- Photo: David Burr
Live news as it happens at the fifth day of the inquiry at Blackpool Football Club into Cuadrilla’s fracking plans in the Fylde area of Lancashire. Check our Inquiry page for more information, posts and links.
Inquiry adjourns for the day
1.30pm
The inquiry resumes at 10am tomorrow (Wednesday 16th February)
“No reason to refuse appeal”
1.10pm
Johnny Ojeil, Cuadrilla’s transport witnesses, sums up his evidence on the impact of the proposed fracking site at Roseacre Wood. He tells the inquiry:
“I conclude with regard to traffic impacts that, from the evidence supplied in this proof and work carried out to date, there is no valid reason for refusal of the appeal.”
Lancashire County Council refused the application at Roseacre Wood in June 2015 on the advice of its highways department that it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety.
Mr Ojeil said:
“The proposed traffic management plan addresses the concerns raised by the highway officers and covers all matters raises in the officer’s response.”
He said an audit of the preferred route had shown that increases in heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) visiting Roseacre Wood would not lead to safety problems on the roads.
Mr Ojeil added:
“It is important to recognise that the highway authority’s objection focusses mainly on a 2.8 mile stretch and when broken down the planning authority admit in their officer report that it is mainly around Wharles which is in length 1 mile only.”
He said lorries travelling through Wharles would number only a few a week on average and this was not enough to cause any safety issues to other road users. The increase in traffic would be “generally part of seasonal variation on any road stretch in that location.”
The peak increases in lorries, capped at 25 in and 25 out a day would for a period of 12 weeks out of the total length of the application of six years.
Cuadrilla’s highways evidence begins
12.25pm
Johnny Ojeil, Cuadrilla’s transport witness, begins giving evidence to the inquiry on the impact of the proposed fracking site at Roseacre Wood on traffic and highways.
In June 2015, Lancashire County Council refused Cuadrilla’s application at Roseacre Wood on traffic grounds, arguing that it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety and road users.
Preferred route
Mr Ojeil described the company’s proposed route to Roseacre Wood.
“The route starts via the M55 motorway junction 3 with traffic accessing the site heading along the A585/ A583 before heading left into Clifton via Clifton Lane, Station Road, Dagger Road, Salwick Road, Inskip Road, DHFCS Inskip Rd (private road available via an agreement within the DHFCS site), and across Roseacre Road.”
He said during peaks of traffic to Roseacre Wood, vehicles would use a route through the Inskip site. During lower volumes, vehicles would use a route through Wharles to Roseacre Wood. He said there would be a daily cap of 50 two-way lorry movements (25 in and 25 out) a day.
Passing places
Mr Ojeil said Cuadrilla proposed to create five passing places on the route at Dagger Road. Three would create spaces 5.5m wide. Two would be 6.5m wide, he said. Each passing place could be viewed from the previous and next one. Mr Ojeil said:
“I believe that two HGVs [heavy goods vehicles] crossing at 5.5m can be achieved, albeit with slow moving vehicles.”
Safety audit
Mr Ojeil said there had been an audit of the route through Inskip and Wharles to Roseacre Wood. He said:
“I conclude that the findings of the safety audit are of a minor nature and more importantly our subsequent reply in addressing matters raised shows that this route can be utilised for this temporary planning permission without any adverse effects prevailing.”
He said the risk of flooding at Inskip, forcing HGVs to travel through Wharles, was low.
Broughton alternative route dropped
Mr Ojeil said Cuadrilla had developed an alternative route through Broughton. But this had been rejected by Lancashire County Council and the company was not proposing to argue in favour of the rotue at the inquiry.
Layby parking for lorries
Mr Ojeil added that the proposed traffic management plan would organise HGV arrivals and departures. He also gave details of HGV parking:
“Also a holding area along the layby located upon the A583 is proposed in addition to using technology to control movements in and out of the site.”
He said: a survey of the use of the layby found that over two weeks it was fully occupied for only 25 minutes.
