What Is Fracking? | Bang Goes The Theory | Earth Science
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 พ.ค. 2016
- Jem investigates the controversial science of fracking, blamed for creating an earthquake in Lancashire. Taken from Bang Goes The Theory: Series 6.
Subscribe for more awesome science - th-cam.com/users/subscription_c...
/ headsqueezetv - บันเทิง
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 65 | คู่เอก "จ้าวเสือใหญ่ vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TDpOh5eEJKw/mqdefault.jpg)
If we frack enough of the UK, we could detach the whole country from the bedrock. Attach some really big engines to Scotland and then drive the country south, into some better weather.
i like your thinking
lmao
+Maxx B That's probably the best idea I've ever heard!
Charlie Ringström I was thinking somewhere around Spain. We could be the Costa Del Pom.
Stephen Mortimer
It's ok he's building a wall around America. I'm wondering if that's such a bad idea.
I am rather disappointed by the BBC. This clip only mentioned the most dangerous part about fracking in only one sentence: "Some people worry that chemicals added to the fracking water..." Look at the list of chemicals they are legally adding to the fracking water in the US, then you will realize that they use it for chemical waste disposal. This will poisen the groundwater for generations and centuries to come. The same people that made money from the disposal of that chemical waste and making some more money from selling the gas will then make even more money from selling you bottled water, because your groundwater will be polluted! As I said: BBC is not what is used to be, very sad.
+Chip Guy Vids Sadly bought and paid for. Used to be something to be proud of, not any more.
+Chip Guy Vids Yep I mean him claiming that fracking wont' lead to more severe earthquakes is bullshit before fracking Oklahoma had practically no earthquakes. Now? In 2014, Oklahoma was the most seismically active state in the Lower 48 and recorded three times as many quakes as California. I live in Texas in the last 40 years, oil and gas activity has caused some 60 percent of Texas earthquakes higher than magnitude 3 in the Richter scale, a new study led by researchers from the University of Texas at Austin found.
+Chip Guy Vids 2min google search so could be wrong but: They are not allowed to use hazardous chemicals in the UK due to the European wide Groundwater Directive. As far as I can see the UK drinking water comes from rain.
+Peter Morrison When did EU directives ever stop Multi Nationals !? And if we are dumb enough to Vote to leave Europe then they have negligible oversight and they can control and monopolize whatever they want . We must not become the 51st State in all but name.
+Peter Morrison "As far as I can see the UK drinking water comes from rain."
Excellent observation - is it captured in buckets? Or allowed to fall onto the ground, and soak in before we get it?
Fraking in Texas has been followed by a high number of small earthquakes. Even small quakes can cause damage over time.
*fracking
+ajtronic could be worse gas could be expensive.
+Blackjack sarcasm?
+ajtronic not small they have been getting worse we are starting to have them jump above 5 on the richter scale. It's just the most of them are out in the middle of nowhere so they don't cause much damage.
yeaaaaah they should probably not do fraking then.
It will ruin the water table, it's not only sand and water being pumped down there.
+Jellyf0x It wont, bore water found around 200m below the ground, and a casing is run on the well to stop contamination. Also even if they werent just pumping water or sand it wouldnt matter as it is so far below the surface, most of the time deeper than 2000m.
+Forerunner) Denial of evidence will not convince anyone.
Forerunner) Are you claiming that it's pure H2O they're pumping down?
Fracking fluid consists of 99.5% sand and water. The remaining .5% are all sorts of chemicals, intended to improve the effectiveness of the process. I'm fairly sure those are not all too healthy.
+Spawny eyed wazzock The geology in the USA is much less stable than in the UK, generally. We also have strong government regulations that protect the environment; it was one hell of a fight just to get these experimental fracking tests.
Fracking is something old people with too much time protest about with badly made signs
+Hayden Russell lol seriously? All the old people will be dead, its you lot who have to live with the consequences....
lynda williams are you threatening me?
Hayden Russell
I dont have to, the oil companies are waaay ahead of me.
Hayden Russell Are you threatening me??? :(:(:(:(:(
Darren Arthur I'm sorry
What are you people talking about? They didn't really say if it's good or bad, just what it is.
+MaxFist 2:04 he makes it sound like it's just water and sand, kind of forgets to mention all the chemicals that make your tab water flammable
***** methane makes your tap water flammable, not the chemicals. The chemicals are surfactants and lubricants.
+misterOsc The things that make your tap water flammable isn't because chemicals they put in, it's because the natural gas they are mining gets into the water. If your tap water is flammable, it's not because of chemicals they put in.
+misterOsc did you even watch the video, it sounds like you have a lot of preconceived notions.
