Fracking: Gasland or Cleaner Energy

Do you think Fracking should be practiced in the world.

https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/...36691717_n.jpg

thats not a very neutral definition is it

"the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc. so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas."

is a neutral definition.

and yes we should

I like it because it has a cool name

Oh just frack off.

Ah I see we're going to play the bias definition game. I wanna join in;

Ty.ler¹

noun: Tyler

1. An annoying child who doesn't offer reasonable evidence to support any of his arguments and is part-troll.
2. A name Katie Hopkins hates.

See also: Habbox, Dragga, Annoyance, and Fluoride-Obsession.

ohmygod hayden +rep
ot: i picked i need more info

I believe Fracking should be Banned. The reasoning to this is it uses up to 20 Million Litres (600 Tanker Trucks) of water per well, which this water more than likely is from a stream or surface water. They add over 620 chemicals that are very dangerous to the environment and our health. After that they inject it into these wells. But the casing to these wells fail 5% of the time once they are put in, the % grows steady as they age and after 30 years, 50% of these casings will fail. Letting all these toxins into aquifers and our drinking supply.

Green energy is the way to go. More money needs to go towards Green energy sources, and to be able to store this power efficiently. I know there in the works of a double carbon battery which takes 16x less time to charge and stores much much more than the batteries we currently use.

ignoring your very bias definition of it which completely ignores the benefits it does have, i do actually happen to agree that it should be banned, for both environmental and socio reasons, which far outweigh in any sense any benefits it might have.

tbh one of the reasons (among many) i thoroughly support the green party tbh when the rest of the parties refuse to do anything about banning it at all.

post proper info from both sides of this argument and perhaps I will agree

Absolutely we should frack and at the same time as I was signing contracts to have the fracking carried out I would be ending contracts which provide state subsides from the state to rich owners for pitiful 'renewables'.

My two priorities when it comes to energy: cheap cost & energy independence, as with any sane nation.

Stuck in two minds about this. If the government and whoever brought their diggers to my front garden and said "eyar, gonna' be fracking here. Move out" - then i'd be totally against the idea, but if they're going to frack in some field somewhere (like they are around my way currently) then i'm all for it. Everybody is well aware that the media is filling our screens and newspapers about the lack of resources the planet has, i reckon a firm 75% of that would be true. Finding new resources should be very high up the agenda to maintain life as we know it regardless of the circumstance. If you have to wipe out a 2 mile radius of homes in Manchester, but yet you can sustain life for the next 15 years then for me that is a sacrifice you should have to take. But only once the people from the homes are re-homed into suitable set-ups.