Regulation

Top 10 points on waste – Cuadrilla fracking inquiry Day 11

Horse Hill 3 160219Environmental consultant and engineer, Alan Watson, gave evidence today against Cuadrilla’s plans for fracking at Preston New Road and Roseacre Wood. His evidence to the inquiry revealed secret information, missing and disputed flowback data and questions about treatment capacity.

  1. Cuadrilla’s secret treatment centres revealed
    The inquiry heard that Cuadrilla had found two water treatment centres that would take the flowback fluid from Preston New Road and Roseacre Wood. But it had not named them, saying this was commercially confidential. Alan Watson, waste witness for Friends of the Earth, said he had identified the disposal facilities as Castle Environmental facility in Stoke-on-Trent and the FCC Environment site at Knostrop in Leeds.
  2. 65% of waste treatment capacity
    Cuadrilla has estimated the proposed fracking sites would need 65-68% of “sub-regional” waste treatment capacity. But Alan Watson said the two identified waste treatment centres were not in north west England or “sub-regional”. The proposed site at Stoke was smaller than Leeds and Cuadrilla would probably have to rely on Leeds to dispose of most of its waste.
  3. Unacceptable use of waste treatment
    Alan Watson said it was unacceptable to tie up such a high proportion of strategic infrastructure on the exploratory wells. “Even if you were promoting shale gas you would not take up all the treatment capacity with one exploratory rig. You would treat the waste on-site and leave the strategic capacity for other industries.”
  4. Too much waste and too high concentrations?
    Alan Watson said the level of radioactivity in the waste from the proposed fracking sites was likely to exceed that allowed at the Stoke waste facility. The level of lead might exceed the limit for the Leeds centre, particularly because other customers were using it. This could mean the centres would not be able to take the Cuadrilla waste.
  5. Build up of waste?
    Mr Watson said if this happened, waste would build up on the sites, result in more lorry movements, more visual impacts and a greater risk of contamination to surface and ground water. The proposed coordination between the two sites would be difficult, he said. Nathalie Lieven, for Cuadrilla, said the company would have to stop work if there was no waste capacity. But Mr Watson said this would extend the duration of the projects and could have implications for seismic activity.
  6. Disputed flowback data
    Alan Watson pointed out that Cuadrilla’s Environmental Statement estimated 21,250 cubic meters of flowback fluid for an individual site of four wells at either Preston New Road or Roseacre Wood. But the waste management plan, which was part of the environmental permit, estimated 22,000 cubic meters of flowback per well
  7. “Profound” increase in flowback
    Mr Watson described the difference in the figures as profound. It would also make it more likely that Cuadrilla would exceed on-site storage and waste treatment capacity. Nathalie Lieven, for Cuadrilla, described the discrepancy as a typing error and said the figure for the Environmental Statement was correct. She said even if the figures meant more lorry movements, the increase would be from two a week to only ten a week. Mr Watson said: “It might not make a big difference for you in London but if you are a horse rider on these rural roads that can make a huge difference to you quality of life.”
  8. Missing data
    The inquiry heard that the environmental permit for Preston New Road and Roseacre Wood did not show how calculations on weekly flowback had been arrived at. This prevented the public and NGOs participating in the permitting process. Nathalie Lieven, for Cuadrilla, said the Environment Agency had the figures it needed for the permit. The inquiry also heard that Cuadrilla told the Environment Agency in an email that flowback at Preese Hall had reached 70% in three months. But the email, given to Friends of the Earth in response to a Freedom of Information request redacted the data on flow back volumes.
  9. Flowback “not the job of planning”
    Cuadrilla sought to show that flowback fluid was the responsibility of the Environment Agency and the inquiry inspector should assume the EA would do its job effectively. Nathalie Lieven, for the company, said local authorities were responsible only for onsite storage of flowback and its transport. Alan Watson said the volume and content of flowback also affected capacity at waste disposal centres, which was a planning issue.
  10. “Unprecedented coordination needed to reduce waste”
    Alan Watson said this would require unprecedented co-ordination between the proposed sites at Preston New Road and Roseacre Wood.

Live updates from Day 12

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

2 replies »

  1. Brilliant Alan Watson! At last the one aspect of fracking revealed, which everyone on planet England should pay attention to. the government has downgraded highly radioactive high polluting waste from fracking to low grade waste, denying the outrageously polluting nature of the end product of this ridiculous industrial roll out.

    The Independent ran stories this week about the ridiculous levels of polluted coastline around the UK as well as featuring how landfill sites were leaking and creating a massive problem we need to stop ignoring if we want generation after generation to live on this landmass,

    Flowback fluid and pollution is only an EA issue when the EA serves the national mass of ordinary tax paying people living on these shores who should not be subjugated to the short term profiteering of those living in tax havens and seeking to rule with not an iron rod, but a highly hazardous industrial roll out that has already in the US been proven to deliver appalling health hazards and land and water pollution wholesale.

    The Lakes area of our landmass is already being taken over by land pollution, horrendous landfill sites and burying of bad news on an horrific scale, while all this debate in Lancahsire is going on, and it is frightening that Lynton Crosby ‘s ”dead cats” are being autopsied while areas once treasured by the NT and other environmental campaigners and protectors are being sold off to subsidise and support some heinous profiteering and rape and pillaging on England’s landscape.

    Waste isn’t a minor or trivial issue, it is the issue we need to pay more attention to if we want to be proud of leaving land for future generations to live on.

    Flowback IS the job of planning, and IS the issue Everyone needs to pay attention to. Cuadkilla is not so named for no reason.

Leave a Reply

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.