“I conclude There is spare capacity at that location to accommodate HGVs.”
Speed limits
Mr Ojeil said the plan would impose speed limits on HGVs . He was asked what would happen if the drivers broke the speed limit. He said there would be a series of warnings. But he added:
“I would expect Cuadrilla to terminate that contract or ask for the removal of that driver.”
Inspector’s questions on colour and sound barrier
11.55am
The inquiry inspector, Wendy McKay, asks question to Cuadrilla’s on landscape
Ms McKay wanted to know what colour the rig and other equipment would be.
Nathalie Lieven, the QC for Cuadrila, said the company would be willing to accept a planning condition on the colour of the accoustic fence. But she said:
“There is a problem of accepting a condition on the drilling rig. It if is a hired rig, the industry norm is that the rig is painted in the owners’ colour.”
Andrew Tempany, Cuadrilla’s landscape witness, said he didn’t think there would be any greater impact on the landscape from the 7m accoustic screens around the drilling rig than from the 4m accoustic fencing.
Mr Tempany
Review of landscape evidence
11.31am
Cuadrilla’s barrister, Nathalie Lieven, reviews evidence of which equipment would be on the sites at the same time.
She asked Andrew Tempany, the company’s landscape witnesses, whether the proposed programme would have a period when the drilling rig (up to 53m), coiled tubing rig (up to 36m) and workover or service rig (up to 36m) would be on site together. Mr Tempany said there wasn’t. He had previously agreed that the three structures could be together in a worst-case scenario.
Ms Lieven asked Mr Tempany what effect would lighting would have on landscape character.
Mr Tempany said: “It has very little impact”.
She said some of areas assessed as most sensitive to lighting would be public footpaths around the site. She asked Mr Tempany: “What impact would lighting have on public rights of way at night?”
“I would suggest it would be very low”, he said.
Ms Lieven reminded the inquiry that Lancashire County Council’s landscape officer had not objected to the applications on landscape grounds. Despite criticism of the methodology, she asked Mr Tempany what difference would best practice have made to some of the photomontages. He said there would have been no difference on the page.
Landscape assessment “did not follow best practice”
10.50am
Cuadrilla’s landscape witnesses accepts that the company’s assessment of the impact of its fracking plans on the countryside did not follow best practice.
Questioned by the barrister for Roseacre residents, Andrew Tempany, accepted that photomontages uses in the application should not have been based on photographs taken on a cloudy day.
He also agreed with comments by Robin Green, for the residents, that the camera used had not been up to current standards and it was not best practice to take photographs when trees were in full leaf. The photomontage did not show one of the rigs or other equipment likely to be on the site at the same time as the drilling rig and flare stack.
Earlier, Mr Tempany said he would not have used the methodology used in the application for assessing the landscape impacts.
Shale gas extraction would have “minor impact” on landscape – company witness
10.30am
Cuadrilla’s landcape witness told the inquiry the fracking plan at Roseacre Wood would have a minor impact on the character of the landscape.
To laughter from the audience, Robin Green, barrister for Roseacre residents, said:
“That is astonishing.”
Mr Green said:
“You are changing an agricultural field within a hedge to a site for the exploration of shale gas and you think there would be no significant change on the character.”
Mr Tempany said the Roseacre site occupied about 1.3ha, or about 25% of a field. He said:
“For the field in which the appeal site sits, the character would not be significantly changed. The remainder of the field would still be a rural field.”
Mr Green put it to him:
“If you look at the physical features, the movement of machinery, the lighting, the noise that would be created you change fundamentally the nature of the field. You change the illumination, the activities on it. You cannot say you have not changed the characteristic of the field?”
Mr Tempany replied:
“I think the significant effect is really in relation to the visual impact on landscape character.”
Mr Green put it to him:
“Someone standing in the field next to the appeal site would have no doubt that it was industrial development. They would have no difficult hearing the operation or seeing the lighting.”
