After posting about the dangers to people and our environment caused by the hydraulic (water-based) fracturing of oil-bearing rock, AKA ‘fracking’ – and which are totally dismissed by our current Prime Minister – I discovered another reason for not letting the Prime Minister, his supporters and the lobbying pack lead us all further down the Primrose Path to Hell.
Not only does fracking pollute the water supply but it also needs an enormous amount of water for the process. So much water is required – (according to this UK Guardian article1) – that in certain areas of America the water table has been drastically reduced until there is no longer enough clear, fresh unpolluted water to irrigate the crops upon which so many people depend. Once the water is used in fracking it is contaminated and is neither fit for human or animal consumption nor irrigating crops.
There is no reason to believe that this will not happen in island Britain where the merest mention of the word ‘drought’ produces the threat of restrictions on our water use. In a country with a burgeoning population like the British Isles where we need all the land and water that there is somebody has to say, ‘Fracking is not in our best long-term interest.’
Why is our PM telling white lies masquerading as truth? Once our reserve of potable water is vastly reduced and irredeemably polluted what then? The population keeps growing, we need more potable water not less.
Of course, our PM and the politicians who support him in this madness won’t be here to put up with the mess caused by yet another political, short-term fix.
Why do so many politicians go for the short-term fix? There is no good reason why a supposedly intelligent person should recommend something that is going to cause so many problems. It either shows a complete lack of knowledge or a thwarted desire to get votes, prestige and power regardless of the health and well-being of the people.
Anyone can see that we need energy but why use an energy source that will cause enormous pollution to obtain and more pollution to use? What is wrong with renewable sources of energy?
So why choose an extremely polluting fuel?
Is there another possible reason? Does it involve the flow of large volumes of money from a higher and more powerful source to a much lower sink, AKA ‘politics’?
Prime Minister Thatcher killed the coal-production industry but coal is not as polluting as forcing oil from rocks (at least the polluting gases and particles from burning coal dust can now be removed). How could we remove the polluting chemical, metals and other chemical poisons from our underground and surface water supply? If we had not all been asleep when Thatcher sold our public water off to private companies then we would have more say now. We simply cannot afford to sleep through this potential disaster in the making.
Please wake up. Politics is poisoning us.
Class: Rotten Politics.
Tags: big money, corruption, Fracking, pollution.
Posted by Keith Gascoigne at www.yoruk.co.uk
You are free to repost this providing that the post appears in its entirety including the byline ‘Posted by Keith Gascoigne, www.yoruk.co.uk’.
It would be good if you could let me know where it goes. Many thanks.
Of course, you can disagree with what I write and email me about this.