Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn into a mutant.
already present. In other words there is already contamination. In addit ion the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yorkj ar e more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes from t he ignorant.
You really have not been following the issue:
and
e. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn into a mutant.
ns already present. In other words there is already contamination. In add ition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yorkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes from the ignorant.
.-water-supplies Huh, I'm not sure how they reach that conclusion... this from your link.
?It was not possible to calculate or estimate the national frequenc y of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic f racturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts,? ? the report said.
They don't have enough data, so how can they conclude anything?
A year earlier the epa said there was no systemic risk.
But I take contamination as a real threat. We (NY state) have to put protections in place to limit that risk. That makes fracking more expensive, if it's too expensive, then leave the gas there till the price goes up.
George h.
We will be fine, it is just so much work, removing debris and doing repairs. I'm waiting for construction workers to come and disassemble then rebuild my garage, then do drywall work. I'm repairing our greenhouse today, it's 25 ft x 40 ft, lost
12 ft of one end and 10 ft of the other. Luckily I had help from a family, the husband is a strong 200lbs and dissasembled parts I just could not have got done. Did I mention our business that was conducted off a boat that was completely destroyed, now my wife has to retire, but I got no proceeds from sale of the business. We had started putting word out that it was for sale.Mikek
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
sue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn in to a mutant.
bons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In a ddition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New York j are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes fr om the ignorant.
.s.-water-supplies
ncy of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts,? ?? the report said.
The important point to take away from that is they cannot say with scientif ic certainty that it's safe. And until they can do that, the activity shoul d be banned. This is a safety issue, which means you do not proceed with bu siness as usual on the basis of an unknown.
Right, and another point is that all the regulation in the world doesn't me an best practices are always used, or can be trusted to be used. The incide nts of contamination that have occurred make it reasonable to assume the in dustry is reckless as regards public health. IOW there is a presumption of guilt until they can prove otherwise.
sell it in kit form :)
Energy is inherently dangerous. Not having any is worse.
I recall a bumper sticker in Louisiana, aimed at yankees who wanted to grab power over the oil resources and pricing.
LET THE BASTARDS FREEZE IN THE DARK
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Thousands of things should be banned because they are not proven to be safe with scientific certainty. Like this burrito I'm eating.
What do we do about things that are known to be unsafe? There are thousands of those, too. Beer. Motorcycles. Stairways. Electricity. Sunlight. Skiing. Cats.
Why are you so afraid of life?
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
e. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn into a mutant.
ns already present. In other words there is already contamination. In add ition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yorkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes from the ignorant.
.-water-supplies
Dan
You have a lot of experience is running the business. You might try sellin g your knowledge. Say sell a partnership say 95 % of the business, where y ou got 10% of the profits for 10 years in return for consulting.
In about 5 years the partner will be comfortable with running the business and will start a new company to get around paying you any of the profits. But hey you will have gotten some money. And maybe the buyer will let you stay a partner if you do enough to warrant keeping you. Maybe running the business so the buyer can go on vacation.
Dan
sue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn in to a mutant.
bons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In a ddition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New York j are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes fr om the ignorant.
.s.-water-supplies
ncy of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts,? ?? the report said.
Breaking News:
On 25/10/2018 2:23 am, John Larkin wrote: [snip]
What a criminal thing to do to oysters!
NSW south coast rock oysters, freshly shucked with the brine still in.
It's the only way!
[snip]-- Cheers, Chris.
:
ssue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn i nto a mutant.
rbons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In addition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yor kj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes f rom the ignorant.
u.s.-water-supplies
ency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydrauli c fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts,? ?? the report said.
Sadly for John Larkin's logic. There are lots of ways of getting energy tha t don't involve digging up fossil carbon and burning it.
Since he's addicted to the flattery that comes with denialist propaganda - paid for by people who make their money by digging up fossil carbon and sel ling it to be burnt as fuel, this thought doesn't seem to have entered his head..
