05-02-2016, 05:36 PM
That might sound like a silly question, but bear with me.
To engage in hydraulic fracturing, my understanding is that there has to be preliminary surveys, then construct the actual pad, drill down into the shale, and THEN the well is only economically viable for 1-3 years, AND the price of the gas is volatile so a profit is by no means assured. And that's even before you cost in the so-called regulatory controls to ensure that (supposedly) no damage occurs to the environment.
So - what is the end goal of the people doing this? This is pure conjecture on my part, but what if the extraction of shale gas was a loss-leader, and the actual long term goal was to cause widespread pollution of aquifers? This would then mean that usable water was no longer widely and naturally available via wells, and you could then control the access to drinkable water, and the price of it.
There have been so many "mistakes" and "accidents" in the fracking industry that with the economics in the balance to begin with, after all these "mistakes" you'd think that any profit was wiped out.
Put this theory in the context of the mass water-grabs by large corporations, and the mass pollution of water supplies as seen in Flint MI as well as other places.
It's plainly apparent that the protection of the population's water supply is nowhere near the top of the priorities of the Governments of the US and UK.
To engage in hydraulic fracturing, my understanding is that there has to be preliminary surveys, then construct the actual pad, drill down into the shale, and THEN the well is only economically viable for 1-3 years, AND the price of the gas is volatile so a profit is by no means assured. And that's even before you cost in the so-called regulatory controls to ensure that (supposedly) no damage occurs to the environment.
So - what is the end goal of the people doing this? This is pure conjecture on my part, but what if the extraction of shale gas was a loss-leader, and the actual long term goal was to cause widespread pollution of aquifers? This would then mean that usable water was no longer widely and naturally available via wells, and you could then control the access to drinkable water, and the price of it.
There have been so many "mistakes" and "accidents" in the fracking industry that with the economics in the balance to begin with, after all these "mistakes" you'd think that any profit was wiped out.
Put this theory in the context of the mass water-grabs by large corporations, and the mass pollution of water supplies as seen in Flint MI as well as other places.
It's plainly apparent that the protection of the population's water supply is nowhere near the top of the priorities of the Governments of the US and UK.