Mr Tempany said there would be significant visual changes.
“I would accept that in perception terms people would experience those effects you mention”.
“No assessment of lighting on landscape character”
10am
Robin Green, for Roseacre residents, put it to Andrew Tempany, Cuadrilla’s landscape witness:
“There is no assessment at all [in the application] of the effect of lighting on landscape character.”
Mr Tempany replied:
“Not on landscape character, no.”
Mr Green added that Cuadrilla had not assessed the landscape impact of lighting on the workover rig, coiled tubing rig or other equipment. He said:
“The impact of the proposed development on residential visual amenity only looks at the lighting of the drilling rig.”
Mr Tempany agreed.
Mr Green put it to him that 24-hour lighting of the site, throughout the main phases of the projects, would have a landscape impact. Mr Tempany agreed.
Mr Green said: “There is nothing like that in the area?”
Mr Tempany replied: “There are other sources. The tall masts at Inskip. I appreciate they are different but there are other light sources.”
Mr Green: “They are quite unlike the lighting proposed”.
Mr Tempany: “They are.”
Mr Green said the lit rig would be “an entirely alien feature”.
Mr Tempany said: “It is a different landscape feature but I don’t think it’s an entirely alien feature”
Mr Green: “At night there are no significant sources of light nearby”
Mr Tempany: “Apart from the Inskip masts, no significant sources, no.”
“Worst case scenario: three rigs on site at one time”
9.40
Robin Green, representing the Roseacre Awareness Group and the parish council, questions Andrew Tempany, Cuadrilla’s witness on the impact of the fracking plans on landscape.
Mr Green said:
“In order to assess the effect of the proposed development on the landscape, you need to have regard of the worst case scenario and that would be three rigs, a sand sillo and a 10 m flare.”
Mr Tempany agreed.
Mr Green added that there would also be lighting columns. Mr Tempany suggested that there would be lighting only during the drilling phase. But Mr Green said the application proposed site lighting would also be throughout fracking and flow-testing.
Inquiry resumes
9.30am
This report is part of DrillOrDrop’s Rig Watch project. Rig Watch receives funding from the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust. More details here
Categories: Regulation
DRILL OR DROP? 
Give me strength. The quality of evidence backing Cuadrilla’s appeal appears appalling.
If Cuadrilla can not over a coupl of years get their act together, how on earth does this give us any confidence whatsoever that Cuadrilla can frack safely or at all?
Thanks so much Ruth for monitoring this, a job which to be honest would drive me up the wall.
Dear anti-fracking friends,
You are thinking about what might happen. We are thinking about what already has happened. A new site has been proposed on the road between two small villages in North Notts-Barnby Moor and Blyth. ISLAND GAS put in a scoping request. That is no more than asking questions about a potential application which is what they were told. However as soon as they did, they put in large black Portakabins and other equipment and tall lighting standards which are flooding not only theirr Portakabins but spilling out onto the road which is only a few feet away.. Local residents asked the Bassetlaw District Council if they had any form of planning control permission. No, there was none but initially the council said that everything could stay as it was because it was “expedient”
“expedient” for Island gas perhaps-not for local residents who cannot sell their homes and who are with in a short distance from the field in totally open landscape with no industry around. I wrote to the Council and they sent out a enforcement officer to look at it. He has been served with a barrister’s opinion that everything is fine. Now Bassetlaw council is faced with having to pay for up barrister’s opinion of their own in order to find out whether or not planning control has been breached. Well Island gas cannot call their operation temporary because it was four months aago that they put the items in the field! I have been told we have to wait for the outcome of the barrister’s opinion for BDC.
Just imagine-I rent a piece of land, ask the planning officer if I can build a house on it and I am told that it is okay providing I put in a proper planning application under the normal criteria. Well, that’s good enough for me. I have a reply from them that I can put in an application so I will deliver tons of bricks to the site and scaffolding and put it all under heavy security lighting so that no one will pinch it until such time as I may or may not get planning permission! And you know what my name is-Mr ICAN DoANYTHING. I have big pockets ( actually Island gas is in severe financial trouble,) but my big brothher TOTAL will bail me out!