+misterOsc
because it is just water and sand, and those chemicals were made up by scaremongers. The only people whose tapwater has become flamable had private wells that were dug into methane sinks, their water was flamable long before fracking came to town and their water was flamable due to their own poor decisions. They tried to blame fracking in movies like gassland because they didn't want to admit that.
Pro fracking vs anti fracking can be boiled down to:
Corporate profits vs small earthquakes and poisoned drinking water
I know which one I care about more
+elementbender1 Not corporate profits, but cheap price for gas (and indirectly everything else, since it has to be transported with trucks using gas) for you. About the water... Just dont shit where you eat and you will be fine.
+Eric Pive I would have to agree with the whole 'don't shit where you eat' philosophy, but fracking happening in my area is a lot of people being bought off, a lot of shitting, and not a lot of impact assessment.
What about reduced gas prices for customers?
elementbender1 Then blame corruption of the politicians for allowing this, but not fracking... I agree with you though.
I hope you enjoy super expensive electricity and all, because without fracking (even with the weak links to all the harm it does), using your ipad to complain about fracking would probably be cost prohibitive. Oh and profit margins on oil and gas exploration typically very low for the risk involved in drilling a well. Oil and gas isn't even in the top 15 profitable industries according to forbes (in the us at least, www.forbes.com/sites/sageworks/2015/09/06/these-industries-generate-the-highest-profit-margins/#1c3b383b64ac), get mad at accountants for gods sake already people!
Can i point out as a geology student fracking is safe. You only hear these horror stories from the USA as they have almost no regulations whilst here with our health and safety obsessed country it will be safe. We are not tectonically active so there will be no major quakes. Have this or less electricity and a weaker economy.
+Stuffthatsfunny1 Dude, you're a student. You should be protesting it for the sake of the protest! haha.
+Stuffthatsfunny1 Yep I mean him claiming that fracking wont' lead to more severe earthquakes is bullshit before fracking Oklahoma had practically no earthquakes. Now? In 2014, Oklahoma was the most seismically active state in the Lower 48 and recorded three times as many quakes as California. I live in Texas in the last 40 years, oil and gas activity has caused some 60 percent of Texas earthquakes higher than magnitude 3 in the Richter scale, a new study led by researchers from the University of Texas at Austin found.
THe whole video is about how they have had earthquakes in the UK so obviously you are a geology student. You don't have to be seismology active for fracking to cause earthquakes, cause it will cause instability.
+Brandon Ottinger (Jaqen H'ghar80) but as I said this is because in the US you do it with no regulations. The companies don't check for faults which of course are there they are across all of the world. Here they are all mapped out and checked beforehand, the small quake in Blackpool was because they missed the fault. The outrage it cause means that they have to check in so much detail now to do anything to stop bad press that every inch of ground will be covered.
Stuffthatsfunny1 right because your new government run by Conservatives aren't doing away with as many regulations as they possibly can and being a pro business as possible. Why do you think there is as big of a push for a Brexit as there is from them? Because they want to be able to say no to as many regulations as they want.
+Brandon Ottinger (Jaqen H'ghar80) the government wants us to remain in the EU
Spent a few years in the ND and TX oil patchs. This pretty much is how I explained it to people. Aside from casing failure, there is basically zero chance of well fluids getting to drinking water. There is two plus miles of rock in the way. Very card rock. I have been on a few jobs where the driller got too high or low and go out of formation. When the frac crew comes out later, they can not frac those zones. Basically when they try they over pressure almost instantly and the safety cutouts kick. Natural pressure may be about 5-6K PSI. Normal frac pressure may be around 6-9K PSI. Sometimes more. But, over pressure will be about 11-13K. The pressure gear on surface is rated for about 15K a lot of times. Lower pressure wells like in ND are only 10K a lot of times. So, thy over pressure around 9-9.5K. If the water can not be forced in at over double natural pressure, it's not going to get out on it's own at the natural pressure. Also, normal laws of physics dictates that the pressure will find the easiest path of escape. And that is the well bore. It's a lot easier to get out through a 4-5 inch pipe than it is to get through two miles of tight rock formation.
So if the fracking is done far enough away from groundwater, why are there so many videos online of Americans with flammable tap water?
+Dan Xepha -- Because methane in ground water came before fracking. There has always been spots where you can light the water on fire. There just wasn't a political reason to show it.
+Dan Xepha
that has been occurring for a hundred years !! it is NOT a NEW issue (especially in Pennsylvania) or google "methane seeps" in the ocean !!
+Dan Xepha Actually: most, if not all, of those were proven to be hoaxes.
