UKIP’s energy spokesman conned by fracking junket to USA

He writes

Shale gas: a huge opportunity for Britain (is he nuts, or misinformed? read on to find out)

In the small town of Mansfield PA, on the great Marcellus shale field

Recently a number of people have written to UKIP raising concerns about shale gas.  I have replied in the following terms:

Thank you for writing to us about shale gas.  I can well understand your concerns, given the torrent of negative stories from “green” groups.  You may like to know that you are helping to fund these groups, via the European Commission.  Many commentators also believe that Russia has a hand in promoting anti-shale-gas campaigns – they are fearful of losing Gazprom’s lucrative export markets.

(TAP – that’s right.  The Green Party is controlled by Vladimir Putin personally, and the proposed fracking site protectors are all paid weekly in roubles)

But there is another side to the story.  As Energy Spokesman for UKIP, I have taken the trouble to go to the USA and look at shale gas first hand, in Pennsylvania and in Texas.  In the small town of Mansfield PA, on the great Marcellus shale field, I found local residents delighted by the economic resurgence, based on the new shale industry, in their previously declining town.  New businesses, new shops and restaurants and hotels, and house prices boosted by increased demand.

(TAP – restaurants?    Keeping them all full should be made a national priority.  Home cooking should made illegal in fact.)

What I did not find was people complaining about pollution, or earth tremors, or any other problems.

(TAP – did you show yourself around town, or were you perchance escorted by a fracking corporation?)

Admittedly during the drilling phase – several months – a new shale well means a football-pitch-sized area of industrial activity.  But when drilling is complete, the landscape is reinstated, and the remaining well which goes on producing for two or three decades is no more intrusive than a garden shed – far less intrusive and disturbing than a wind farm.

(TAP – 2 or 3 decades?  most wells last 1 year at pressure and then it’s all over.  The majority.)

More generally, America is enjoying an industrial renaissance based on shale gas.  Businesses that were off-shored to Asia are coming home.  There are more jobs, more prosperity, more energy security, industry is more competitive on the back of lower energy prices, the balance of payments is improved.  It would be utterly irresponsible for politicians to ignore this huge opportunity.

(TAP – Americans will be very pleased to find this out.  Trouble is record numbers are on food stamps, and the fracking companies are going bust in droves leaving their installations to rot away and pollute indefinitely)

These are vast benefits, and they stand in stark contrast to Europe, where energy prices are far too high, jobs and investment are moving abroad, and we depend on insecure energy sources like Russia.

We hear about methane in tap water.  But the USA experienced methane in tap water long before fracking.  It comes from the natural decay of plant material in the soil.  There has never been a case of fracking per se leading to pollution.  There have been a few cases of pollution from cracked piping.  But occasional minor issues occur in any energy industry.  Seismic events resulting from fracking are very small – less than those associated with coal mining, for example.

(TAP – ahem.  sure they are, Roger.  You say never, and then say not never.  Can you make up your mind?  It’s hard to debate with a sheet flapping in the wind.  So there is pollution.  OK.  We agree on something.)

10940610_785772634844990_6403184003539501830_n

Indeed shale gas is much cleaner, safer and less intrusive than coal mining.  Across Britain, communities regret the loss of the coal mines.  They should be delighted to have a new technology that offers similar economic benefits, without requiring hundreds of men to spend decades underground acquiring respiratory diseases.

(TAP – no.  You can gas people on the surface instead of underground, in their own homes, in fact)

Gas also burns cleaner than coal.

(TAP – with carbon captured at point of combustion, coal is now actually half as polluting as gas.  That information is out of date)

If we had seen the same sort of protests against the nascent coal industry in the eighteenth century that we see today against shale gas, the Industrial Revolution might never have happened.

(TAP – coal mining didn’t destroy Britain’s aquifers,  or consume her lakes and reservoirs.  Water was pumped out not in.)

Some people say we need more time to see evidence of safety – but they’ve been fracking in the USA for fifty years with no major problems.

(TAP – loss of the United States water reserves is no problem at all, if you’re politician paid for by the corporations pushing the agenda.  The people who’ve become sick are entirely disposable as well.)

We’ve even had fracking sites in the UK for a couple of decades, and they were so problem-free that local people hardly knew they were there.

(TAP – I think you’ll find they’re oil wells, Roger.)

