Snp Not Radical Enough... ? - Page 4 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Snp Not Radical Enough... ?


Recommended Posts

"Welcomed by campaigners as “a very big nail in the coffin for the unconventional gas and fracking industry in Scotland”, energy minister Fergus Ewing told the Scottish parliament on Wednesday afternoon that the moratorium would allow time for the government to launch a full public consultation on the controversial drilling technique, and to commission a full public health impact assessment."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/28/scotland-announces-moratorium-on-fracking-for-shale-gas

So why would you vote on banning it before you get the results? That would be incredibly stupid no?

Some folk are incredibly stupid though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-42903144

 

This would be great but first there needs to be employment to pull people to settle, some of the coments on the thread enrage me, must be neil oliver on the troll,

 

i see other the other main topic on the thread “fracking” has to an axtent been put to bed for now anyway 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/1/2018 at 7:38 PM, hampden_loon2878 said:

i see other the other main topic on the thread “fracking” has to an axtent been put to bed for now anyway 

Not exactly. There is at least one challenge to the Governments position going through the courts right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

People don’t want radical. 

You could put me in that bracket a lot of my political views are bang in the middle, however when it comes to land reform i would like to see a bit more done, regarding fracking the snp have handled fmit perfectly IMO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
On 10/19/2015 at 10:38 AM, phart said:

Money is the big motivator of fracking as opposed to energy supply, finding novel ways to find shit to burn isn't a route we should be taking or encouraging. Creating billions of gallons of toxic water in a difficult to control environment and dislodging materials like Radium also isn't behaviour I would be encouraging.

I don't think not knowing how fracking works is distinct to folk against it.

So now we have actual Fracking and we can see the results, what are everyone's opinions now. Mine are still the same.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/16/lancashire-fracking-has-stopped-since-small-earthquakes-say-locals

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/earthquakes-tremors-fracking-site-lancashire-cuadrilla-a8592956.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phart said:

That shit in the Netherlands doesn’t look to clever either 😳

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On looking at the posts from 3 years ago i wonder if the board clever clogs now realises why it wasnt "banned" (court cases) and an infinite moritorium (no court cases) was put in place

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-44532985

Edited by Ally Bongo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2015 at 5:21 PM, AlfieMoon said:

I see the BBC reporting that the conference members voted against a motion to have an outright ban on fracking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34552962

There was also criticism on C4 news (from mainly pro-SNP people) last night after the SNP not going far enough with the Land Reform Bill. It seems that they stopped short of enforced buy-outs and are leaving it to the good grace of the landlords - so I guess it's fair to expect little change. I guess if they were to enforce buy-outs then they'd be under huge criticism and comparisons to communist Russia , etc. so it's effectively a no-win but should they have went further rather than talk a good game?

On one hand, the SNP are doing good to hold the center ground and try to appeal to as broad a base as possible.

On the other hand, they send out a message that is left-of-centre and of social justice.

It seems that their actions are not always matching their rhetoric. It's also only fair to recognise that are the closest thing to that left of centre message (when compared to Lab/Con/Lib anyway) but that doesn't mean that the SNP are quite matching up to expectations.

The question is - where can/should the SNP be bolder and more progressive and which specific policies should this touch?

 

20 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

On looking at the posts from 3 years ago i wonder if the board clever clogs now realises why it wasnt "banned" (court cases) and an infinite moritorium (no court cases) was put in place

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-44532985

It was in the first sentence of the opening post. It not me being a clever clogs so much as you being a dumb ass i think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, phart said:

If it is fucked up then ban it is my view. But this is a serious resource if safe (nothing is entirely safe of course).

https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/12/investing/us-oil-production-russia-saudi-arabia/index.html

It made the USA a bigger oil producer than the Saudis and Russia. It cannot be written off without good reasons. (And if they exist it is a cost benefit question.)

Edited by thplinth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, thplinth said:

 

It was in the first sentence of the opening post. It not me being a clever clogs so much as you being a dumb ass i think.

I was referring to Parklife - Mr Paranoid

Although in hindsight board clever clogs could relate to Phart ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, thplinth said:

If it is fucked up then ban it is my view. But this is a serious resource if safe (nothing is entirely safe of course).

https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/12/investing/us-oil-production-russia-saudi-arabia/index.html

It made the USA a bigger oil producer than the Saudis and Russia. It cannot be written off without good reasons. (And if they exist it is a cost benefit question.)

We haven't mapped the interior of where we're putting the high pressure well enough to have any predictive power. So literally anything could be set off, we have no way of knowing.