+Dan Xepha There are some places where the fracking is not done well. If methane gets into the water, that is due to cracks or faults in the steel casings and cement walls of the fracking wells that are meant to prevent things like that. It's not a problem if it's done well, but apparently, just like with oil companies, faults happen a lot more often than they should.
Well even if it is safe we really need to stop burning fossil fuels and find alternatives anyway. They won't last forever so the sooner we replace them the better.
You conveniently forgot to mention the tons of toxic chemicals mixed in to the fracking slurry! What oil company is sponsoring this video? Are you being paid enough to keep you, your children and their children with imported bottled water for the rest of your/their lives? Because your ground water will be ruined. I expect a follow up video addressing the chemical compounds used in the slurry. Right now you look extremely pro-fracking. "We'll just pump down a little water with a bit of beach sand and, voila, free natural gas without any side effects."
+lhl2500 The video is from a BBC family/children's science show, so it's of course over-simplified. I think this episode was a couple of years ago. BBC has always claimed to be more impartial than it is. The video won't be directly corporately sponsored, but BBC journalism does generally reinforce the government's message and although the UK government is relatively low on the corruption index, there's not a government in the world which doesn't have some corruption.
The UK government (currently the party which disproportionately represents the rich) is generally pro-fracking because it's a natural resource that we actually do have plenty of (which is quite rare), inland where it's cheaper to get to than off-shore and they want to capitalise on that. It's also mostly the poorer parts of the country that will be affected, so won't affect many government ministers in any personal way. I do think it's ironic that the political party that closed all the coal mines when there was still plenty of coal left and switched to importing it now wants to mine for methane in the same places.
Well you seem to know so much, please explain these deadly chemicals
+jon paskewitz
Acetaldehyde
flamability 4
health 2
reactivity 2
Acetophenone
flamability 2
health 1
reactivity 0
Acrylamide
flamability 2
health 3
reactivity 2
Benzene
flamability 3
health 2
reactivity 0
Benzyl chloride
flamability 2
health 3
reactivity 1
Copper
flamability 1
health 1
reactivity 0
Cumene
flamability 3
health 2
reactivity 1
Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
flamability 1
health 0
reactivity 0
possible endocrine disruptor
Diesel
flamability 1
health 1
reactivity 0
Diethanolamine
flamability 1
health 3
reactivity 0
Dimethyl formamide
flamability 2
health 2
reactivity 0
Ethylbenzene
flamability 3
health 2
reactivity 0
Ethylene glycol
flamability 1
health 1
reactivity 0
Ethylene oxide
flamability 4
health 3
reactivity 3
Formaldehyde
flamability 4
health 3
reactivity 0
corrosive
Hydrochloric acid
flamability 0
health 3
reactivity 1
corrosive
Hydrofluoric acid
flamability 0
health 4
reactivity 0
acid
Lead
flamability 0
health 2
reactivity 0
Methanol
flamability 3
health 1
reactivity 0
Naphthalene
flamability 2
health 2
reactivity 0
Nitrilotriacetic acid
flamability ?
health ?
reactivity ?
p-Xylene
flamability 3
health 2
reactivity 0
Phenol
flamability 2
health 3
reactivity 0
corrosive
Phthalic anhydride
flamability 1
health 3
reactivity 0
Propylene oxide
flamability 4
health 3
reactivity 2
Sulfuric acid
flamability 0
health 3
reactivity 2
₩
Thiourea
flamability 1
health 3
reactivity 0
Toluene
flamability 3
health 2
reactivity 0
Xylene
flamability 3 - 3 - 3
health 2 - 1 - 2
reactivity 0 - 0 - 0
oil != natural gas
+Ja-Shwa Cardell any one can look compounds up on wiki. you are aware the uk has some of the best environment protection laws and regulations...
In the US we have towns who's water supply has been tainted with methane because of fracking. You can actually light the water on fire if you hold an open flame to it.
Firstly, many of those videos have been shown as hoaxes. Secondly there are places where you can light the water before fracking, so fracking may not be to blame
+Christian's Channel That sounds good to me... just buy bottled water and use the flammable water to heat/power your home!
it is because the idiots are leaking their stuff along the pipes ;(
How will they sell the gass if everyone gets all their gass through the waterpipes?
Daniel Cider Not all the gas ends up in the water supply. But there's enough seepage to contaminate the water.
Fracking makes the frogs turn gay.
+Leeta I heard they also convert to islam and demand a ban on bacon!!!!
Isn`t it fracking that causes this burning water in the US?
yes
+Robberto Pyne short and helpfull
+Fry, Phillip J The problem is not that fracking is inherently bad, it's just that the US doesn't have proper regulations about how and where it should be done.
