On Apr 24, 8:15*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Apr 24, 7:28 am, Andy Burns wrote:
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Following on from another thread...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...fracking-gets-
green-light
Seems we have 5x the amount of shale gas offshore, as onshore, will
offshore fracking meet less resistance? I think it's going to be hard to
ignore ...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/17/us-britain-shale-reserves-i....

Lots of "could bes" . Many of these initial high estimates were cut
back elsewhere.
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Shale...m-3739100.S.60...

I think there is no doubt its there, the real killer is what it will
cost in cash AND energy terms to get it out.

The shell tight oil man said that..if is three times what loose gas is
from Norway, its *a bank account you wont draw on.

And looky here

Legal procedures, bureaucracy and haggling over resource valuations can
delay exploration and production indefinitely. In France, political
opposition to fracking has brought a stop to development of the Paris
shale basin.

That's exactly how it will go. it will be delayed as long as possible
like nuclear power has been to give renewables the fattest easiest
profits for the least value to the people of this country.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Some of the intial estimates of other gas sites have been cut back by
90%.
Quite possibly the whole thing is a Ponsi scheme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas#Economics