Skip to main content

View Diary: Cuomo's primary opponent addresses fracktovists (bigger update on fracking) (116 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  she'd like to "see all fossil fuel exploitation in (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    NY ended"


    You mean no gas in cars, no natural gas in pipes to heat homes and businesses? And aren't there a lot of gas power plants, and even coal or oil? What about that jet liner you flew in on?

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 06:00:07 AM PDT

    •  Fossil fuel is readily avaialble in NYS (8+ / 0-)

      without fracking operations damaging quality of life and water resources. Furthermore fossil fuels need to be phased out in favor of renewable resources that do not contribute to global warming.

      •  from where? Does it rain Jet A from the sky? (1+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Big River Bandido

        What fraction of it's energy does NY get from renewables now? When does this "phasing out" happen?

        They frack in my town. Why should we send oil to you NIMBYs? Sorry, you use it, you frack it.

        “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

        by ban nock on Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 07:12:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  There is no "renewable" liquid jet fuel (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        produced in New York or anywhere else.

        Banning hydraulic fracturing means shutting down the oil and gas extraction industry since most conventional oil and gas deposits which can be produced without such fracturing have already been extensively exploited.

        Since natural gas is extensively used throughout the economy for heat input or feedstock materials which cannot be substituted by the generation of electricity, banning all hydraulic fracturing means very high future natural gas prices, massive economic disruption and and public hardship since there is no practical means of providing 100% of cold-climate wintertime residential, commercial and industrial space heating demand with either solar or wind energy generation.  

        •  but isn't it just postponing the inevitable? (0+ / 0-)

          Natural gas and other fossil fuels are going to run out (or become ridiculously expensive to extract) within our lifetimes, no?  or at least within our children's lifetimes.  Now we don't have alternatives that work well enough or cheaply enough to meet all our needs.  But, we'd better get busy finding alternatives that will work and meet our needs, right?  If we turn to fracking or other radical measures for extracting fossil fuels, it will buy us a bit of time, but the envirnomnental and public health costs could be extremely high.  We have to make the transition to clean energy sooner or later, so it seems to me we can better start now (while our drinking water is still ok, at least.)

          •  You said: (0+ / 0-)
            If we turn to fracking or other radical measures for extracting fossil fuels
            hydraulic fracturing has been carried out on the vast majority of oil and gas wells constructed in the last 60 years.
            •  sorry I am not getting your point (0+ / 0-)

              Do you think fracking is good?  Or a necessary evil?  That it has no negative side effects?  That it can sometimes cause problems but that the problems are a small price to pay because it is vitally important to have lots of relatively cheap gas?  Or that we've been doing it for 60 years and there have been no problems reported?  (Walter Hang can give lots of evidence to the contrary...) Do you think that we (humanity) can't develop any other way to heat our homes and run our industries?  Or that maybe we can, but we absolutely need gas (which these days mostly has to be extracted with fracking) to keep our societies running until those developments come?  If the last, how do you think we (as DKOS members) can motivate politicians and industry to hurry up and make those developments, especially if we don't motivate them by getting behind greener candidates?  

              I'm not just asking rhetorical questions, I'd really like to understand what your point of view is, because it is confusing me.

              •  You asked: (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Do you think fracking is good?  Or a necessary evil?
                These are not science questions or inquiries on the characterizations of objective reality.
                That it has no negative side effects?
                There is no water quality, hydrogeology, geological engineering or hydrological basis for a policy of either a either a ban or a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing operations, which are the final phase of well completion activities and which are conducted thousands of feet below potable water supplies.  

                The claims about hydraulic fracturing you've seen in the Gasland movies are mostly garbage & junk science.

                Do you think that we (humanity) can't develop any other way to heat our homes and run our industries?
                There is no practical solar or wind energy solution available for retrofit in conventional house construction that is sufficient to provide space heating in northern winter climate zones.  

                The entire steel and plastics industry is based on natural gas as both heat input and feedstock input.  While electricity as an energy input can substitute for BTU input in an electric arc metal melting furnace, most other steel industry heat input comes from natural gas or coke oven gas and there is no way for electricity to make such an energy input substitution.  

                For example, there is no way to make steel from iron ore as a matter of fundamental chemistry without a large source of carbon for carbon monoxide formation and reaction with iron oxide.

                The entire plastics industry depends on natural gas for fuels and materials inputs and on natural gas liquids as material feedstock inputs.

                All commercial and military aviation depends primarily on liquid fuels obtained by hydraulic fracturing (unless they are obtained from tar sands sources).

                The entire solar and semiconductor industry depends on plastics which are directly obtained utilizing processes  natural gas and other petroleum liquids.

                All of these industries are flat-lined by a ban on hydraulic fracturing.   That is the policy you appear to be advocating.