There's nothing like backwoods ignorance for generating idiotic bumper stic kers.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
te:
r.
issue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn into a mutant.
carbons already present. In other words there is already contamination. I n addition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Y orkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes from the ignorant.
o-u.s.-water-supplies
k.
quency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydrau lic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts, ? the report said.
tific certainty that it's safe. And until they can do that, the activity sh ould be banned. This is a safety issue, which means you do not proceed with business as usual on the basis of an unknown.
There's a distinction between caution and fear, and foolhardiness (which Jo hn Larkin exhibits to excess) and courage (which John Larkin can't exhibit because he isn't aware of the risks he's running).
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Only way? How about Oysters Rockefeller, Oysters Bienville, BBQ oysters, oyster stew, Oysters Mosca, oyster stuffing, fried oysters, broiled oysters, oyster shooters...
Oyster is one of those words that, after you type it a few times, starts to look wrong.
I used to get beautiful plump Gulf oysters fresh shucked at a bar on Bourbon Street for 10 cents each, with a 25 cent draft beer. Now we get wimpy little east coast oysters for $2.50 each, and the beer is $8. Good thing my income is up.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
e:
.issue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you turn into a mutant.
arbons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In addition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yo rkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get votes from the ignorant.
-u.s.-water-supplies
.uency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraul ic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts,? ?? the report said.
ific certainty that it's safe. And until they can do that, the activity sho uld be banned. This is a safety issue, which means you do not proceed with business as usual on the basis of an unknown. Huh, nothing will every be perfectly safe, mistake/ accidents happen. We should just try and plan/ prepare for them.
George H.
mean best practices are always used, or can be trusted to be used. The inci dents of contamination that have occurred make it reasonable to assume the industry is reckless as regards public health. IOW there is a presumption o f guilt until they can prove otherwise.
Life is a giant calculated risk. Think, decide, enjoy.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
:
ote:
er.
n issue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you tur n into a mutant.
ocarbons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In addition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yorkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get vote s from the ignorant.
to-u.s.-water-supplies
nk.
equency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydra ulic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts, ? the report said.
ntific certainty that it's safe. And until they can do that, the activity s hould be banned. This is a safety issue, which means you do not proceed wit h business as usual on the basis of an unknown.
Nobody said anything about being perfectly safe. Historically the regulator y agencies allow as much risk as to produce an accident rate equal to or le ss than some/ similar associated activity that society considers acceptable . But until the science has "fully characterized" the risk, they can't do t hat.
t mean best practices are always used, or can be trusted to be used. The in cidents of contamination that have occurred make it reasonable to assume th e industry is reckless as regards public health. IOW there is a presumption of guilt until they can prove otherwise.
where you got 10% of the profits for 10 years in return for consulting.
will start a new company to get around paying you any of the profits. But hey you will have gotten some money.
And maybe the buyer will let you stay a partner if you do enough to warrant keeping you. Maybe running the business so the buyer can go on vacation.
Yes, there are several things we could do but, we have enough money to live a comfortable retirement and leave some for the kids. I don't want to put the energy into doing a rebuild. I was hoping we would find a young couple making minimum wage or a little more, willing to work a lot of hours and put them into business. It would have changed their live just as it did ours. However, things changed after Micheal. It was a simple business, it would have only taken 4 or 5 weeks spread out over a year to train a person to carry on. Now, I just want to get things back in order. Mikek
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
e:
rote:
ter.
on issue. Not going to do you any good to reduce global warming when you tu rn into a mutant.
rocarbons already present. In other words there is already contamination. In addition the NG is 10,000 feet down. I doubt if any water wells in New Yorkj are more than a 1000 feet deep. I think the ban is more to get vot es from the ignorant.
-to-u.s.-water-supplies
ink.
requency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydr aulic fracturing water cycle or fully characterize the severity of impacts, ? the report said.
entific certainty that it's safe. And until they can do that, the activity should be banned. This is a safety issue, which means you do not proceed wi th business as usual on the basis of an unknown.
This would be more impressive if John Larkin ever showed much sign of think ing.
His approach to climate change is to swallow the propaganda that comes with the biggest dose of flattery and ignore the fact that it has very little c onnection to reality.
The risk involved in that approach clearly hasn't been calculated.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.