Supplier to Lancs shale gas site pulls out of contract after single delivery

Crown Oil statement

A company supplying fuel to Cuadrilla’s shale gas site in Lancashire has announced it is pulling out of the contract.

Crown Oil, based in Bury, made its first delivery today to a contractor at the site at Little Plumpton near Blackpool.

But this afternoon, the company posted a statement on its Facebook page saying it would no longer supply the site.

It said it made no comment on “the legitimacy of fracking” or its impact. But it added:

“We care about people and have made the only decision we consider is appropriate”.

In February, Moore’s Readymix Concrete and Armstrong Aggregates announced they would no longer supply the site.

Mark Seddon, a Crown Oil director, confirmed to DrillOrDrop that the Facebook statement was genuine and was made in response to emails and messages to the company’s website. He would not say which contractor his company had been supplying.

The Crown Oil statement said:

“As a business we have considered the representations made and have concluded that in the interests of the community involved we will cease supply to the site in question with immediate effect.”

The statement also said:

“It has become apparent from various communications we have received today (6th June 2017) from communities affected by the process of fracking that they oppose Crown Oil supplying a drilling site with fuel.

“Firstly, it should be noted that our supply arrangement is with a contractor and not the fracking company directly and as such until our vehicle arrived on site we were unaware of the exact purpose the fuel would be put to; secondly we have made only a single supply to site.

“As a family owned and run business, we attempt to help local communities either directly via charitable donations or by way of local sponsorship arrangements and we are fully aware of our corporate responsibilities and how our actions can sometimes affect others.”

Opponents of activities at Preston New Road welcomed the statement and thanked the company for its decision.

Crown oil Facebook message

One comment said:

“Thanks. It seems to be a recurring pattern…. contactor s being unaware of their delivery destination…very poor do from Cuadrilla… not very transparent…but hey would we expect anything else?”

Another said:

“Oh my what a indepth and concisely written statement. Well done to Crown oil Ltd. Much respect to them as these decisions are difficult to reach in times of austerity.”

A spokesperson for Cuadrilla confirmed that that Crown Oil was supplying a contractor and made one delivery to the Preston New Road site.

The spokesperson added:

“Our operations are not impacted by their decision.”




64 replies »

  1. Don’t get me wrong. I agree with the Frackers argument the need of UK shale as a security of supply and jobs and tax revenues and economic bonuses. I also agree with the anti Frackers about the environmental risks which I accept the Frackers evidence that it can be safely managed under current regulation and technology.
    What I see is that after all the political and legal debate and fight the UK shale industry has gone through amd kind of won the battle there seem to be little passion to get things done to demonstrate their points and objectives to show the public the points they were making in the public debate in the last 4 years. The US shale got where they are and unstoppable because they get on with doing thind getting it done and their momentum carry them through to a point where noone can disputes its economic benefits and the evidence for its positive and negative impact on the environments. Whereas UK shale seems to be on defensive footing all the time without a evidence of conviction or believe or what it wants to achieve except for that the industry stay afloat for as long as they could. So as far as progresses and PR campaign concerns I think renewables and anti fracking brigades have been on the front foot compared to the UK shale industry.

    • I absolutely take on board what you’re saying TW and I agree with the majority. What I shall say is that the anti frackers are desperate to avoid any exploration as they know when the gas is extracted it’s a game changer for them. They have tried their best legally and now only illegal action such as chain gangs etc is left. We are on the cusp of extraction where you will see a huge rise in pro sentiment. The anti frackers are insignificant on a national level but have a large voice due to only a handful of sites being explored currently. The only people it will affect are people within very close proximity of a well but of course they will receive compensation. Money is still king in a capitalist country even though communist style professional protestor groups would have you believe it’s not.

  2. Well done Crown Oil and thank you. If only all the decisions about fracking rested with the people most affected, ie the local communities where it’s proposed drilling will take place, fracking wouldn’t be granted any licences in the UK, and instead investment would be put into research and development on renewables. Had this commenced 20 years ago, the UK could by now be self-sufficient in its energy needs from wave, tidal, solar and windpower. As it is, politicians in power have gone with their vested interests in the oil and gas industries.

    The representatives of those industries on this site who are wasting their energy in ad hominem attacks, are simply making themselves look very foolish and out of date.

    • Unfortunately the political parties from both sides know the reality of 100% renewables is impossible. It is just that the Tory is willing to confront the truth and Labour is just playing for votes.

      • That’s right TW but for this generation 60% renewables is possible and I suspect at least 85% for the next generation, and that would address our Carbon commitments and get things heading in the right direction. Problem is, as Ry points out, the vested interests are protecting this deplorable and dirty approach.