+Fry, Phillip J Nope, the burning water existed before fracking was invented.
+Sad But Mad Lad sure: methane + water = burning water, the problem is most places where methane is in the water (us) it comes from fracking
I heard that fracking causes adult baldness. Damn you, fracking companies!
ground water levels are variable, the water table shifts, and their are channels that connect it to the surface.
The distances we are talking between the ground water levels and the fracking zone typically over a mile and a half. A casing (concrete wall) separates the well and the ground water. In the USA there have been NO water table contamination from the well communicating with the water table.
wouldn't allowing these earthquakes to occur release the built up potential energy on the plates-- thus preventing a damaging earthquake?
Just a thought.
It's not the earthquakes that people are worried about its the chemicals that could end up in the water table that worries everyone
A good way to tell if a scientist has money down his throat - a "clean" scientist, when in doubt, will use words like "uncertain", "unknown", "there isn't any data". A scientist with money shoved down his throat will always use something like "probably will not be any problem."
I think the question is not whether or not fracking is dangerous it is: Why not put that money into developing clean energy sources instead?
Money is being put into developing clean energy sources. Until those sources are viable you cannot just stop producing the energy we rely on.
If there is no possible leakage of fracking chemicals or gas in the drinking water, would you please (and this is non-agressive, just curiosity) explain the hundreds of videos online of people lighting their tap water on fire or whole rivers for that matter, near fracking sites ?
Is drilling the desert for oil a danger to sea life just because a tanker sank?
"Flint, Michigan"
video.lmgtfy.com/?q=lighting+tap+water+on+fire ... There you go, 41,400 results.
I love when people posts links like that one, it makes it easy to spot no life losers and obnoxious douche bags. Ironic your name is Chris Evans, which also proves the second option.
He asked for a list of videos, I gave him a list of videos, sorry you find that obnoxious.
Fracking is just so bad. There are tons of examples in the US where fracking just devastates huge parts of the landscape... Just leave the gas where it is and look for other possibilities to fulfill our growing gas demands... There are literally dozens of better and greener possibilities to generate electricity and extract gas...
+Der Hammer derrrrrrr
Der Hammer like yeah, it's like soooo bad. Like there's science and stuff, you know man? It's a conspiracy because I think they rely want to let the air out of the lands you know? And it makes less land to grow crops and live on. When they do that u know the man's gotcha down
my concern about "Fracking" is: the huge amount of water used. That's why I think "Fracking" is not good for people
1:50 see that rock? imagine your house is on top of it, now you know why Fracking is not that good
So? Introduce regulation that prevents it near houses. OH wait! They already did that...
Thomas Richardson If fracking is contaminating the earth beneath but there's no one there to see it, is it contaminating?
If my house were on top of it, I'd be getting royalty checks.
Whats the evidence that Fracking is bad? cos all i see in the comments is people shouting their OPINIONS at a video that involved an expert.
+Thomas Richardson yup, definately have a bridge to sell you, cheap too
+lynda williams you LITERALLY just proved my point, where's your evidence that fracking is bad?
+Thomas Richardson If you expect the comment section to be a source of information then you're just deluded. First easy steps would be to google fracking? Is it that hard?
Go to google to find the facts. The first 10 pages of evidence by real experts should be proof enough.
Let's go Electric. Solar. Wind. Geothermal.
It's better. It's cheaper. It's reliable.
Here in northern BC Canada rhey are able to recover most of the water sent down. Also the companies can only use either designated frac water trucked in or collected rain water.
+TheCanadianOne So there's only some chance that innocent bystanders are harmed by the collection of the gas.
Luckily many more innocent bystanders will be hurt by the following processes this gas is used for. Oh wait, that's not nice at all.
Darckense Onoda what?
I live in Dallas and we get earthquakes on a regular basis now because of this.
Except that it's not "just water." It's shit tons of chemicals that can seep into people's water supplies.
+Szymon Gorczynski have you watched till the end, where they talk about the chemicals? Sounds like you didn't.
Janszler I did, and that "expert" obviously has shares in fracking companies.
+Szymon Gorczynski if you did watch it till the end, then why suggest they claimed it's only water that's used for fracking? And why dismiss an expert on the matter in advance, by assuming he's paid by the industry? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and state you're definitely not an expert on this matter. And neither am I.
I'm not pro-fracking, but I feel if you have something to say, inform yourself and discuss things with facts and reason. Simply yelling "chemicals!!!" isn't contributing much imo.
if every expert you come across is bought, clearly you're the one who's bought.
Alan Ball That makes no sense whatsoever.
