Fracking

Fracking. There is a lot of talk today in British Columbia about fracking. Let's try to get some perspective on the WHOLE  story. I've seen truckloads of rigs, pipe, pumps go up the highway to drill sites. That equipment starts in a steel mill in Taiwan. We used to have steel mills in Hamilton, Ontatrio, but they were all shut down when multinationals bought the companies and then went where the cheap labour was (read no regulations, less taxes, work in flip-flops) located. This equipment was manufactured through the use of HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS. Net result - $$$ to foreign multinationals.

Now those steel products were shipped to North America on ships that use HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS (read a ship moves 44 feet using one gallon of fuel). Not to mention the fact that Canada used to have large ship building facilities that were bought up by multinational companies. Yep, moved to where the cheap labour was. Net result - $$$ to foreign multinationals.

Now in Canada, we have allowed a large number of our railway lines to be shut down and deactivated. Deactivated means that we allow the rail companies to pull up the rail and sell it for scrap at 2 cents a pound. Yes, you guessed it. The steel rail goes overseas to be melted down using HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS to be made into gas fracking equipment. Because we don't have an extensive rail infrastructure anymore, all this equipment must be trucked from the coastal ports and over the mountains using HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS. Not to mention, British Columbia used to have some famous truck manufacturers that were originally started here. Hays, Mack Trucks, Pacific, White Western Star. All of these names have been bought by multinational companies and the manufacturing moved elsewhere or the line shut down because it was competing with a similar product. Net result - $$$ to foreign multinationals.

Now, the equipment has arrived at the well site. Drilling has commenced, using HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS,  to drill a mile or two down and another mile horizontally. Water, sand and chemicals are now injected under great pressure to fracture the rock and allow the gas to seep out. Each well uses upwards of 2 million gallons of water that is lost for future use. 

Let me explain. Water belongs in a cycle that is infinitely reusable. The original water on this planet may have come from asteroids hitting this hot orb, but nobody knows for sure. What is known is that WATER IS NOT BEING MADE ANYMORE. Mix that water with chemicals and inject it into the ground where it becomes lost to the water cycle, we lose it from the system. It will no longer be available to fall as rain and snow and replenish our reservoirs. Multiply that by the huge number of proposed wells and ask yourself whether there will be any water left over for you.

Ok, the gas is seeping, not gushing, out of the rock and is being collected at the well site to be pumped into the network of pipelines. The natural gas does not flow in the pipe on its own, it must be pumped, USING HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS, at compressor stations located every so often along the pipe line route. The proposal is that this natural gas will come through a pipeline that has been built, USING HUGE AMOUNTS FO FOSSIL FUELS, over and through the mountains to the coast. Here it will enter the liquefaction plant.

The liquefaction of natural gas to make LNG requires a HUGE AMOUNT OF ENERGY, either fossil fuels or hydro electric, to cool the natural gas to around -160 degrees until it reaches its liquid state. British Columbia only has enough excess energy at this time to supply one liquefaction plant. The proposal is for 5 initial plants and up to a total of 11. The thought is that the taxpayer will ultimately pay to have the Site C on the Peace River dammed, flooding a whole river valley that is now used for agriculture. Are we damming this river to produce power so that the citizens will get cheap power? No. Are we damming this river so that the citizens will get cheap natural gas? No. We will dam this river so that multinational corporations have a means to ship natural gas, by liquefaction, to markets in Asia. Oh, and don't forget, that the shipping will use HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS. Net result - $$$ for multinationals.

We are near the end - hang in there. Count up the number of times that HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS was used, and I have probably missed some because the business is so intertwined. Do you think that the natural gas, which is finite in quantity, seeping out of the ground, can create enough profit to offset the cost of all the HUGE AMOUNTS OF FOSSIL FUELS? I know that it seems that each step in this journey is separate and that separate companies are doing it but there has to be a final reckoning of the NET FOSSIL FUEL. Maybe we are using more fossil fuels than we are getting natural gas out of the ground.

One thing is sure. This has introduced a new cycle, like the water cycle and the energy cycle, and that is the money cycle. Everywhere on this natural gas recovery journey, $$$ are sticking to the hands of multinationals. Yes, we get some $ from labour but considering what we as taxpayers will be paying for, it will be a NET LOSS. Other nations, Norway for one, have had the same problem but they made the oil industry pay for the infrastructure. We don't do it that way.

Fracking. Sounds like that other F word, doesn't it.