PLEASE WRITE to THE Planning Officer at Queens buildings Worksop North Notts, also to the editor of the Worksop Guardian and ask what the hell is going on.
Best of luck to all of you
David Larder
Chair
BASSETLAW AGAINST FRACKING
I’m sure you may have done this already David, but is it possible to get more people writing to their councillors and MP to insist planning laws are properly met?
Also, shouldn’t some form of notice have gone out warning local people about the planning application for this development?
Does the council have a mineral and waste plan which should clearly deliver guidelines before allowing any mineral extraction to take place and what about the councils development policy, does it have a proper statement about new industrial roll outs? Local governance is there to serve residents and ratepayers. Perhaps finding the minutes of the meeting where the approval was given would also be a good place to start with objecting to this dictatorial and cavalier roll out, otherwise anyone can turn up in your district and bribe some council official into letting them blight the region.
Your local councillor needs to be involved, but if they are useless, and very few are good, though you could try a retired one with time but inside knowledge, why not try engage with the council depts to find out if due process has been met, look at the regs of the council yourself, barristers are not good at taking on such tasks. Are there any environment groups in your area as well who could help?
Ask the council if gypsies could turn up and set up a site on the adjoining field for expediency’s sake? In fact, I would be tempted to ask a caravannery to do just this—for expediency’s sake!
The anti fracckers really grasp at straws. The site will be approximately 100 x 100 metres and screened. It will be there for a maximum of 40 years and, thereafter, the site will revert to its natural state. Lighting, I wonder who goes out there at night anyway, but to those that do lighting may well be an asset . If they have a complaint to make, then let it not be so trivial
Bats absolutely bats
Dear Planning officer ,
I from Essex, am delighted that fraccing may take place in your area. The reason is not nimbyism but the country is in dire need of new energy resources. Thus, the effects the effects are not limited to Lancs alone, the whole country has a vested interest that this project should go ahead . As a nation we have already seen the effects of shale gas exploration which has taken place in America. America used to import 25% of all of the oil produced in the world, and now they import a much reduced amount and in the years to come expect to become self sufficient in oil and gas. The knock on effect has been to create a glut of oil and this has reduced the price of oil world over. In the UK we already benefit from having to spend up to £50 less per month to fuel our cars, we have seen inflation at zero and near zero, and prices for domestic gas and electricity are falling. There are few people in the country that would wish to see this situation reversed . In effect this makes shale oil and shale gas too important for local politics and a football for focus groups, because the economic health of the nation is at stake. Therefore, please think hard and long on this subject and bear in mind that a few perimiter lights around a drilling site may be of minor importance to the very few people living nearby, but the possibility for the UK to have its own energy sources is of strategic importance to many
Oh dear , Verony. You miss the point completely don’t you. Future energy must be from renewables and just recently its reported we need to make huge lifestyle changes in order to halt any more warming. Think ahead and if you have children or grandchildren think of what kind of world they will inherit !
WON’T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!
Will be good for kids, they can get a job in Fracking.
Am afraid Gas has to be part of the equation. Therefore we need to frack the crap out of what we got and see what we can get up. I don’t care about a few people that live in the area,I don’t care that it affects their house price.that’s just tough Shite when the national energy security is of great importance. That’s the bigger point here.
Oil and gas will be here for a long long while yet. Both you and me will bebdead before your renewable dream comes true. Nobody will argue against you on your renewables point,but it won’t happen over night.
vernony ?
Are you the same vernony who is a regular on the Igas share chat webpage ( for Igas shareholders ) ???
IF SO,
With the complete collapse of the Igas share price, I can understand why you are so keen for fracking to go ahead.
