Yes Colorado is a water poor state--semi desert. Fracking uses a shit-load of water that cannot be reused. There is an ever increasing demand on the Front Range (Pueblo to Ft Collins, including the Denver metro area) for water (can you say uncontrolled growth?). The proposed source for this water is from the western slope, ie, the Colorado River drainage, which is already over subscribed! I guess at some point this will be self limiting. Not too long ago, Douglas County, north of Colorado Springs was the fastest growing county in the country. The wells that people had on their properties were certified by State Engineers as being 100 year wells. The rapid growth and development depleted those wells in just a few years, leaving the home owners literally high and dry. So, lets keep fracking and burning the natural gas with its, albeit reduced, CO2 levels, and deplete the water supply and raise the environmental temperature. That will surely limit growth and the need for water and natural gas from fracking.

Some of the 12900 employees that were laid off or had voluntarily retired were doing things outside of the 5 areas of focus. Some on my development team were in one these areas but the bulk of the development in this area was shifted overseas. A large number of the voluntary retirees were doing work in these areas as well. With some of these folks in very key roles.

I had a '56 chevy that I put on a bunch of devices that were supposed to save gas. Every few miles I had to stop and siphon the tank to keep it from overflowing!!!

Lets see, a 3 fold increase would be from 'a' kwh to '3a' kwh. The percent increase would be 100%*(3a - a)/a = 200%. So is it 3 fold increase or 300% increase (which would be 4 fold increase).

Cheerup, this is only the beginning with warming global temperatures, the atmosphere holding more moisture, more intense and frequent storms, yada yada yada.

---
if all your folly were changed to intelligence and divided amongst a thousand toads, each would be more intelligent than Aristotle.

Please note -- I didn't claim it was bullshit. Someone else did!

lets just say that there is some contention about the explosiveness of zirconium. An older article (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/148/3677/1594.abstract) suggests that it can be explosive (what about flaring, does that count)? Given that there are high concentrations of Hydrogen, the point may be moot!

Gee--I learned something--burning is not the same as exploding. DOH! BUT, get this, zirconium was used in making flash bulbs. If you do your research instead of responding so glibly, you will find that the compound is explosive. See for example: http://techyum.com/2011/03/does-zirconium-explode-at-2000-degrees/.

The fuel rods in these reactors are made from a zirconium compound. This compound is explosive above 2000 deg. There are tons of this stuff to go boom spreading the radionuclides from the tons of the spent fuel, into the atmosphere. Is this shades of "On The Beach"? But, not to worry, the government says we are safe just like they said the environment around the WTC was safe.

"If the brain were simple enough to be understood, it would be too simple to understand itself"--anonymous

If all of our folly were turned to intelligence and divided amongst a thousand toads, each would be more intelligent than Aristotle