Shale Gas is back in the news again and it concerns me a great deal the way that we are extracting this.
I know we have a few on the forum who seem to have good knowledge of these sorts of issues, so I'm coming very much from the armchair punter, who only knows a little of what is on the TV news and in the press.
But Shale Gas worries me - it's thought we could be sitting on 1,000 trillion cubic feet of the gas, or 300 years supply at current rates.
But what happens to the shale when we extract the gas, there must be some impact - it smacks to me of fracking the bubbles out of an Aero. The chocolate may still be there, but it woudln't look or behave in the same manner.
Surely we have much better methods of harnessing the energy around us and here's 3 that I don't think we use enough.
Solar - consistant -likely to be around for a good deal longer than us.
Hydro - we can be sure of rain and gravity - the elements needed and yet 7 reservoirs linked together and water flowing down the system to Horwich aren't used to generate anything.
Surely it must be feasible to generate something from this.
GeoThermal - we have a vast store of energy underneath us and seem to do very little with it.
Perhaps some of you out there that are more clued up can advise why we don't seem to do more and persist with these inefficient windfarms and fracking.