6 thoughts on “Anti-fracking disease spreads to the Northern Territory”

1. Kinda like allowing Uranium Exploration but banning mining for cultural reasons – circular & directional fornication by Shardilarts*
   ( *Chardonnay-Latte’ Weekend Earth Mother Armchair Socialist Fair Weather Feminists SorosBots)

2. Fracking has been proven safe all round the world, not only through scores of inquiries, but after years of trouble-free operation at many, many sites. The idea that yet another inquiry in the NT is going to show anything different is ridiculous.

   Reading the story carefully, it appears that the Chief Minister knows this and is only calling the inquiry to give the government cover to “soften the policy it took the election”. Exploration can continue, as long as it does not itself use fracking techniques.

   So, shameless populism during the election campaign, followed by craven buck-passing after it. Result – years of delay in extracting a useful resource. As you say, Warwick, read it and weep.

3. I understand that fracking has been used for decades in the on-shore gas fields of WA (eg the Dongara gas field). I am sure fracking has also been used in the Palm Valley gas field west of Alice Springs NT. Fracking of course is used to assist recovery of coal seam gas in Qld. I would be surprised if fracking has not been used in the central Australia oil and gas fields such as Moonie in SA/ Qld border area

4. Turns out that the boundary between “Conventional “& “Un- Conventional Gas is an arbitrary point on the spectrum of reservoir porosity.

   I.e. all host sequences are probably enhanced by engineering techniques but some bloody bureaucrat picks a “figure “& all subsequent resource harvesting is either OK or WFO Eco-Hooning Earth Rape!

   Aren’t we clever!!!

5. HOW James Hansen NASA & IPCC GOT IT ALL HORRIBLY WRONG

   A very small portion of the Moon’s surface where the Sun is almost directly overhead receives a flux of just over 1,360 watts per square meter and, as the Stefan-Boltzmann Law in physics tells us, that flux will (and does) achieve an equilibrium temperature of just over 120°C. But the average temperature of the Moon’s surface is well below 0°C. On Earth about half of the Sun’s radiation never reaches the surface because it is reflected by the atmosphere or absorbed by so-called “greenhouse” gas such as water vapor, ozone, carbon dioxide and methane. So the solar radiation impinging on Earth’s surface could only achieve an average temperature well below the Moon’s sub-zero average temperature, and calculations show it would be below -40°C. For Venus, the Solar radiation reaching its surface is less than 20 watts per square meter on average, so how could that explain a temperature of 460°C? It doesn’t.

   Dr James Hansen recognized this dilemma and (totally incorrectly) thought it must be radiation from the cold atmosphere somehow causing heat transfer into the warmer surface which was helping the Sun’s radiation that reached the surface to raise that -40°C temperature. Climatologists worked out (incorrectly anyway) that an extra 324 watts per square meter (about twice the average solar radiation) would be needed to explain the surface temperature, and that’s the figure that went into NASA energy diagrams as seen on this page: whyitsnotco2.com/PSI.html.

   The atmosphere certainly does send radiation to the surface, but calculations show it could not be as much as that 324 figure. In any event, radiation never causes heat transfer into a target that is warmer than the source of the radiation because it is merely pseudo-scattered, as physicists in the 21st century have realized and explained. So NASA and the IPCC are wrong on two counts and radiation of any form that reaches a planet’s surface is not the primary determinant of the mean temperature of that surface. The so-called “trapping” of energy up in the cold atmosphere supposedly causes extra “back” radiation included in that 324 figure, but it does not explain the temperature in the first place, let alone any rise in such.

   Referring back to that -40°C, what would be needed was far more than the “33 degrees” of warming you can read about in the “Glossary” on the IPCC website. James Hansen’s guesswork backed the wrong horse, as we now know from more facts about the Solar System. For example, there is no solar radiation and no solid surface at the base of the nominal troposphere of Uranus, yet it’s over 45°C on average down there. That single fact is sufficient to prove wrong the radiative forcing greenhouse conjecture.

   If you want to know what really happens you will only find it in my writings as I have been first in the world to explain how the temperatures and the required heat transfers occur on all planets in all galaxies.

   Douglas Cotton B.Sc (physics), B.A.(economics), Dip.Bus.Admin – retired scientist, educator and now researcher into Atmospheric Physics and Climate Change, Author of published articles and papers thereon, including “Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures” and the book “Why It’s Not Carbon Dioxide After All” and the websites earth-climate.com climate-change-theory.com and blog itsnotco2.wordpress.com.

6. I know its OT but interesting to read of the NSW bureaucracy supporting the expansion of the Drayton South coal mine.
   Planning Assessment Commission to have final say on controversial Drayton South mining project
   www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-20/planning-department-recommends-rejected-mine-be-approved/7860188
   More amazing that anti mine arguments from nearby horse studs enjoy the oxygen they have. Weigh up income to the nation from from the mine against income from the horses, no brainer. And the mine expansion does not stop anybody operating a horse stud anywhere.