polluting the water table, we did it because it's what's left. All the other oil has been depleted. And shale is a business model that has never been able to cover its own enormous production costs.
I know the oil business. Pretty much every single claim you've made here is wrong or wildly exaggerated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
