The argument is flawed. Reverse osmosis will remove all contaminants and yield water close to distillation purity. Benzene can be filtered out as it is not miscible with water.
Want to play pedant? About RO, Wikipedia notes that "this membrane-technology is not properly a filtration method." More importantly than playing silly word games, please address the energy requirements and costs of RO (including who will bear those costs). Also evaluate the time between detecting that significant contamination has occurred and when these RO plants can go into operation.
If you want to ban fracking in Germany, just give the lawmakers some American beer and remind them that there's fracking in the US and look how the beer tastes.
Careful, if you give them some of our good microbrewery stuff they might decide that contamination is a good thing. The French used to turn their noses up at American wines too, until a blind test by French testers found they preferred some of the American wines.
I agree, but unless you specifically say otherwise, talking about fracking as though it can't cause contamination because the actual fracking is at great depths misleads people into thinking that the whole operation can't cause contamination.
Even modern beer doesn't contain enough alcohol to kill bacteria; the important thing is that to make beer you had to boil it
Interesting. I wondered why the small alcohol content worked (maybe it helped a little?). I also wondered why they didn't just boil water, whether it was ignorance or just a preference for beer instead of water (actually I still don't know). I'm also obviously no brewer, as I didn't know you had to boil water to make beer.
All a business is concerned about is profit, and rightly so!
Gewinn über alles? (anyone who actually speaks German feel free to correct).
Yes, profit is what I expect for-profit business to be mainly concerned with (hence the term "for-profit"). It makes a great economic tool, but we also introduce something called "regulation" to deal with externalities like pollution. In some cases intelligently run businesses even support that regulation because they realize that otherwise there may be a public backlash that will destroy their business.
Obviously it can't! After all, fracking takes place far below where the wells get their water, and with our latest technology, we have Scotty here to teleport the chemicals down and the gas up without having to drill through the water table!
Scotty ain't so sharp. He can't even tell the difference between a computer mouse and a microphone.
If for no other reason than that they aren't fracking yet. This is about a proposed law permitting it.
and it may well be that nothing will happen to it in the future. And if anything does happen, the magnitude of it could be so small as to be unnoticeable
That's two "maybe's", and the other side of that is two "maybe not's". Wouldn't it be nice to get some assurances before proceeding w/ something that can seriously contaminate the water supply, as has happened at fracking sites in the US.
Fact is the shale in my region sits below 3500 m (~10,000ft.)
Above it are huge salt layers that cap the Slochteren formation, the largest but 3/4 depleted on-shore gas field in Europe.
Would there be any leaks from the frack they'd logically end up in this reservoir.
You're assuming that the contamination comes from the actual fracking itself. It usually comes from things like improperly sealed bore holes. Is it your contention that fracking (or any natural gas drilling) can't contaminate water supplies? Do you think everyone in the US reporting it is under a delusion and that we should just trust the gas industry?
Well water is anything but pure. In the best case its loader with dissolved minerals and full of microbes.... say its pure is crazy talk.
You're quibbling over the definition of "pure". At least you could find out what the German word is and quibble over that definition. Personally I'd rather have the minerals dissolved in most decent ground water than, say benzene.
We have reverse-osmosis filtering system on the water source for the humidifiers for the environmental chambers in the test lab at work. It's not unknown technology. The old-fashioned alternative is a still.
You think that's a solution? What about the rest of the potable water supply and the cost and energy use of what you suggest.
Are these breweries currently using unfiltered, unpurified water?
Quite possibly. There are places where untouched ground water is quite safe to drink (let alone what the alcohol in beer does to further sterilize it). There are plenty of people in less densely populated areas that get their water from a backyard well.
So distill the water if you need it "pure". I doubt the water coming out of the ground is as "pure" as distilled water.
Forget beer - do you know how much potable water the average person uses in a day? Distillation is very energy intensive, otherwise it would be used all over to get fresh water from salt water. Distilled water also tastes like crap. Even soft water has enough mineral content to change the flavor, and I suspect that's part of the beer flavor. Brewer's tend to be very particular about their exact water source, which wouldn't be an issue if distilled water worked well.
Don't get too excited. It was mostly what the British called "short beer". It was pretty watery and had just enough alcohol to kill much of the bacteria. Otherwise people couldn't have afforded it, and would have been too drunk all the time to brew any more. You probably wouldn't touch the stuff.
Or if only there was a way to filter the water (they don't already filter it?).
Filtering works great for sand, grit, etc. but is not so easy w/ various mixed in chemicals.
Or if only you could take hydrogen and oxygen gasses and do anything useful with them.
You mean the hydrogen that you get from the electrolysis of water, and the oxygen you get either from that or liquefying air? That'll solve your energy problem.