The industry has made great strides in improving well integrity, reducing water use and recycling more water, and reducing the use of chemicals in fracking fluid.  Fracking fluid now consists of water, sand, detergent, and other perfectly safe chemicals which can typically be found around the home in toiletries and cleaning products.  The concerns raised by protesters really relate to an earlier period.

(TAP – So was there a problem or there wasn’t one?  I’m getting confused.  Chemicals in the home are a hugely underrated source of illhealth)

For more technical background on safety questions related to shale gas, please visit

Please do stand back and take a new look at the opportunity represented by shale gas.  Don’t be taken in by the black propaganda of “green” campaigners.  These people aren’t “Friends of the Earth” – they’re enemies of the people.

(TAP – anyone who opposes destruction of our water is a black propagandist.  That includes me.  I hope you’re being paid a lot of money for writing this tosh, Roger.  Otherwise I really am wondering about your sanity.)

2 Responses to Shale gas: a huge opportunity for Britain (both from TAP)

  1. tapestry says:

    If this were all true then why are all fracking companies in the US going tits up?

  2. tapestry says:

    Why is California no longer able to pump ground water during the drought? Why is Texas importing drinking water, and Colorado? Fracking is an environmental and economic catastrophe. Where are The Great Lakes disappearing to? Fracking water. The story of fracking is more about fresh water and the access of people to water, than it is about gas. It’s about control. Once you have to buy in water, you’re powerless, totally in the hands of foreign suppliers. That’s exactly what Roger Helmer, supposed patriot is advocating for Britain. Save our water. Stop fracking. Drill casings leak. Fact. They leak into aquifers. It all looks lovely on the surface but deep down where the most valuable commodity on earth is stored, there’s catastrophe happening. That commodity is not gold like bankers like to think. The most valuable commodity on earth by far is fresh water. Stop its destruction now. Stop brainless frackers and their junkets for jovial uninfomed MEPs now.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

10 Responses to “UKIP’s energy spokesman conned by fracking junket to USA”

  1. sovereigntea says:

    I agree with Tap … it is pure fantasy to state that the water table is safely sealed off from whatever gunk is used to fracture the rock. There is no way on earth anyone can check subsurface strata for existing fractures or inconsistencies. The subsurface strata is of course also slowly rearranging itself over time even a minor earthquake / tremmor can induce new fractures so even a 100% survey is no guarrantee over time.

    Economics also play a key role.

    Fracking fantasis Cameron also echoed the same bullet points as Helmer

    A year ago, the prime minister famously declared: “We’re going all out for shale. It will mean more jobs and opportunities for people, and economic security for our country.” Chancellor George Osborne also wrote a detailed letter to ministers asking them to make policy implementation a “personal priority”.

    The UK government has said that fracking has three main benefits: energy security, decarbonisation and economic growth. The government has shown clear support for test drilling to assess the economic feasibility of fracking. It has reinforced this support with a range of policies such as tax breaks; local compensation rules; pro-fracking planning guidance; and a sovereign wealth fund from shale petroleum revenues that would be invested in north England.

    The evidence against
    http://nsnbc.me/2015/01/28/shale-fail-david-cameron-not-gone-fracking/

  2. NPP says:

    TAP

    Let’s cut the crap. I don’t want this f—ing BS in my countryside or my community fullstop. They can write long BS explanations, but f— them. They f— with my community, I f— with them.

    Well done for your perseverence and Ian R. Crane too. Brilliant work. But, if I see my local MP face to face, he is going to know how I feel and any local actiist whether UKIP or Lib-Lab-Con is also going to hear my opposition loud and clear.

    I’m sick of morons, bought and paid for asreholes and child violators running my country.

    It’s 2015 and the energy game is a managed scam. Get the good technology off the military and corporate copyright and patent shelves and into the community.

  3. sovereigntea says:

    ditto – Get the good technology off the military and corporate copyright and patent shelves and into the community.

    We are expected to believe that the highest tech solution available for driving wheeled vehicles is the internal combustioin engine. They are taking the piss ! and chaining us to the fuel cartel’s monopoly pricing system.

    Street – 1794

    The next engine, invented by Robert Street, and for which he took out a patent (No 1983) in 1794, was a great advance. Inflammable gas was exploded in a cylinder and drove up a piston by its expansion, thus producing the first example of a practical internal combustion engine. The gas was obtained by sprinkling spirits of turpentine or petroleum at the bottom of a cylinder, and evaporating them by a fire beneath.

