Thanks Ty Gwyn. I would assume (and hope) that the developers of the well would have taken into account the major faults. It is the microgeology that bothers me. I am sure there are fissures in the chalk that are small so unknown, and I know that developers of all projects don't look at that.
The drove a motorway through a hill of Gault clay and have spent years cutting back the sides as it kept sliding, so that doesn't give me a lot of confidence.
" I would assume (and hope) that the developers of the well would have taken into account the major faults"
i would assume that the name on the licence is an underfunded shell company, the works will be carried out by contracting companies that are also underfunded shell companies with plant hired from further shell companies or local patsys to separate responsibility from liability and that any profits will be passed via several shell companies based in panama or the BVI (or similar places with strict secrecy laws ) before said profits are further passed along a washing line of bank accounts in "friendly" places to a bank account that attracts minimal or zero tax liabilities which finally makes the funds available to the owners of the scheme.
that is the usual procedure.
Shane
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 3467 Location: Doha. Is hot.
We have a number of 'conventional' oil wells near here which use nodding donkeys to do the extracting. Another company wants to start a different sort of well with horizontal drilling and 'acid fracking'. There is a great deal of concern as this is under the aquifer that supplies the whole of the area, and being all on chalk, the acid is going to dissolve the chalk and make the opening of fissures more likely. Any comments from Shane or anyone who knows more about this technique?
Apologies - was away for the break with terrible wifi access (I coped better than the kids )
Not an expert on onshore fracking but, as dpack points out the fracking liquid is normally water-based with various additives. Acid is usually used to clean up wells after fracking and to stimulate production as far as I know, and is normally a fairly weak solution. It's often used offshore to clean up existing wells that have become clogged with various kinds of scale. It wouldn't strike me as helpful for production to start dissolving a chalk layer above your target zone as a) you'll lose control of where your injectant ends up, b) you'll ultimately extract less from the producing wells, and c) you'll spend a lot more money on injected chemicals and subsequent clean up of the water than you'd need to.
Thanks Shane. It's just that with the level of understanding of the geology of this area used in most large projects here I don't have a great deal of faith in this one. The local water company have objected, as have the Environment Agency, so we will see. Most contaminants can be removed from water, but that can be costly, and I would like to be sure that the polluter pays is well and truly written into this to focus the mind of the oil company. Sadly, the current government seems to be thinking oil at any price and blow the future.
umm the chalk aquifer under the old sericol ink works ?
the cyclohexanone plume is most definitely not removed so far.
a different industry and a rather deep politics background to the problem being identified but it demonstrates the issues of organic chemicals in chalk aquifers.
there are many examples from the fossil fuel industry ,some of which get mentions in the links in this thread.
Shane
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 3467 Location: Doha. Is hot.
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 17 5:55 am Post subject:
The offshore oil industry in the UK has about the toughest regulatory environment in the world (barring, maybe, the Barents Sea), but industry manages to make it work. I would very much hope that a similar regulatory burden exists for an onshore oil producer. I'd very much expect the technical people working on an UK onshore development to be of the same mindset and capability of those working in the UK offshore sector, in which case the actual doers will be highly conscious of their impact on the surrounding environment. How far up the tree that attitude goes is, as of course, dependent upon personalities and company culture, but I would hope the onshore sector behaves responsibly.
If their geologists are from the same stock as the offshore sector, they'll know the underlying geology of the area extremely well - even onshore wells cost money and modern-day companies don't like drilling duds or having to fix rogue wells.
Yes, I hope they are fully competent too Shane, but sadly if politics say something is going to happen it does, and those at the 'coal face' have to make the best of it. That is why engineers on the whole are regarded as rather negative; we've been there, been dropped in it, had to make it work somehow.
Shane
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 3467 Location: Doha. Is hot.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 17 11:24 am Post subject:
Engineers in the UK are viewed as the people that clean out your drains or fix the plumbing.
I'm keeping half-an-eye on developments in the UK fracking wise, especially with regards to the aspects that concern you guys the most (out of interest, not because I view it as a future career). Will certainly report back here if anything especially negative or positive pops up.
Nick
Joined: 02 Nov 2004 Posts: 34535 Location: Hereford
I know that engineers aren't valued the same way in the UK as the rest of the world. Most 'engineers' who, as you say Nick, fit Sky dishes etc. are at the best technicians.
Probably because the term in the UK seems to come from the word 'engine', thus someone who tends and engine, rather than from 'ingenious', someone who develops or makes ingenious devices.
Shane, will be interested to hear any input you have on the subject.
Shane
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 3467 Location: Doha. Is hot.
I know that engineers aren't valued the same way in the UK as the rest of the world. Most 'engineers' who, as you say Nick, fit Sky dishes etc. are at the best technicians.
Probably because the term in the UK seems to come from the word 'engine', thus someone who tends and engine, rather than from 'ingenious', someone who develops or makes ingenious devices.
Also because, in countries like France and Germany (and Vietnam, it turns out), you are not allowed to refer to yourself as an engineer unless you have an engineering degree.
That works both ways of course. The best engineer for metal and ceramic I ever met probably had no qualifications and certainly couldn't write a report, but was brilliant. Last heard of adjusting wave guide in his garage after retirement.
Again, in the work I did there was at the time no recognised subject to have a degree in. One place I worked where there were a lot with degrees, we had a couple of physicists, me with chemistry and a metallurgist. It worked well as we all knew the work we were doing; microelectronics assembly, and some of us had been in it virtually since the beginning when we were using pottery gilding for the conductors on thick film as there were no other conductive inks.
Thought there would have been mention of Cuadrilla starting operations in Lancashire for their fracking operation especially after the opposition a year or so back.
lancs and ryedale have had a few mentions in the msm, mostly the grauniad .
the likes of murdoch (see genie energy) have been very quiet, one of the reasons he wants brexit is that eu environmental law is a little restrictive to extreme energy production (it costs more to be cleaner than to be dirty) as is a stable middle east with consequently low fossil prices
)
View Latest Posts