howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#2
have been watching this on the tv newa of late.an intresting find in a unemployment black spot.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#3
I saw a report on this on the news last night. Absolutely oodles of jobs and as much gas as anybody could ever wish for...and as soon as the earthquake problem is sorted all should be well.
Have you all seen the footage of flame-thrower kitchen taps?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#4
Yes I saw that before re flame spouting taps. Fracking was suspended previously, just a few short months ago in the midlands I believe it was, as several nasty earth tremors followed the process. So it seems to be a very dangerous game this fracking..but isnt everything dangerous to do with finding or developing energy. From Nuclear Power to North Sea oil, all hazardous. The only option that appears safe is windfarms..but all the NIMBYS dont want windfarms.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
#5
With employment running high and energy sources depleting and cost's increasing, new projects like fracking need to be considered. I do not know enough about it to say whether I am for or against it but I believe it is necessary to consider it seriously.
I think there are two problems, one is earthquakes, the other is contamination to water table. As far as I am aware the shale that would be fracked in Kent is below the water table, so if that information is correct, then I see no problem with contamination. I am concerned with earthquakes but have no information on that.
If it is proved to be safe then the employment it will bring will be a bonus for this area, as to whether the consumer will end up with cheap energy, I am not so sure about. When we found oil in the North Sea, we all expected cheaper fuel bills but that never happened.
I don't think we should dismiss fracking.
I am in favour of windfarm's, preferably at sea.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#6
Windfarms are not really an option either. They only work when the wind blows. Zilch generated last winter in the cold spell. Big hoo-hah a few days ago when the wind was blowing but demand was low and the National Grid had to instruct the windfarm operators not to supply all this unwanted energy they could not use, and pay huge compensation fees as a result.
Wind energy is erratic and a spinning reserve has to be constantly maintained to keep the lights burning for the great majority of the time when there is no useable wind input to the grid. The back up power stations are gas as that is the only technology that can be put on line immediately, coal and nuclear take days to run up or run down.
Windfarms may turn out to be one of the great cons of history, a South Sea bubble for our times. The only people whom they can confidently be said to benefit are the windfarm operators who only install the turbines when they are guaranteed immense subsidies for decades to come. The energy supplied costs three times that which the National Grid obtains from the other sources and is paid by the consumer via their electricity bills.
NIMBY's were the last line of defence. Not many people living in beautiful countryside want to see giant money-making devices for foreign windfarm operators despoiling the view. Constable's Hay Wain would not look quite the same with a line of Enercon E-126 turbines poking above the trees.
NIMBY's may now be outflanked by two measures announced recently. One is the proposed planning presumption for development. The other is the installation of phased array radars at defence and air traffic control sites where windfarms have until now been banned in the vicinity due to obscuring returns from aircraft when using the current radars. This has enabled some very large onshore windfarms to go ahead.
The four or five turbines proposed for the North Dover windfarm were ruled out by the government inspector Mr. Lavender because of potential obscuration of returns from aircraft over the wind turbine site as viewed by Manston ATC radar. It would seem most unlikely that Manston will fork out £20m for a phased array radar so the NIMBY's around East Langdon are safe for the time being.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
#7
ED.
I have asked this question before. Wind is a force that cannot be determined or relied on. Tides are constant. Why are turbines not run by ebb and flow.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 700- Registered: 11 Jun 2010
- Posts: 2,868
#8
Definitely, the tides are much more to be depended on. Why not more hydro power?
---------------------------------------------------
Lincolnshire Born and Bred
#9
On a less serious note I clicked on this thread with interest. Fracking? Never heard of it. Could Howard be dragging up? (Misspelled Frocking?). Had I got it wrong and is it de-fracking the computer not de-fragging? Was Howard, again, fracking up with the stress of it all? Somewhat relieved to realise it must be a kind of mining...
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
#10
yes, I was fracking disappointed too, Diana.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#11
Earthquakes are actually a serious concern for this area. One fault line runs from central Switzerland, right through Europe, directly under Dover and on up to, and through, central London. Evidence of quakes along this line have been found in Roman remains in London, France and Germany as well as well documented 'events' in 17th century Switzerland and Germany.
Another fault line running through the channel shook this area only a few years ago. Historically, Dover has not been immune to both tremors and the resultant tsunami's.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#12
fracking heck chris i didnt know that.
Guest 700- Registered: 11 Jun 2010
- Posts: 2,868
#13
Here are a few mentions of earthquakes in Kent:
Apr 6 1580 at Hythe;
Sep 8 1692 at Deal;
Feb 18 1756 in East Kent
8 Jan 1776 Canterbury and E.Kent (Canterbury flooded)
("Romansgate in Thanet" by Finn page 35)
---------------------------------------------------
Lincolnshire Born and Bred
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#14
More recently Folkestone 2007 and 2009.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#15
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.