    The up-stroke of the piston admitted a certain quantity of air, which mixed with the inflammable vapour. A flame was next sucked in from a light outside the cylinder, through a valve uncovered by the piston, and forced down the piston of a pump for raising water.

    In this engine many modern ideas were foreshadowed, especially the ignition by an external flame, and the admission of air by the suction of the piston during the up-stroke, but mechanical details were crude and imperfect.

  4. NPP says:

    I read this TAP post, vented my spleen above and phoned 01626 831290 and told ‘Maggie’ I don’t want fracking.

    I then e-mmailed:
    mail@ukip.org

    I’m telling, if you or whoever frack my community, I’ll frack you.

    You are the only party worth voting for, I want out of the EU, but if you continue to push for fracking I will consider it an act of violence.

    For goodness sake, are you all insane?!

    We do not want fracking in West Suffolk or anywhere else.

    Currently the Greens will get the anti-fracking vote. Wake up and see sense. No fracking.

    Ned
    East Anglia

  5. Julie says:

    By Michael Hoffman
    http://www.revisionisthistory.org

    The Auschwitz bandwagon has rolled onto our television and Internet screens and newspaper front pages once again. It never actually leaves, so perhaps it is more accurate to say that this week it is more present than usual.

    You don’t believe we’re ruled by halacha (Talmudic law)? In that case, how is it that whatever befalls The Holy People of Counterfeit “Israel” is branded the supreme evil of the cosmos, and whatever happens to the eternally skimmed (we the goyim), counts for slightly less than nothing?

    Take for example the hideously evil El Khiam concentration camp operated by the Israelis through their south Lebanon proxy army, the SLA.

    You never heard of it, correct? Why is that? It was a torture camp; a death camp paid for in part with American taxpayer money. But you know nothing of it. Israeli allies under Israeli direction killed and tortured the Lebanese in that El Khiam concentration camp. All of the victims were goyim, not Holy People. Now do you understand why El Khiam is unsung and unknown?

    El Khiam was liberated by Hezbollah, the people Americans are taught to hate because they are the only formidable armed resistance against Israeli conquest and land theft in the Middle East. Unlike Sunni Saudi Arabia which is allied with the Israelis, Shiite Hezbollah has not cut a deal with the US or the Israelis. This is why Assad in Syria and the government of Iran are attacked and sanctioned — they are the principal, and practically the only significant allies of Hezbollah.

    “Saudi Arabian interests and Israel are almost parallel,” says Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. “He notes the startling alliance of Saudi Arabia and the Jewish state.” (Wall Street Journal, November 23, 2013, p. A11).

    “…the kingdom now supports Islamist rebels in Syria who often fight alongside Qaeda groups like the Nusra Front. The Saudis say they have little choice…they believe they must now back whoever can help them defeat Mr. Assad’s forces and his Iranian allies.” (New York Times, January 5, 2014, p. A10).

    Saudi Arabia, which maintains a compact with its clerics who furnish the murderous Wahhabist-Salafist theology which drives ISIS and al-Qaeda, is our precious “ally,” while Hezbollah, Iran and Assad’s Syria we are taught to hate, sanction and prepare to do war with.

    We are seeing the makings of another war unfolding this week, which the Israelis are instigating in league with their covert Saudi-based Wahhabist-Salafist Sunni terrorist allies; a war intended to finish off Assad, the protector of the Christian population in Syria, and in Lebanon to “mow the lawn” (an Israeli euphemism for periodic massacres of Arab civilians so as to “tame” these lesser humans).

    Here’s how it’s playing out as we write these words: nine days ago the Israeli military bombed a convoy in Syria’s Golan Heights. The bombs killed five members of Hezbollah, including the son of the group’s former military commander, Imad Mughniyeh, and an Iranian general. The Israeli government justified the unprovoked attack on Syrian land by claiming, on no evidence, that Hezbollah and its Iranian allies “had been building an infrastructure in the Syrian Golan Heights with which to attack Israel.” The NY Times and other controlled media published this alibi without skepticism and without publishing any comment from Syria, Iran or Hezbollah as a counter to it. The Israelis issue the pretext for their violence and all people who think “correct” thoughts are obligated to believe it’s true.