        • And yet when a place that is rich in sun and wind resources such as South Australia reaches levels of 25-30% they have to deal with blackouts, brownouts, skyrocketing electricity rates, businesses fleeing, and new fossil projects to correct the problems left by overinvestment in renewables. Sure, 60% is possible in a society that doesn’t value energy much! LOL

      • 100% renewable sources of energy is not impossible, but due to the total sidelining into marginality by successive governments, there has been little or no equivalent investment compared to preserving the fossil fuel monopoly. Tesla battery systems are as yet expensive but given the same tax break concessions and investment handed on a platter to o&g the costs will fall dramatically. Wind power innovations make them a major contender, even in low and high wind situations, solar panels are also experiencing an astonishing leap in efficiency, wave and tidal innovations, storage systems including zero resistance Tesla generators. Tesla energy systems have been supressed for 100 years and are only now, with new technology, becoming known and developed. We live on an electromagnetic engine, we orbit a star with astounding free energy capabilities, we are only just learning to use these free resources.
        O&g are here now and will take a while to wind down, oil is still a major manufacturing source for almost everything but that is changing also as we move towards new technologies and out of this consumerism dependency need. Renewables include recycling waste, new innovations of slow low temperature heating reduces these to their recyclable components. The result is almost free renewable resources and inert materials that can be used as building materials. The renewable resources are criminally ignored because o&g provides short term revenue to governments and that is used as a inroad into government back doors that renewables dont yet have. The operant is always Que bono, who benefits. O&g have the monopoly at the moment, but the concomitant dangers of using those as our only source of energy are too great and too pernicious to allow them to continue unfettered. To partition off this country into o&g private states is a democratic insult and can only lead to a police or military state situation to protect them as a opposition will represent a threat to the incestuous cash cow power base of this government. We must grow up in every possible way as a viable species or decline and fail. Hiding in the past to strap us all down into the artificially preserved power bases will not allow us to grow and move out of this insane self destruction of anything decent and noble in human nature just to preserve the establishment self interest rice bowls. This economy in its present state must fail, it is inevitable, only war and internal conflict can keep it ticking over, but even that will not do for long, this government have increased the national debt by 70% and now we owe £1.5 trillion which is 90% of UK gross national product. That cannot be maintained, soon we will be in negative as is USA. Hence the o&g revenue and incestuous relationship to prop up the unsustainable madness before it collapses completely.
        Like any species we are at a turning point where we turn back and collapse into selfish old illusions towards the inevitable decline, or we move ahead towards a better, but perhaps difficult future. No growth is free or painless, but preserving the old illusions at the expense the remaining ecology and plunging ourselves into a police state is insane. We must look towards the amazing clean energy possibilities waiting for us in the future, not to do so is simply suicide.

        • Phil C. I admire amd hear your progressive and forward thinking but if you look at the economics technical capacity and pragmatic view I think most engineering and science will say it is technically wishful thinking to become 100% renewable. I have no doubt battery storages and renewable will make significant in road to replace combustion engines with electric cars which requires electricity that can be charhed by renewable source in supplement to current mixtures of gas oil and nuclear and renewables. This will be signficant reduction in fossil fuel consumption because cars is a major consumption of oil. But 100%? I doubt it.

          • TW I don’t think its impossible, its unlikely I agree. But I suspect some time in the future, should we still possess one that these post industrial machinations will seem like the dark ages. How long that will be, well that is probably in the distant future, some time after we emerge from our petty infancy stage that all intelligent races must go through.
            That just means we need to try harder to unfetter ourselves and release the energy shackles we have relied on for too long.
            I don’t deny that o&g are here for the present, but the increasing need for undemocratic protectionism required to maintain it alone, while ignoring all the other opportunities is simply racial suicide.
            I’m not a luddite, but I see the present move to instituting a police state in order to preserve o&g proliferation to be little more than anti democratic dictatorship, and once we are in that trap it will mean we will be willing or unwilling slaves to our so called democratically elected public servants. It will take more than a vote to extricate ourselves and our children from that.

            • Phil C. If you claim that Tory is currently imposing their undemocratic dictatorship on locals who dont want fracking in their communities then I guess by your and your friends’ logic if Labour win this Thursdays and impose windfarm and higher energy bill and tax to subsidize their Green policies on those who disagree with Labour policy then these people will be screaming undemocratic dictatorship by Labour. So the dictatorship argument doesn’t seem reasonable to me.

            • Like i say, there is no gain without pain, i am sure that whatever happens Thursday it will be one way or another a difficult time for us all, one way leads to stagnation of every aspect of society, where money is the only winner for the 4% that own it all, the others at least have a chance of a glimmer to see out of the darkening maze towards some sort of light for the future, however painful that May be, i would rather suffer pain in order to get better, than suffer pain in order to stay the same, or more than likely get much worse.
              It was always going to be this way, we either stand up and take responsibility for our past and present mistakes and become masters of our own destiny, and accept all the pain and difficulty that entails, or we just roll over and play dead and hand it all over to those who do not give a damn about anyone or anything but their own skins, and end up sleep walking into the well documented police state trap. There May be traps in all directions, but at least i would rather have my eyes open and at the very least intend for a better future, not just for myself but for everyone, even those who vehemently disagree with me. This May be the most important election of this century, to hand it all over to just more of the same old same old that led us here to this crisis state in the first place, is simply insane.
              I keep reminding myself that most of us never wanted this crisis, but the failing system has led us here anyway, at least at the moment we actually have an opportunity to stand up and say STOP! In the not too distant future we May not even have that small voice.