Its a very safe process, in the US we have been doing it for decades. I know someone that worked on a fracking crew for several years, the process is fascinating, they drill the well, perforate the pipe every so many feet, and once that is done, they pump the high pressure water and sand down to open the rock up. Before they perforate the pipe, they also sanitize it to kill any microbes that could contaminate anything as well. Everything they pump down the well, except for the sand, comes back up and does not stay.
+compactc9 Except when regulations are ignored or equipment failure happens, unfortunately this is more the standard than "safe drilling" environmentamerica.org/sites/environment/files/reports/EA_PA_fracking_scrn.pdf
Example:
In July 2012, for example, Chief Oil & Gas was cited by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) when the company allowed 4,700 gallons of hydrochloric acid to flow off of its drilling site in Leroy Township, Bradford County, and into nearby Towanda Creek, causing a fish kill.
Well problems, including leaks, contaminated drinking water supplies in as many as 243 cases across Pennsylvania between December 2007 and August 2014 - 81 of them between 2011 and 2014. In one such case Carrizo (Marcellus) LLC was cited for failing to properly restore a water supply its fracking activities had contaminated.
In Pennsylvania, fracking companies violate rules and regulations meant to protect the environment and human health on virtually a daily basis. Between January 1, 2011, and August 31, 2014, the top 20 offending fracking companies committed an average of 1.5 violations per day.
+compactc9
it's not just in the US, Fracking has been done in the UK since the 1930s. The sudden backlash against it is bizarre.
+unassumption The backlash is bound to increase when the amount of fracking increases and hits close to home.
'More than a dozen minor earthquakes have struck western Alabama’s Greene County since November. The area is near the Black Warrior Basin, where thousands of hydraulic fracturing natural gas wells have been operating in recent years.' (2015) Just an unpredictable black swan phenomenon?
Note how the expert says that METHANE can only penetrate a few meters into the rock.
He doesn't say anything about the chemicals being used.
This video also doesn't mention that the used mixture of chemicals and water is usually pumped back into the rock and left there once the gas deposit has been exhausted.
And in the US, fracking ruined water supply for whole towns, even making the water from the faucet FLAMMABLE.
I don't mind filling my future methane car with my drinking water but i won't call it "drinking" anymore.
good thing that you don't have to drill _through_ the water bed, so there is no way the fracking fluid gets to drinking water, no way at all /s
I lived in Oklahoma for several years. Fracking is quite commonplace there. While we have seen an increase in small quakes (about once every few months we may see one as high as a 4.0, with the highest i remember being a 4.5 because it woke me up dammit) there have been no issues with poisoned groundwater that i have ever seen or heard of. People act as though they pump the chemicals directly into their faucet or the local nature reserve. in truth the depth of fracking is going to be way deeper than the water supply. there are probably more immediate threats, and also, worse places to put toxic chemicals. They have to go somewhere.
He's not entirely lying - if done responsibly, it should be possible to mitigate the risks we *know of*. What we've seen from fraking so far as earthquakes go isn't too threatening, and if done right, the hazardous materials should be kept away from the water supply.
However, the real issue we have in the states is our backasswards regulation that doesn't give a shit. The most real danger is negligent companies who don't want to properly dispose of waste material, and instead it ends up in lakes and rivers where it eventually gets into drinking water. Would companies be handled better in the UK? Probably not.
It is funny that they talk about the dangers of methane when the gas only has acute effects in extremely high concentrations. The real risk is if the unknown proprietary chemicals used in the fracking process can seep into drinking water.
Im going to be 100% honest here. I live in Texas. Fracking started here in 2012. The water was shit out here in West Texas before fracking ever started. However, we do have small earthquakes now in 2017, nothing earth shattering. Most don't even register, but i have never been able to light the water on fire. I think those people live in areas where the water smells like sulpher! East Texas and Louisiana and Florida are all known for this nasty water. Even in areas there has never been any drilling.
Yeah there's a lot of distance between the shale and the water supply but they burrow a straight tunnel between the two just to get to the shale.
That's where you're wrong. The pipe that's sent below can crack any time. If it happens, the toxic wet mix will deep into ground water. You will die soon.
I can guarantee you, that there is no system in the world that's working with zero flaws or errors. Even a nuclear reactor. Since it's far away from the residential area, it's kinda safe. There can't be any leaks in radiation since there are only a few nuclear reactors. It's safe. During earth quakes, it's dangerous. That's why nuclear power plants are built where there is less chance of earth quakes.
But for fracking, you would still holes a hundred times or more. Even a slightest carelessness in one hole will lead to catastrophic failures and deaths. When there is an earth quake, even the properly sealed tubes will break and let the chemical loose into the soil. And fracking is done only where the hydrocarbons are available, not based on seismic zones.