    Israelis have a license to kill Arabs. They can “Auschwitz” them as much as they like, on this, the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

    For the full article go to:

    http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com.es/2015/01/an-auschwitz-for-arabs.html

  6. Julie says:

    Khiam prison was a detention and interrogation camp during the years of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. From 1985 until the Israeli defeat in May 2000, Lebanese and Palestinian detainees were held in Khiam without trial. Most of them were brutally tortured – some of them died.

    http://electronicintifada.net/content/photostory-khiam-detention-camp/9479

  7. PeterKos says:

    Tap: Me thinks you drink too much cool-aid. Over 1,000,000 fracked wells in the USA, over 100,000 fracked wells in Canada over the last 50 or so years. There has not been one documented case investigated that proves any ground water anywhere was ever polluted.

    If you would personally go on site to where a frack well is being drilled and observe exactly how it is done and ask some serious questions, you just might get an eye opener. But then again, if you are a water mellon, truth and evidence is not going to convince you.

    The only real dangerous chemical used in any quantity that you should be afraid of in the fracking process is di-hydrogen monoxide. As I understand it, in the right conditions it can cause burns and again, if you inhale it directly you can die. Other than that, fracking in 50 years or so has never been a problem anywhere if the rules are followed.

    • Tapestry says:

      Water is what this is mostly about. I agree with you PeterKos that humans are entirely expendable except those with good lawyers, and those sign gagging clauses as part of their out of court settlements. The dead tell no tales anyway and the sick are too weak to run information campaigns. Let them all die away so we can have a bankrupt energy business, which destroys our water in perpetuity. Then the humans will depend 100% on the corporations for mere simple fresh water. It’s so genius a a scheme the person who thought of it should be proud of themselves. If someone doesn’t comply then cut them off – not from money, which they do now, but from water…..

      Destroying the accessible sources of fresh water is what fracking is all about. Power – political not electrical. And not gas. The casualties to this great plan, the lands destroyed, the animals, the communities destroyed are mere nothingness compared to the beauty of the grand plan.

  8. NPP says:

    “The only real dangerous chemical used in any quantity that you should be afraid of in the fracking process is di-hydrogen monoxide….”

    Oh that’s OK then. I change my mind. Perhaps we should put that into vaccines too… just for good measure, build up our immune systems.

    I do not want fracking chemicals forced into the water table or soil.
    The same old same old type of power play characters and financial interests are at play… so I smell rats.
    The process has not been properly and clearly presented to the public.
    The decision to go forward has not been with clear and unequivocal consent by the public.
    As with so many things, so long as enough do not object, acquiescence is presumed by the enforcers of a policy.
    We have superior energy technologies not being shared with the taxpayer, when the taxpayer has probably contributed toward the research and development of these technologies.
    There’s no proof of such technologies? Give me the ‘authority’ and I will organise an open hearing for anyone who knows anything to shine light on withheld technology. I bet they are real. This is perfectly affordable and feasible since we are considering our independent national energy requirements.
    If you trust George Osbourne over Ian R. Crane fine, but I do not.
    If you think TAP & co are wishy washy internet conspiracy theorists, I don’t care, they are more worthy of my attention than insane government which lies lies lies, hurts children and lies more.
    I have not been convinced that fracking is safe or efficient or necessary. If you have, good for you, but I do not want it.

    If you deem me a ‘kool aid’ (whatever that is) twat -unt fool idiot blah blah, so be it, it bothers me not, I still do not want fracking.
    The fracking concept has not been properly explained, it is merely being imposed.
    Until otherwsie enlightened, I say NO.

    TAP. I applaud your pushing and demanding answers to this issue. If we are misguided and wrong, so be it, we have not been properly informed and thus far ultimately follow ‘gut feeling’.

    BBC Technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones has agreed to be chipped, so that’s OK, let’s all do that too!
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-31042477

    The alternative free media is making an impact and word is an increasing number of mainstream journalists are increasingly looking to and taking the ‘free and open’ media seriously.

    Fracking? Oh please, it’s as old hat as the combustion engine. Electric cars anyone said Ford in late the 1800’s? Man on the moon in 1969 and in 2015 we are fracking. As my Jewish uncle says, “Don’t be a mug.”

  9. PeterKos says:

    NPP:
    “The only real dangerous chemical used in any quantity that you should be afraid of in the fracking process is di-hydrogen monoxide….”

    Oh that’s OK then. I change my mind. Perhaps we should put that into vaccines too… just for good measure, build up our immune systems.

    Perhaps NPP, you should google di-hydrogen monoxide before you consume any more and die from its effects.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.