Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not bad.
My personal bet is at sixty dollars a barrel it will work environment be damned. Think at one sixty they can probably do it right?
Still though, we probably will not run out during my life time.
If you don't like drilling or mining
support nuclear or learn to chop wood.
Not bad.
My personal bet is at sixty dollars a barrel it will work environment be damned. Think at one sixty they can probably do it right?
Still though, we probably will not run out during my life time.
If you don't like drilling or mining
support nuclear or learn to chop wood.
Drilling seems to work with fewer big government subsidies than nuclear. Although I believe we should keep our hands in nuclear it does not excite me much.
So where is the most similar operation to what will be going on in West Texas?
Among other things, it alleges that the
hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells has contaminated nearby water wells with methane in a
number of states including Colorado.
in other words, it doesn't prove.
Among other things, it alleges that the
hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells has contaminated nearby water wells with methane in a
number of states including Colorado.
in other words, it doesn't prove.
Right, so lets just ignore it and make a few more shekels. What's the worst thing that could happen anyway?
debunked
By scientist
why is it a good thing to do that without examining what the potential for environmental damage is.
Drilling does minor harm. The same amount of harm any building would do it you cover the land with concrete.
The fracking is done well below the water line. there is no hazard.
debunked
By scientist
By which scientist exactly? And how?
why is it a good thing to do that without examining what the potential for environmental damage is.
Drilling does minor harm. The same amount of harm any building would do it you cover the land with concrete.
The fracking is done well below the water line. there is no hazard.
OK prove it's not hazardous then.
And you're supposed to wash your hands after using the restroom. And you're supposed to shore up that coal mine and keep the coal dust to a minimum. And you're supposed to have confidence in a nuclear power plant even if it's built on a seismic fault line.A cancer epidemic is a small price to pay for an economic boon.
How the hell does natural gas cause cancer?
If you are talking about the fracking fluids, yes they have to make sure they collect them properly when they reach back to the surface. they also have to make sure the well pipe liner is structurally sound.
Hydro fracking can be done safely if rules are followed. THATS the job of regulators, using regulations that are both conservative when it comes to safety, and reasonable when it comes to scope.
And you're supposed to wash your hands after using the restroom. And you're supposed to shore up that coal mine and keep the coal dust to a minimum. And you're supposed to have confidence in a nuclear power plant even if it's built on a seismic fault line.A cancer epidemic is a small price to pay for an economic boon.
How the hell does natural gas cause cancer?
If you are talking about the fracking fluids, yes they have to make sure they collect them properly when they reach back to the surface. they also have to make sure the well pipe liner is structurally sound.
Hydro fracking can be done safely if rules are followed. THATS the job of regulators, using regulations that are both conservative when it comes to safety, and reasonable when it comes to scope.
And you're supposed to have sufficient funding for those inspectors to ensure hydraulic fracing is done safely. Now, what's all this about cutting the government's budget?
And you're supposed to wash your hands after using the restroom. And you're supposed to shore up that coal mine and keep the coal dust to a minimum. And you're supposed to have confidence in a nuclear power plant even if it's built on a seismic fault line.A cancer epidemic is a small price to pay for an economic boon.
How the hell does natural gas cause cancer?
If you are talking about the fracking fluids, yes they have to make sure they collect them properly when they reach back to the surface. they also have to make sure the well pipe liner is structurally sound.
Hydro fracking can be done safely if rules are followed. THATS the job of regulators, using regulations that are both conservative when it comes to safety, and reasonable when it comes to scope.
And you're supposed to have sufficient funding for those inspectors to ensure hydraulic fracing is done safely. Now, what's all this about cutting the government's budget?
I was the resident inspector for construction projects and hazardous waste abatement projects for twenty years. Believe me when I say that some contractors can be trusted to accomplish a task safely and on budget while others cannot be trusted to store bowling balls in their warehouse, let alone remove a leaking underground storage tank, abate asbestos-containing building materials, clear the soil of PCBs or conduct hydraulic fracturing operations.And you're supposed to wash your hands after using the restroom. And you're supposed to shore up that coal mine and keep the coal dust to a minimum. And you're supposed to have confidence in a nuclear power plant even if it's built on a seismic fault line.How the hell does natural gas cause cancer?
If you are talking about the fracking fluids, yes they have to make sure they collect them properly when they reach back to the surface. they also have to make sure the well pipe liner is structurally sound.
Hydro fracking can be done safely if rules are followed. THATS the job of regulators, using regulations that are both conservative when it comes to safety, and reasonable when it comes to scope.
And you're supposed to have sufficient funding for those inspectors to ensure hydraulic fracing is done safely. Now, what's all this about cutting the government's budget?
If the rules were simpler they would require less money to enforce, as you wouldnt need a team of government lawyers to interpret each one. Compliance can be determined from:
1. approval of drawings
2. Inspection during setup or particularly dangerous activities
3. Spot inspections to keep people honest.
Something similar to the FDA grading thing would be useful, where the beef industry pays to have inspectors onsite to judge if the beef is prime/choice/select. etc.
I was the resident inspector for construction projects and hazardous waste abatement projects for twenty years. Believe me when I say that some contractors can be trusted to accomplish a task safely and on budget while others cannot be trusted to store bowling balls in their warehouse, let alone remove a leaking underground storage tank, abate asbestos-containing building materials, clear the soil of PCBs or conduct hydraulic fracturing operations.And you're supposed to wash your hands after using the restroom. And you're supposed to shore up that coal mine and keep the coal dust to a minimum. And you're supposed to have confidence in a nuclear power plant even if it's built on a seismic fault line.
And you're supposed to have sufficient funding for those inspectors to ensure hydraulic fracing is done safely. Now, what's all this about cutting the government's budget?