The real pollution problem with fracking for gas isn't the fact that it's fracking as opposed to more traditional extraction techniques, but that the drilling sites are not well monitored and even existing regulations are not well enforced. In other words, the same crap can happen with conventional drilling. It's also ridiculous that thanks to Dick Cheney, companies don't have to tell the EPA or state environmental departments what the ingredients of their fracking fluids are. At least that's the situation here in the US - as an American I can't speak to the German situation so well. Hopefully they handle it better.
I'm afraid that this is yet another industry that'll screw itself through short term greed, just as lax safety at nuke plants has trashed that industry.
I have no complaints about modern healthcare in the U.S.
Obviously it's good that your treatment experiences with modern healthcare in the US have been positive. Your treatment experiences would probably have been as good in almost any developed country though, which is not a knock on the US, but does show we're not exceptional in that regard. The big problem w/ US healthcare is its cost. If you had lacked insurance that ER experience probably would have bankrupted you. There's a possible exception for on-the-job injury or something that was clearly the fault of someone else with good insurance and/or deep pockets, but the lawsuits can take years and cost a fortune themselves. Don't count on those things though. Many 9/11 "non-official" first responders, who were rightly considered heroes, were bankrupted by their medical costs. Without insurance you also couldn't have even contemplated cataract surgery.
US healthcare costs at least 50% more than in any other country (as %/GDP, it's worse if you use exchange rate or PPP), and we do not have better results for it. We also lack universal coverage. It's also a crap shoot as to whether or not needed medical treatment will bankrupt you.
Computerized gerrymandering is part of the problem: politicians redraw their own districts to be slanted politically so that all they have to do is kiss up to extremists to get re-elected rather than do real work.
They don't have to kiss up to extremists, or do anything. With a well enough gerrymandered district the Democrats or Republicans could run a dead slug and he'd get elected. The 2012 redistricting did this where I live. Instead of adjusting the congressional districts, they completely redrew them. At least it was bipartisan - we now have a guaranteed Democratic district and a guaranteed Republican district.
Slashdot Mirror
The argument is flawed. Reverse osmosis will remove all contaminants and yield water close to distillation purity. Benzene can be filtered out as it is not miscible with water.
Want to play pedant? About RO, Wikipedia notes that "this membrane-technology is not properly a filtration method." More importantly than playing silly word games, please address the energy requirements and costs of RO (including who will bear those costs). Also evaluate the time between detecting that significant contamination has occurred and when these RO plants can go into operation.
Mod parent up - very informative.
If you want to ban fracking in Germany, just give the lawmakers some American beer and remind them that there's fracking in the US and look how the beer tastes.
Careful, if you give them some of our good microbrewery stuff they might decide that contamination is a good thing. The French used to turn their noses up at American wines too, until a blind test by French testers found they preferred some of the American wines.
The fact is that there are no confirmed reports of fracking contaminating drinking water.
The actual fracking, no, but there are cases of the overall operations causing serious contamination.
The problem in the US is a lack of regulation
I agree, but unless you specifically say otherwise, talking about fracking as though it can't cause contamination because the actual fracking is at great depths misleads people into thinking that the whole operation can't cause contamination.
local breweries, which on average is 3 per town (from 1000 pop.)
Small wonder the last time I visited Germany it seemed like everyone was staggering. It may have helped that it was during Oktoberfest.
it was called "small beer" not "short beer"
Small, short, I just speak American.
Even modern beer doesn't contain enough alcohol to kill bacteria; the important thing is that to make beer you had to boil it
Interesting. I wondered why the small alcohol content worked (maybe it helped a little?). I also wondered why they didn't just boil water, whether it was ignorance or just a preference for beer instead of water (actually I still don't know). I'm also obviously no brewer, as I didn't know you had to boil water to make beer.
silly americans think their beer is beer...
FTFY
Good thing you said that about Americans, who are quite forgiving about such "jokes". If you'd said that about Canadians, you could be in real trouble
the Cheney laws are totally unthinkable in Germany or any other N/W European country
Hopefully you're right. Not so long ago they were unthinkable in the US.
All a business is concerned about is profit, and rightly so!
Gewinn über alles? (anyone who actually speaks German feel free to correct).
Yes, profit is what I expect for-profit business to be mainly concerned with (hence the term "for-profit"). It makes a great economic tool, but we also introduce something called "regulation" to deal with externalities like pollution. In some cases intelligently run businesses even support that regulation because they realize that otherwise there may be a public backlash that will destroy their business.
Problem solved then! They can simply amend it again to include the cocktail of chemicals from the fracking.
Benzene adds a delightful "bite" to an otherwise dull lager.
Obviously it can't! After all, fracking takes place far below where the wells get their water, and with our latest technology, we have Scotty here to teleport the chemicals down and the gas up without having to drill through the water table!
Scotty ain't so sharp. He can't even tell the difference between a computer mouse and a microphone.
nothing is happening to the beer source water now
If for no other reason than that they aren't fracking yet. This is about a proposed law permitting it.
and it may well be that nothing will happen to it in the future. And if anything does happen, the magnitude of it could be so small as to be unnoticeable
That's two "maybe's", and the other side of that is two "maybe not's". Wouldn't it be nice to get some assurances before proceeding w/ something that can seriously contaminate the water supply, as has happened at fracking sites in the US.
