XPost: us.politics, ca.politics, dc.politics   
   From: in@val.id   
      
   On 2/22/2014 2:39 PM, ConɀƦConɀ wrote:   
   > Trading water for fuel is fracking crazy   
   >   
      
   Depends on WHOSE water...   
      
    > It would be difficult to live without oil and gas.   
      
   It would be a LOT more than just "difficult", especially north of 60.   
      
    > But it would be   
    > impossible to live without water.   
      
   Is Canuckistan running out of water?   
      
    > Yet, in our mad rush to extract and   
    > sell every drop of gas and oil as quickly as possible, we’re trading   
    > precious water for fossil fuels.   
      
   Depends on WHOSE water...   
      
    > A recent report, “Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Stress”, shows the   
    > severity of the problem. Alberta and B.C. are among eight North American   
    > regions examined in the study by Ceres, a U.S.-based nonprofit   
    > advocating for sustainability leadership.   
      
   Wot, you hoseheads can't even get your own left-wing non-profits to   
   (wait for it) carry your water?   
      
   LOL!   
      
    > One of the most disturbing findings is that hydraulic fracturing, or   
    > fracking, is using enormous amounts of water in areas that can scarcely   
    > afford it. The report notes that close to half the oil and gas wells   
    > recently fracked in the U.S. “are in regions with high or extremely high   
    > water stress” and more than 55 per cent are in areas experiencing   
    > drought.   
      
   Bummer.   
      
   Ever consider those water rights were BOUGHT from farmers and ranchers   
   who now have a new cash crop?   
      
    > In Colorado and California, almost all wells – 97 and 96 per   
    > cent, respectively – are in regions with high or extremely high water   
    > stress, meaning more than 80 per cent of available surface and   
    > groundwater has already been allocated for municipalities, industry and   
    > agriculture.   
      
   DUMB FUCK!   
      
   Those wells are on agricultural land using existing landowners'   
   agricultural water rights - sheesh!   
      
   Wake the fuck up, fool!   
      
    > A quarter of Alberta wells are in areas with medium to high   
    > water stress.   
      
   Well maybe you can pipe some down from the Great Slave Lake, you morons.   
      
    > Drought and fracking have already caused some small communities in Texas   
    > to run out of water altogether,   
      
   Good thing they were "small communities" then, eh?   
      
    > and parts of California are headed for   
    > the same fate.   
      
   Blah, blah, blah, tend to your own nation's affairs you witless Canuck   
   troll.   
      
    > As we continue to extract andburn ever greater amounts   
    > of oil, gas and coal, climate change is getting worse, which will likely   
    > lead to more droughts in some areas and flooding in others.   
      
   So a new balance, yeah, feast or famine, but likely both.   
      
    > California’s   
    > drought may be the worst in 500 years, according to B. Lynn Ingram, an   
    > earth and planetary sciences professor at the University of California,   
    > Berkeley.   
      
   Yeah, so?   
      
   What's it to ya, Canuck?   
      
    > That’s causing a shortage of water for drinking and   
    > agriculture, and for salmon and other fish that spawn in streams and   
    > rivers. With no rain to scrub the air, pollution in the Los Angeles area   
    > has returned to dangerous levels of decades past.   
      
   Lions and tigers and...oh my!!!   
      
    > Because of lack of information from industry and inconsistencies in   
    > water volume reporting, Ceres’ Western Canada data analysis “represents   
    > a very small proportion of the overall activity taking place.”   
    > Researchers determined, though, that Alberta fracking operations have   
    > started using more “brackish/saline” groundwater instead of freshwater.   
      
   Oh?   
      
   You mean they adapted.   
      
    > The report cautions that this practice needs more study “given the   
    > potential for brackish water to be used in the future for drinking   
    > water” and the fact that withdrawing salty groundwater “can also   
    > adversely impact interconnected freshwater resources.”   
      
   Wow, full Chicken Little mode, eh?   
      
    > Although B.C. fracking operations are now mainly in low water stress   
    > regions, reduced precipitation and snowpack, low river levels and even   
    > drought conditions in some areas – likely because of climate change –   
    > raise concerns about the government’s plan to rapidly expand the   
    > industry. The report cites a “lack of regulation around groundwater   
    > withdrawals” and cumulative impacts on First Nations lands as issues   
    > with current fracking.   
      
   Why is any of this Canuck rant in a US newsgroup, troll?   
      
    > Ceres’ study only looks at fracking impacts on freshwater supplies, and   
    > offers recommendations to reduce those, including recycling water, using   
    > brackish or wastewater, strengthening regulations and finding better   
    > ways to dispose of fracking wastewater. But the drilling method comes   
    > with other environmental problems, from groundwater contamination to   
    > massive ecosystem and habitat disruption – even small earth tremors –   
    > all done in the name of short-term gain.   
      
   I love it when the earth has tremors, feels like giant Magic Fingers!   
      
    > It’s important to heed the conclusions and recommendations of this study   
    > and others, but given the problems with fracking, and other forms of   
    > extraction, we must find ways to control our insatiable fossil fuel   
    > demand. That burning these – often wastefully – contributes to climate   
    > change, and our methods of extraction exacerbate the problems, should   
    > make us take a good look at how we’re treating this planet and   
    > everything on it, including ourselves and generations to come. It’s a   
    > reminder that we need to conserve energy in every way possible.   
      
   I bet you hosers won't drop your thermostats to 58 deg. F in the winter,   
   will ya?   
      
    > In the short term, we must realize that we have better ways to create   
    > jobs and build the economy than holding an “everything must go” sale on   
    > our precious resources.   
      
   Like that infamously buggy Canuckian software and CrackBerry industry, lol?   
      
    > In the longer term, we must rethink our outdated   
    > economic systems, which were devised for times when resources were   
    > plentiful and infrastructure was scarce. Our highest priorities must be   
    > the air we breathe, the water we drink, the soil that provides food and   
    > the biodiversity that keeps us alive and healthy.   
    >   
    > By David Suzuki   
      
   As rhetorically over the top as ever, wotta nutbar!   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)