Grow some brains sir.
Sorry to correct you but fracking hasn't been halted in South Africa. Its currently at the exploration level.
fracking is only bad if its close enough to damage your well supply
Here we are, watching BBC showing us how to frack out trapped gases.
I get a kick out of all the commenters that have ZERO clue on how a well is drilled, and completed commenting on this video. Unless you know about well design. Ask questions and leave out the ignorant comments. If you ask intelligent questions, people that actually know something about the industry will respond respectfully.
For everyone freaking out over its affects on water, the problem in the US is that fracking is not regulated while other industries are, so other industries will pay fracking companies to add chemicals that are not necessary as it is cheaper than proper disposal, but it is a problem with the US that may or may not exist in other countries. Further if the US actually gave a damn they could regulate fracking such that they cannot add any non-necessary, harmful chemicals as you only need water and sand.
EDIT: further most cases of water contamination are not due to fracking, and most burning water videos are hoaxes, that and some places already had methane in water but there was no political reason to point it out before.
Oklahoma in 2008 and before averaged about 2 earthquakes of 3.0 or higher magnitude. Since then we've been averaging about 250 a year. Last year alone had 890 earthquakes of magnitude 3.0 or higher, including at least one that reached 4.7 magnitude. That's a significant jump for an area that's typically seismically stable.
fracking in Groningen (NL) caused higher scale then average earthquakes, causing alot of dammage
Ok, I want evryone to look and understand. Even if you think that a liltlle earthquake is not a big deal, you might know that pressurised water put into a hole (even for fracking) has to come back up, in the USA they stock that "²black water" (which is highly polluted) in large pools on the ground, and yes there is a lot of spillage and pollution...
the first five seconds I knew exactly where he was. if they are going to crack there I will personally tear the place down!
Pro: some energy for a limited time
Cons: if corners are cut then gas and chemicals will leak into the water table and ruin the water supply of the surrounding area, if something goes wrong then gas and chemicals will leak into the water table and ruin the water supply of the surrounding area.
So yay cheap* energy with the risk of ruining the water table.
*only cheap compaired to peak oil prices, more expensive than renewables or nuclear.
Stay warm this winter.
it's actualy a big problem I some parts of the us. some companies did freaking get right next to and near aquifers and allowed methane into the pipe systems of thousands of homes. it got so bad that people were able to turn on there faucet and light the end of their water spout on fire
Enough supply for decades??? Nah the uk has potential reserves to last for 9 years at current demand and it is still uncertain if all of the reserves can be utilised efficiently.
This is like knocking down your house to find 10p
No mention of what chemicals are being mixed with water or what will be the wastage. Is this an Ad or an explanation?
When I saw what the water did to the rock I understood why a full bladder turns me into Usain Bolt
Interesting video. so much rage in the comments. i don't really see big downsides to fracking, seems like a safe enough process. minor earthquakes don't seem to bother people, and the drilling happens far below the water table. i don't understand what everyone is complaining about at this point.
When is bang goes the theory back on tv?
People here were brainwashed to think that fracking is evil and bad. When faced with the truth, they whine.
it is always nice to identify another OIL and Gas company sponsored channel
I can just imagine the BBC running up to the conservatives with this film and pleading to stay on air.
Oil company sponsored video? What chemicals...?
Why not just drill two holes, one to release pressure and one to pump up the gas and goods, if has to be sealed with the pressure, make the pressure back in and seal the hole..?
Wait a minute... He says with franking the 'methane' might only be able to travel a few metres and not get near the water, but doesn't the natural gas make it all the way to the surface? Just a novice question, but none of it strikes me as an exact science anyway. How can they guarantee that fracking at one depth is only ever going to stay extremely localised? Our rivers in Australia have bubbled with enough methane to be set in fire and remain burning for over an hour! mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-23/condamine-river-bubbling-methane-gas-set-alight-greens-mp/7352578
Could have also said that water is one of the only things on Earth that can't be compressed!! Water would put dents in steel presses if you tried to squash it and it can't escape!! That's why they use it!!
Well in the US and many parts of Australia where there can't be methane leakage or water contaminations because its too far, there is, so good luck to your overly optimistic (paid for ??) views
yea rite no methane or chemicals like benzine in the drinking water tell that to the people who can open their faucet and light it on fire maybe no leaks from the rock that's fracked but the borehole connects all the layers to the drinking water basin so when the borehole leaks and they often do bingo there's your problem
...or how it will effect the price of your home.