Fact is the shale in my region sits below 3500 m (~10,000ft.) Above it are huge salt layers that cap the Slochteren formation, the largest but 3/4 depleted on-shore gas field in Europe. Would there be any leaks from the frack they'd logically end up in this reservoir.
You're assuming that the contamination comes from the actual fracking itself. It usually comes from things like improperly sealed bore holes. Is it your contention that fracking (or any natural gas drilling) can't contaminate water supplies? Do you think everyone in the US reporting it is under a delusion and that we should just trust the gas industry?
Well water is anything but pure. In the best case its loader with dissolved minerals and full of microbes. ... say its pure is crazy talk.
You're quibbling over the definition of "pure". At least you could find out what the German word is and quibble over that definition. Personally I'd rather have the minerals dissolved in most decent ground water than, say benzene.
We have reverse-osmosis filtering system on the water source for the humidifiers for the environmental chambers in the test lab at work. It's not unknown technology. The old-fashioned alternative is a still.
You think that's a solution? What about the rest of the potable water supply and the cost and energy use of what you suggest.
Are these breweries currently using unfiltered, unpurified water?
Quite possibly. There are places where untouched ground water is quite safe to drink (let alone what the alcohol in beer does to further sterilize it). There are plenty of people in less densely populated areas that get their water from a backyard well.
Oh great, German anti-science deniers spreading scare stories about fracking.
Is it your scientific contention that fracking can't pollute water supplies?
I watch way too many WWII documentaries.
Same here, but it's ok if you only apply it to beer.
So distill the water if you need it "pure". I doubt the water coming out of the ground is as "pure" as distilled water.
Forget beer - do you know how much potable water the average person uses in a day? Distillation is very energy intensive, otherwise it would be used all over to get fresh water from salt water. Distilled water also tastes like crap. Even soft water has enough mineral content to change the flavor, and I suspect that's part of the beer flavor. Brewer's tend to be very particular about their exact water source, which wouldn't be an issue if distilled water worked well.
Don't get too excited. It was mostly what the British called "short beer". It was pretty watery and had just enough alcohol to kill much of the bacteria. Otherwise people couldn't have afforded it, and would have been too drunk all the time to brew any more. You probably wouldn't touch the stuff.
Or if only there was a way to filter the water (they don't already filter it?).
Filtering works great for sand, grit, etc. but is not so easy w/ various mixed in chemicals.
Or if only you could take hydrogen and oxygen gasses and do anything useful with them.
You mean the hydrogen that you get from the electrolysis of water, and the oxygen you get either from that or liquefying air? That'll solve your energy problem.
The real pollution problem with fracking for gas isn't the fact that it's fracking as opposed to more traditional extraction techniques, but that the drilling sites are not well monitored and even existing regulations are not well enforced. In other words, the same crap can happen with conventional drilling. It's also ridiculous that thanks to Dick Cheney, companies don't have to tell the EPA or state environmental departments what the ingredients of their fracking fluids are. At least that's the situation here in the US - as an American I can't speak to the German situation so well. Hopefully they handle it better.
I'm afraid that this is yet another industry that'll screw itself through short term greed, just as lax safety at nuke plants has trashed that industry.
I have no complaints about modern healthcare in the U.S.
Obviously it's good that your treatment experiences with modern healthcare in the US have been positive. Your treatment experiences would probably have been as good in almost any developed country though, which is not a knock on the US, but does show we're not exceptional in that regard. The big problem w/ US healthcare is its cost. If you had lacked insurance that ER experience probably would have bankrupted you. There's a possible exception for on-the-job injury or something that was clearly the fault of someone else with good insurance and/or deep pockets, but the lawsuits can take years and cost a fortune themselves. Don't count on those things though. Many 9/11 "non-official" first responders, who were rightly considered heroes, were bankrupted by their medical costs. Without insurance you also couldn't have even contemplated cataract surgery.
US healthcare costs at least 50% more than in any other country (as %/GDP, it's worse if you use exchange rate or PPP), and we do not have better results for it. We also lack universal coverage. It's also a crap shoot as to whether or not needed medical treatment will bankrupt you.
girls are actually more fun in person.
That's a common myth.
Nonsense, I heard it from a very reliable source.
Computerized gerrymandering is part of the problem: politicians redraw their own districts to be slanted politically so that all they have to do is kiss up to extremists to get re-elected rather than do real work.
They don't have to kiss up to extremists, or do anything. With a well enough gerrymandered district the Democrats or Republicans could run a dead slug and he'd get elected. The 2012 redistricting did this where I live. Instead of adjusting the congressional districts, they completely redrew them. At least it was bipartisan - we now have a guaranteed Democratic district and a guaranteed Republican district.