 

My pals job is to research safe and novel ways to store uranium/plutonium geologically so it is safe from tectonic shifts etc  for tens of thousands of years and she shakes her head at fracking the same way a chemist would shake his head at folk just dumping random mixtures together.

Now admittedly a shake of the head isn't much to go on but it's what's informed my view.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

I was referring to Parklife - Mr Paranoid

Although in hindsight board clever clogs could relate to Phart ...

Were you? I had a read of the thread but still your post makes little sense. I'll let parklife answer for himself if he can be arsed.

Well for sure he is a lot cleverer than you. You could have been referring to anyone on here thinking about it.

25 minutes ago, phart said:

We haven't mapped the interior of where we're putting the high pressure well enough to have any predictive power. So literally anything could be set off, we have no way of knowing.

 

My pals job is to research safe and novel ways to store uranium/plutonium geologically so it is safe from tectonic shifts etc  for tens of thousands of years and she shakes her head at fracking the same way a chemist would shake his head at folk just dumping random mixtures together.

Now admittedly a shake of the head isn't much to go on but it's what's informed my view.

 

 

If it was me running the country I'd have it banned while we wait and see how those doing it get on... I'd be super cautious and be the last to join in. Doubt that will happen though. Too much money involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, phart said:

We haven't mapped the interior of where we're putting the high pressure well enough to have any predictive power. So literally anything could be set off, we have no way of knowing.

 

My pals job is to research safe and novel ways to store uranium/plutonium geologically so it is safe from tectonic shifts etc  for tens of thousands of years and she shakes her head at fracking the same way a chemist would shake his head at folk just dumping random mixtures together.

Now admittedly a shake of the head isn't much to go on but it's what's informed my view.

 

 

In the interests of balance, I also have a friend whose job is to do exactly the same thing and I asked him about fracking.  His view was that fracking per se was fine but that it was probably a good idea to look at reducing the use of hydrocarbons rather than looking at new ways of getting more hydrocarbons out of the ground so on that basis he was against it.   Probably one of those cases where the scientific community isn't wholly in agreement.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, aaid said:

In the interests of balance, I also have a friend whose job is to do exactly the same thing and I asked him about fracking.  His view was that fracking per se was fine but that it was probably a good idea to look at reducing the use of hydrocarbons rather than looking at new ways of getting more hydrocarbons out of the ground so on that basis he was against it.   Probably one of those cases where the scientific community isn't wholly in agreement.

 

Really? I just made that job up as an inside joke. Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, phart said:

Really? I just made that job up as an inside joke. Interesting.

Nah it really is a real job Just some co-incidence since geological disposal of nuclear waste isn't the biggest employer.

 

Edited by phart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, phart said:

Really? I just made that job up as an inside joke. Interesting.

I didn't make anything up, his background is geology and he works in the nuclear industry. 

TBH, I was surprised as I expected him to say it was fundamentally unsafe  

He mentioned that fracking had been carried out offshore in the North Sea for decades which was news to me.  

Personally I wouldn't want it happening under my house and don't see why anyone else should have to.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aaid said:

I didn't make anything up, his background is geology and he works in the nuclear industry. 

TBH, I was surprised as I expected him to say it was fundamentally unsafe  

He mentioned that fracking had been carried out offshore in the North Sea for decades which was news to me.  

Personally I wouldn't want it happening under my house and don't see why anyone else should have to.

 

My friend is an academic at university who is designing the techniques for nuclear containment.

you use 2% of the liquid off-shore as you do onshore. Which is significant.

It's the fact you're just "blindly" pumping in all these pressures that worries her, i'm sure if the full topography was known and you could make adjustments and do it safer. It's this lets jump pump it in make a fortune then fuck off attitude.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, phart said:

My friend is an academic at university who is designing the techniques for nuclear containment.

you use 2% of the liquid off-shore as you do onshore. Which is significant.

It's the fact you're just "blindly" pumping in all these pressures that worries her, i'm sure if the full topography was known and you could make adjustments and do it safer. It's this lets jump pump it in make a fortune then fuck off attitude.

 

 

My friend works at an establishment in Oxfordshire,  enough said.    I suspect since it's a small industry they are at least aware of each other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aaid said:

My friend works at an establishment in Oxfordshire,  enough said.    I suspect since it's a small industry they are at least aware of each other. 

Probably both appalled at our approximations of their positions as well lol, if they found out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

Were you? I had a read of the thread but still your post makes little sense. I'll let parklife answer for himself if he can be arsed.

Well for sure he is a lot cleverer than you. You could have been referring to anyone on here thinking about it.

 

You had only needed to go to the top of THIS page to see the end of his debate with Aaid - Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...