+NichoTBE
only because idiots think fracking is bad
it isnt about the fracking, its about the greenhouse gasses you guys are releasing... I thought we where trying to get rid of those?
inconsequential compared to potential earthquakes
We should not be waisting money trying to get more gas. That money should be invested in research into renewable energy sauces.
in here: people who do not know a single thing about geology repeating others' opinions.
what he doesn’t say is that this is not for natural gas, nature creates some kind of lubricant to ease movement of tectonic plates, this is what they are extracting, thank you governments
HAHAHA fracking has already some of the drinking water flammable in the States so that geologist is so wrong.
The sand use is synthetic they also use military grade high explosives, radio active mapping technology's, acid and a special ultra-dense slurry we're loose rocks sediments float to top. Depends on geology ,but no earthquakes have been caused in the west slope of Colorado from fracking. Ultimately fracking does not cause sinkholes because solid /liquid Mass isn't took out under ground only gas ,and some water that was pump in the beginning of the fracking process. Unlike in crude oil extraction, or coal mining.
question. if the gas is so massively deep and gas is made from dead life mater how did it get so deep? was it just plate movement?
+Joseph Fox it was laid down a long time ago. millions of years. same as oil.
Viridis Lux I think it could make a cool video on the process of how gas became gas
Hey, I've got an idea!
How about we spend the money being used to develop this polluting and potentially hazardous oil and gas supply and, I don't know, put it into developing and building new, more efficient renewable sources of energy that that won't pollute the environment for decades and perhaps centuries to come!
+CCcrafted "Your" "idea", and BWAHAHAHAHAHA! all the way on that one, has already sunk upwards of at least a TRILLION dollars of TAXPAYERS money into the "new, more efficient renewable sources" game with poor to no results. Dozens of these govt. sponsored boondoggles have gone belly up, costing taxpayers billions of dollars. It's time that loud-mouthed eco-billionaires started putting THEIR money where their mouths are, instead of it always being taxpayers who have to foot the bill.
+bohnstube Enter Elon Musk.
ElectricTriangle To do what exactly? To have the stock price of his "SolarCity" (NASDAQ symbol: SCTY) plunge from a high of nearly 85 dollars back at the end of February of 2014, to its current price of *not even 22 dollars* (U.S.). You DO know why that's happened, don't you? It's because the time period for the U.S. government subsidizing the operation is coming to an end, (and at least as far as how private investors are seeing it) unless the U.S. government shovels even more taxpayers money into this operation, private investors are not at all confident that Musk's operations can turn even so much as a dime in profits.
Source: Google "Solar City Stock Price History", and expand the chart out to 5 years to make it easier to read.
bohnstube
Ah, excuse me for thinking that taxpayer money should go to the public good. I suppose you're protesting oil and gas subsidies as well? I guess you don't care about climate change, do ya? Not your problem?
ElectricTriangle Any you don't care about answering any of the questions posed to you, "do ya"... nope, of course you don't. Because then you'd have to admit to your ilk's hair on fire, drive the ambulance up to the front door, bullshit as being nothing but simply a smokescreen you and your ilk to try and cobble together your long held ultimate wet dream of creating one huge "one world" socialist nation state, with no national boundaries, and no national sovereignty over any current country's use of it's own natural resources to do with as they believe is in the best *current* interests of their own people. Not about "the environment", not about any "saving of the planet" eco-hippie bullshit. It's about socialism. Always has been, always will be.
that guy was so full of it, the truth is they have no control over where there water and chemicals go.
Huh, electricity gathered with other methods can easily substitute methane
Asking someone who is in agreement to fraking will not give u true answers or dangers caused by the process ..... if you weaken any foundation by whatever means .... How long before the upper structure fails....
and it will fail !!
But I guess as long as the process makes money , who cares about the after effects..
"We don't know how it will affect the price of gas" - Just look at how the price of petrol has dropped. All due to the gas produced in America.
If we produced our own we wouldn't need to pay money to foreign countries, many with dubious ethical standards, and could keep more of the taxes raised for our own use.
+Sad But Mad Lad yeah we need more of our taxes to go towards free houses for romanians
I wonder who paid for this episode.
Just watch one of many videos of people lighting their tap water on fire and decide for yourself if fracking is safe or not.
+jimboblivesforever That stunt's on record as having existed since before the 1920's, and it's not at all uncommon for methane gas deposits to be located naturally close to drilled water wells.
talk to the people in the US that are near a frack well that can't drink the water they were drinking before from their well.
not only can they not drink the water anymore but they can set in fire.
just because you have a PHD you can still ignore empirical data.
what if if we sent high strength PCC after fracking? Make it strong again :)
Five years after the fracking boom in PA, USA, there have been many polluted wells, but the problem has been shoved under the ground, so to speak.
you need to decide if you want your water to catch on fire like it does in Australia due to fracking
+MrKeflor The oft-times pointed to old stunt which is *documented* to have existed since at least the pre-1920's era only "proves" that pockets of methane gas and sources of water can exist close to one another, and nothing more.