If the rules were simpler they would require less money to enforce, as you wouldnt need a team of government lawyers to interpret each one. Compliance can be determined from:
1. approval of drawings
2. Inspection during setup or particularly dangerous activities
3. Spot inspections to keep people honest.
Something similar to the FDA grading thing would be useful, where the beef industry pays to have inspectors onsite to judge if the beef is prime/choice/select. etc.
A set of rules you can scribble on a post-it note won't suffice!
I was the resident inspector for construction projects and hazardous waste abatement projects for twenty years. Believe me when I say that some contractors can be trusted to accomplish a task safely and on budget while others cannot be trusted to store bowling balls in their warehouse, let alone remove a leaking underground storage tank, abate asbestos-containing building materials, clear the soil of PCBs or conduct hydraulic fracturing operations.If the rules were simpler they would require less money to enforce, as you wouldnt need a team of government lawyers to interpret each one. Compliance can be determined from:
1. approval of drawings
2. Inspection during setup or particularly dangerous activities
3. Spot inspections to keep people honest.
Something similar to the FDA grading thing would be useful, where the beef industry pays to have inspectors onsite to judge if the beef is prime/choice/select. etc.
A set of rules you can scribble on a post-it note won't suffice!
I have a background in engineering, with a specialization in wastewater treatment, including design, construction, and operations/control. right now I run construction so I am familiar with contractor quality.
The problems we have today are with the system we have today, so obviously there is a problem. And just as you cannot use a post it note for proper regulation, a 1500 page guide that spends 1200 pages covering how you report it, 200 pages on who to report it to, and only 100 pages on what the hell you are supposed to be doing is not the right way either.
]
A couple of points, thumbs. And I'm not refudiating (thanks, Sarah!) your story, but I've got to believe there's more to it than $275,000 for one oily rag. And, not to get technical, but OSHA sets regulations for private industry. The EPA regulates government workplaces.I was the resident inspector for construction projects and hazardous waste abatement projects for twenty years. Believe me when I say that some contractors can be trusted to accomplish a task safely and on budget while others cannot be trusted to store bowling balls in their warehouse, let alone remove a leaking underground storage tank, abate asbestos-containing building materials, clear the soil of PCBs or conduct hydraulic fracturing operations.
A set of rules you can scribble on a post-it note won't suffice!
I have a background in engineering, with a specialization in wastewater treatment, including design, construction, and operations/control. right now I run construction so I am familiar with contractor quality.
The problems we have today are with the system we have today, so obviously there is a problem. And just as you cannot use a post it note for proper regulation, a 1500 page guide that spends 1200 pages covering how you report it, 200 pages on who to report it to, and only 100 pages on what the hell you are supposed to be doing is not the right way either.
kewl, 2 people that have some near first hand knowledge.
Nosmo, it's not about throwing out the book, no ones fool enough to do that [
However the book gets over bearing.
It takes 30+ years to open a nuke plant, so no one bothers b/c it takes to long to start earning money let alone turn a profit.
ever hear of OSHA? These goons patroled the Navy for anything that may be wrong, and when they didn't find anything, or not enough, they hounded the crews.
I was on the USS Orion. a very old sub repair ship, that was getting ready for decomissioning. But for some reason OSHA wanted to inspect it. One very new shipmate, spilled a bucket of grease. He followed all the rules as best that he could and those around him could. While he was cleaning, an inspecter came by and asked him if he was done with that rag. [he had filled it and set it next to him] He said yes.
bam
$275,000 fine for not properly disposing of the oily rag.
Why were we really fined? Power. The inspector had the power and power corrupts.
A couple of points, thumbs. And I'm not refudiating (thanks, Sarah!) your story, but I've got to believe there's more to it than $275,000 for one oily rag. And, not to get technical, but OSHA sets regulations for private industry. The EPA regulates government workplaces.I have a background in engineering, with a specialization in wastewater treatment, including design, construction, and operations/control. right now I run construction so I am familiar with contractor quality.
The problems we have today are with the system we have today, so obviously there is a problem. And just as you cannot use a post it note for proper regulation, a 1500 page guide that spends 1200 pages covering how you report it, 200 pages on who to report it to, and only 100 pages on what the hell you are supposed to be doing is not the right way either.
kewl, 2 people that have some near first hand knowledge.
Nosmo, it's not about throwing out the book, no ones fool enough to do that [
However the book gets over bearing.
It takes 30+ years to open a nuke plant, so no one bothers b/c it takes to long to start earning money let alone turn a profit.
ever hear of OSHA? These goons patroled the Navy for anything that may be wrong, and when they didn't find anything, or not enough, they hounded the crews.
I was on the USS Orion. a very old sub repair ship, that was getting ready for decomissioning. But for some reason OSHA wanted to inspect it. One very new shipmate, spilled a bucket of grease. He followed all the rules as best that he could and those around him could. While he was cleaning, an inspecter came by and asked him if he was done with that rag. [he had filled it and set it next to him] He said yes.
bam
$275,000 fine for not properly disposing of the oily rag.
Why were we really fined? Power. The inspector had the power and power corrupts.
I know no one wants to throw out the book. But, ask yourself, how does the book get written in the first place? For instance, OSHA sets regulations for exposure limits to hazardous and toxic materials. But OSHA doesn't do the research on those materials. NIOSH (National Institutes for Occupational Safety and Health) does. In many many instances, a Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) (usually fifteen minutes or so) can be established by NIOSH at, for instance 15 parts per million (ppm). But by the time industry lobbyists get through the public comment portion of a hearing, that STEL can be two or three times higher than the NIOSH recommendation.
Profit trumps science. Then the science is castigated by partisans as "junk science" and the public debate gets muddled in a political squabble rather than sound scientific findings.
