Notts village votes overwhelmingly against IGas shale plans

Misson Imagery c2016 Getmapping plc, Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky

Misson village, Nottinghamshire. Photo: (c) 2016 Getmapping plc, Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky

People in Misson in north Nottinghamshire have voted overwhelmingly against plans by IGas to drill two exploratory shale gas wells near the village.

A survey, organised by Misson Parish Council, was completed by 396 residents or 76% of the parish population.

Of the residents who took part in a survey:

87% (345 people) were against the proposals.

4% (14 people) were in favour.

9% (37 people) were undecided.

A separate petition against the scheme collected 363 signatures, which is 70% of the village population.

Parish councillor, Jayne Watson, said:

“The figures speak for themselves.”

The survey and the petition were handed to the village’s county councillor, Liz Yates. She will present them to the next full meeting of the Nottinghamshire County Council on Thursday February 25th.

Last month, the council’s planning committee approved IGas plans to sink up to 12 groundwater monitoring boreholes at its proposed shale gas site, known as Misson Springs. Equipment was moved onto the site eight days later. DrillOrDrop report

The company has also applied for permission to drill vertical and horizontal shale gas exploration wells. Nottinghamshire County Council said last week it needed more information from the company on the application.  Another public consultation was likely, the council said. DrillOrDrop report

The exploration application does not include fracking but IGas has said it will apply to frack if the wells produce successful results.

This report is part of DrillOrDrop’s Rig Watch project. Rig Watch receives funding from the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust. More details here

8 replies »

  1. and how many of those villagers were told that the water would be polluted (that has never happened), toxic chemicals would be used (not permitted in the UK) and that the land would be ruined, (no evidence for this).

    Feinds of the Earth have been promoting this drivel for years, through their limited company. They know its rubbish, which is why they set up a limited company as the Charity arm is not permitted to tell lies. It all helps win an argument on climate change. See http://oesg.org.uk/what-do-groups-like-friends-of-the-earth-really-think-about-fracking/

    • With 5.2 million homes at risk of flooding in England ( SOURCE, Flood defence spending in England – Parliament breifing paper 19th November 2014 )

      With two thirds of the UK insurance market either refusing cover, or placing special exemptions on the policies of homeowners who live in areas at risk of flooding with fracking sites in close proximity ( 5 miles ).
      DEFRA warning of the serious risk to human health from highly polluted fracking waste water.
      ( SOURCE, Independant Newspaper UK, 9th January 2016, headlined… Householders Face Double Whammy If They Live Near A Planned Fracking Site )

      AGAIN I ASK, what does the fracking industry intend to do about this ???

      • No issues with flooding, its a closed loop system and there is always a flood risk assesment with any drilling.

        There are no issues with insurance either. Its the usual scare stories. The supposed ‘earthquake risk’ is covered by all insurers. Apparently there is an exclusion for chemical pollution but that has never occurred due to fracking anywhere. Any surface pollution would be covered by the operator, but that is highly unlikely anyway as all chemicals are required to be ‘non hazardous’. The operators are also covered to abandonment with an insurance bond.

        As usual, the truth is a lot more boring than a scare story.

    • All is not lost. 4% were in favour. Start a group called Enemies of the Earth to counter the evidently effective line taken by Friends of the Earth.

  2. @ken w. – Im so glad its really dense people like you who argue for how good fracking is. You managed to get all three of your robust statements wrong. Comical

    • Oh really, which ones? If you disagree, please post links to establish that, from proper scientific establishments. Dense? well I have an engineering degree and 12 years of industry experience at a senior level. And you?

      Odd that those that actually know about drilling, and all of the regulatory bodies have no issues, even in their own backyard.

  3. Ken, l’m aware that the fracking industry would like ordinary folk to believe that the millions of gallons of fracking fluid pumped in to the ground and what comes out is ” sugar and spice and all things nice ” but that’s NOT the case.

    For anyone wanting to know what chemicals are put in to fracking fluids and the toxic, radioactive chemicals that can be present in the waste water, Take your pick and google search from the list below. What you will read gives a very worrying insight.

    BREAST CANCER UK fracking

    OR, read the many reports on fracking dangers by,
    NOBEL PEACE PRIZE winners, Physicians For Social Responsibility.

    INSURANCE COMPANIES calculate premiums on risk factors and if two thirds of them have publicly stated that they will NOT insure, or would add special exclusions to policy holders in fracking areas. It does not take a rocket scientist to work out how the UK insurance industry calculate fracking risks.

    When countries around the world, including an ever increasing number or US states have, or are banning fracking. Why is the “precautionary principle” that is currently being adopted by UK councils on behalf of the residents they represent , not acceptable to the fracking industry ???

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s