"Unexpected side-effects", I think they mean completely expected side-effects.
Needs more James May!
Rather than doing all this, more money and research should be put into other sources of energy. I have been saying this from the 80s when they started building nuclear power plants here in Germany. Imagine how much more advanced we would be now using solar, wind and water for energy production if they had developed these technologies from then on!!
And... For every expert who tells you, it's nothing to worry about, you will definitely find one - if not more - who will tell you the exact opposite!
Chrissie aka GermaicanLady We can develop technologies as best we can but we cannot break the laws of physics. Solar and wind just don’t have enough energy density to adequately supply nations. Here in the UK we have the biggest and best wind farms in the world yet it only produces 3% of our electricity whereas Drax power station does 7% on its own.
Nuclear power station are a fantastic green power option since it has the energy density of fossil fuel stations yet emits zero harmful gases and radiation. It is extremely unlikely that a meltdown will ever occur especially only 2 have ever happened and were in very unique situations.
You can be idealist all you like but you can’t keep the lights on with wishful thinking.
This video clip is like 2 years old at least
Be careful what you wish for Brittain! This is still a very young method, and long term effects could be a disaster as well... And those chemicals ruin the environment!
Okay, let’s clear up the earthquake thing. Yes, fracking can cause an earthquake. Only if the fracking takes place with in a quarter mile of the fault.
You do know that their is literally tonnes of oil left oil wont run out until your grandchildren's children are around
+kurtilein3 if oil was running out then why the hell are the oil prices falling. In america and across the middle east they have oil reserves that haven't even started to produce oil yet we are still collecting water from the ocean and we are not even close to using that up
Shrek Dank
prices are irrelevant. you need to look at supply. supply is going down, which means prices should go up, instead they go down, and this is because people reduce their dependency on oil faster than the oil supply is dropping. Prices can very well do the opposite of what you would expect. With supply its a different story.
I am fairly fine with this as long as its just water.
+tgillies101 That is partly the issue though. When fracking started in USA people were freaking out because the solution they were using was considered top secret and the only people allowed to know what was being used were medical and fire staff. Pretty sure the counter argument was that they were corporate secrets.
+tgillies101 In Queensland Australia, the government has a list of chemicals that you can view that show what may be used in fracking fluids. You'd be surprised to find that those chemicals are no different to things you find around the house, from whats in a bar of soap to chemicals in your day to day food such as vinegar. The exceptions are BTEX chemicals (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) which are considered extremely harmful; these are illegal to use in fracking fluids.
The evidence of the dangers is overwhelming. The need for the gas is non-existent...unless it is your business to sell people a useless and deadly product.
+D Powell I'd say that if your comment was turned around 180* it would be more accurate. As much energy as has been produced so overwhelmingly SAFELY and to the point where it has made it cheaper and safer ON A WORLDWIDE SCALE to heat homes and power businesses, is indeed a VERY useful product.
+bohnstube So-called natural gas is anything but safe. Thousands die from it worldwide in fires of "Unknown Causes." Range Hoods are there for gas stoves and aren't really needed for electric. Cooking over gas for a prolonged period of times will take you from light-headed to painful headache to passing out.
+D Powell And again you're determined to try and ridiculously over-hype the "Dangers!!!!!!* of what literally billions of people around the globe have used with no problems for decades, for your own personal unexplained and unsupported agenda. Maybe you really do have genuine terrifying and debilitating fears of paper cuts and of sticking your head out from beneath the covers every morning because you fear getting hit by a bus. Does anyone really know or care about what the motivations are of those who are so blatantly and ridiculously alarmist?
random fact :the rules and regulations document regarding fracking is a measly 5 pages long. I am not kidding -_-
Love his accent
How about in stead of finding all new ways to exploit deeper and deeper gas ignoring all the risks like "minor earthquakes" focus on new sources and making them more efficient? no? oh. ok.
And what about radioactive isotopes trapped in shale?
Using ocean wave energy has not been done correctly yet. An old river mill would skim the top of the moving water not some clever snaky device. I know tides would make this type of device only work at certain times. Not if the mill turbines are on top buoys.
Poor Walter' Almanac
Does that guy at 3:30 work for the gas companies?
This can solve the energy crisis
i thought it was chemicals that they add to the water and sand that extracts the gas in the shale.