                •  Thanks to fracking... (0+ / 0-)

                  I have clean, cheap geothermal power from the Hellisheiði power plant. Thanks to fracking, they were able to turn a local geothermal hot water well from 4 liters per second into dozens, which means that my land is going to be getting endless, cheap, clean hot water for heating, showers, etc. People forget that fracking isn't just about oil and gas, and it's not just nameless, faceless people who benefit from it.

                  Thanks for bringing up Gasland. It should be mentioned that when a second filmmaker, Phelim McAleer, asked Gasland's Fox about why he didn't mention in the film that in the same area where they light the guy's faucet that people have since pioneer days lit "burning springs", that the water in the area naturally has an abundance of methane that long predates fracking. Fox said he didn't think it was relevant. When McAleer put the video of the interview up on Youtube and Vimeo, Fox had his lawyers force Youtube and Vimeo to take it down with DMCA claims (McAleer eventually won and got the content reinstated).

                  Honestly, I have trouble envisioning a more environmentally benign way to extract resources (of whatever type) than to drill down to them and remove them from deep underground with as little of a surface footprint as possible. When the very concept of doing that (regardless of what level of precautions are taken for fluids handling and the like) is fundamentally demonized, then what are we left with? I mean, are open pit mines preferable? Of course we need to regulate and tightly control all resource extraction technologies, but the degree that fracking has been demonized in general I think is just way overboard, and destructive to boot.

                  The day I'll consider justice blind is the day that a rape defendant's claim of "She consented to the sex" is treated by the same legal standards as a robbery defendant's claim of "He consented to give me the money": as an affirmative defense.

                  by Rei on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 02:43:18 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  lesser of various evils then, perhaps... (0+ / 0-)

                  I haven't seen the Gaslands movies you refer to.  And I don't dispute your points about gas perhaps being necessary for certain manufacturing processes.  I'm just not an expert on these things.

                  What I see, coming here from Europe, is that gasoline is really really cheap in America.  Europeans think twice before they drive anywhere, but not here. Many people here still have single-pane glass in their windows.  And poorly insulated attics.  Public transportation options are pretty ridiculous (arriving in Dulles International Airport, one basically has to hire a taxi to get into DC itself....)  I don't see solar installations many places, or many windmills.  For houses in areas with harsh winters, there is also heat pump technology, but I don't see that talked about much.  Ithaca has an active "eat local" movement, but the big stores here and elsewhere still carry out-of-season produce trucked in from distant locations.  Organic farming (which is much less reliant on fossil fuels than conventional farming) is not as widespread as in many areas of Europe.  In short: it just doesn't look like America is serious about dealing with climate change and reducing fossil fuel dependence.

                  So, maybe gas extraction is necessary to some degree, and maybe a  transition period to green energy sources is necessary, and maybe fracking (or nuclear energy) is not the most evil thing in the world, if it can save our planet from global warming.  And if it is closely regulated. But personally I'd like to see more action on the alternatives.  A lot more action.

    •  C'mon is there something abt the word exploitation (6+ / 0-)

      you don't understand? The quote doesn't say "all fossil fuel use in NY ended".

      "We can either have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. But we can't have both." - Justice Louis Brandeis

      by flitedocnm on Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 06:51:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, I see, "exploitation" means you will exploit (0+ / 0-)

        us. Or you will exploit Nigerians. It has nothing to do with having a carbon footprint about the size of the empire state building. Exploit does not mean burning all the carbon but messing up someone else's back yard. I thought that when you fly to Europe on a jet powered by oil you were exploiting the carbon in that fuel to push the jetliner, perhaps powered by unicorn farts?

        We have those same exploiters move out here to Boulder. I can hear it in their accents. Complete disconnect from reality. I think it comes from being ungodly wealthy.

        “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

        by ban nock on Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 07:19:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  But it doesn't serve the lame (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CenPhx, flitedocnm, NoMoreLies

        narrative unless you work from this point:

        all fossil fuel use in NY ended
        I don't think some people realize how laughably insulting they are to other peoples' intelligence, while they're shoveling such narrative all over a comments section.

        "Counting on people having nowhere else to go is the logic of a slumlord."--Wolf10

        by lunachickie on Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 08:56:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  two meanings for "exploitation"... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ban nock, Susan from 29

      ... maybe I should have chosen other words so as not to cause confusion.  I studied geology once many moons ago -- never did anything with my degree because I realized that both definitions of exploitation apply to the oil industry.  But in theory at least they are two totally separate usages:

      1 [MASS NOUN] The action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work:
      the exploitation of migrant workers

      2 The action of making use of and benefiting from resources:
      the Bronze Age saw exploitation of gold deposits.

      (oxford dictionary)

    •  Are you deliberately trolling here? (0+ / 0-)

      It couldn't be more obvious what she meant.  No drilling, no fracking, no mining of fossil fuels.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site