I think Verony will have the last laugh here.Fracking will happen,just got to get the crusties views out of the way,then we can get drilling drilling drilling. Create jobs, energy,and lower bills for the poor.
Roy ? you are clearly not an educated man with the choice of obscene language in your above post.
So you don’t care about the health and wellbeing of the many thousands of people who will be affected by fracking. You also don’t care about the British people who have worked hard throughout their lives to pay off their mortgages, only to see their homes devalued if situated within a fracking area.
Your comments are disgraceful.
What sort of a person are you ???
As for the “lower bills for the poor” you clearly have no idea how the energy market works. People will NOT see their energy bills fall.
I’m amazed that the appeal for fracking has come down to planning laws and the impact on the local landscape. You only need look at the problem in the US with water toxification and associated problems as THE argument against such a destructive method. Why is it people are so insistent on polluting to maintain their standard of living. The argument is plain and simple and that it fracking is not safe. Of course the companies who wish to frack will always argue it is and since they are large companies people will swallow their arguments without even thinking about it, just as they accept government spin as well. I’m realistic and understand that fossil fuels still have a place whilst we get our act together with renewables, but not at the the expense of the health of the local people or the land scape. Over urbanisation is ruining much of our countryside as it is without throwing up fracking rigs as well. The Tory Governments interference in this matter is just another example of blatant crony-ism.
I’m actually a Graduate of Kings College London,and what language I use Jack the Lad is my expression of free speech which I have a right too.That’s the trouble in this world because we have dictorial people like yourself who spout of at people because they speak the truth.
No,I don’t care about the few people,not many thousands as you put,that live in the area or have worked hard all their lives to pay off mortgages. There’s 64 million people in this country,which,puts your mere thousands to shame. Christ,let’s all attack cars and people that owe them shall we for polluting our lungs and killing our children! Do you attack cars?petrol stations? Refineries? No you don’t. You a bandwagon jumper that feels a few thousand has priority over 64 million people. Pleb.
So Jackthenad tell the world what you propose and put forward to solving our national energy needs?
ROY ?
So your a graduate at Kings College, London and I’m Mary Poppins. That’s the trouble on here, people can pretend to be anything they want, without having to submit any proof.
What I prefer Roy is to deal with tangible, indisputable facts , which can always be verified. Something you have you have failed to do in ANY of your rants.
I accept the possibility that you really are unaware of the DANGERS of fracking , therefore. HERE ARE THE FACTS.
To read about the dangers, Google search any of the following .
NOBEL PEACE PRIZE winners, ( PSR ) Physicians For Social Responsibility, fracking.
DEFRA fracking report.
BREAST CANCER ACTION fracking.
BREAST CANCER FUND fracking.
BREAST CANCER UK fracking.
US Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) article headline, EPA Findings In Fracking Water Pollution Disputed By Its Own Scientists, 19th November 2015.
I look forward to your detailed and sensible response.
MOVING ON ROY.
Let me clarify something which you had brought up in your previous post.
When I said about the thousands of people that could be affected by fracking. AS you will be aware, I did NOT specify a number.
Maybe I was meaning 100 x 1,000, 1,000 x 1, 000 or 100,000 x 1,000 , it was just a figure of speech.
I’m sorry that I did not make this more clearer for you.
In reality if we consider the possibility that fracking could last for decades, you could possibly end up with hundreds, if not thousands of fracking wells.
In our densely populated country, as you have so kindly pointed out, it would be quite feasible to expect that millions of people would be affected.
Do you still not care Roy ????
One last thing Roy,
I do not take kindly to bring called a PLEB.
I’m open minded and receptive to civilized, constructive debating , not name calling with internet trolls.
Please mind you language on here
Jack da Nad,you still haven’t come up with any solutions to solving the national energy problem have you?Not gave any answers whatsoever. We need action done now. Perhaps your a paid deramper paid by Greenpeace to scour forums and put down people who are in favour of Fracking. You sound like a politician in all honesty, who are PLEBS by the way.