        • 100% is a pipe dream and is utter foolishness. How would you build and charge batteries large enough to generate power for three weeks running when an extended period of little sun and wind occurs? This happens regularly, as you know. And where would you get the minerals needed to build that massive battery capacity? And how much damage would you be willing to do to the environment to build such large batteries? And when you have to build systems that can deliver capacity 20x larger than that which is required (because of all the backup needed for those three week periods with little sun and wind, such as Germany has experienced recently) how will you pay for that (even assuming that batteries become economic on a certain level)?

          No, we’ve run big experiments where large renewable installations were used, and they have failed. The large countries that have tried are now retracing their steps, cutting back on renewables, building new fossil capacity.

          Physics and logic will rule the day, Phil. Pixie dust will only get you so far my boy.

    • Ry
      In your link, one allegation is that Bp and Shell, being major shale gas players in the UK, would benefit from the George Osborne Tax cuts. As neither of them were or are involved in it (indeed they have steered clear of it), why would they be included in the frackfreesussex corruption allegation?
      Shome mistake surely as they say in a private Eye?

  3. When the Tories launched their last manifesto Cameron and Osborne announced that fracking permission would be sought at local levels – an that (on record): ‘We are not a dictatorship’. Kind of contradicts what has been stated above, and what is happening now.

  4. PhilC you’re just not accepting the fact you are the minority. People like yourself go around thinking you are the ‘people’. If this was the case we would see Labour under Corbyn smash the Conservatives on Thursday. I’ll bet all my money that doesn’t happen. You are instead the minority living in a little bubble.
    I’ve read all your chat about renewables. I have a company that is working solely in R&D in the renewable field as I do believe there could be large financial gains to be made but they are way down the pipeline due to infrastructure/political will/technology/money.
    So what’s going to happen is, Conservatives will win with announcement on Friday morning. And we will await the initial findings of exploration in shale fracking. If they prove positive you’ll see that small groups of local protestors and pro protestors who have ‘no fixed address’ won’t be able to stop us. But have no fears as we don’t want any major environmental disasters either. Believe it or not we are a very competent bunch of people and perhaps more intelligent than you actually realise. Although you’ll never accept that and continue on your path trying to lecture.
    If we drill and find zilch we will pack up.
    You are all prolonging the pain you are feeling mentally. If you just let us drill and show we can do it safely then you could move onto some other cause but my side realises that will never happen. People fear what they don’t understand.

    • Curious how Teresa May does not actually seem to want to be elected? The fracking issue is guaranteed to put everyone’s back up except the few that plan to profit from it, she has alienated the pensioners, the poor, the NHS supporters, the students, the families with children at school, the immigrants, the cultural integration, the poor, the disabled and just about everyone else but the usual 4% that own 60% of the wealth in this country. The tory manifesto is a series of own goals and back downs, she refuses to debate in public, she acted like an automaton reading the weather report when talking about the terrorist horrors of the last few weeks and her appearance on TV was laughably inane? Her pole predictions have plummeted from 40% lead to a 50/50 who knows? What an utter disaster, it must be the worst campaign on record?
      I seriously think she does not want the job, and I would not be at all surprised if she immediately resigned a’la David Cameron and throws in the towel even if she does slide in?
      I suspect Amber Rudd is waiting in the wings to replace her in any event, good or bad.
      I suspect the (t)reason for this is that she has no stomach for what is being prepared for in the coming months and she does not want to be seen as being responsible for it, nor responsible for implementing it, what is that?
      We shall see.
      [typo edited at poster’s request]

  5. Not only are there hundreds of cases of negative human, animal and environmental impacts wherever shale fracking has been, for which all we get is denial on steroids, [edited by moderator] are killing the planet. Climate instability, climate refugees (more than you might think), ocean de-oxygenation and acidification, imminent (and actual) crop failures, sea level rises, disappearing polar ice and now with CO2 higher than its been not just in recorded memory, not even since way before humans even became a species. Some countries are seeing weather patterns never seen even in ancestral memories. You’re still not getting this urgency thing are you. This is what the Paris agreements were about. New shale gas drilling is just about the worst answer to any of this unless you’re (a country) just getting out of heavy coal dependency and moving away from old style power plants.

    Sadly it may have to come down to the first few fracking crises in the UK before this turns around. The hype merchants and spin doctors will have moved off having creamed their profits from gullible investors. Their money will be fenced in overseas accounts and the British public will be left with a dirty and decaying infrastructure and bad water. The UK still hasn’t solved the Selafield waste problem, why add more liabilities? Profits if any will be short lived, liabilities – for this generation and the next.

    • Philip, You are quite adept with hysterics. You say that we are killing the planet. You might take a moment to consider your words a little more carefully. Fossil fuels have been necessary in creating an environment that has advanced human living standards considerably over the last 200+ years. Without fossil fuels you wouldn’t have modern medicine, heat, engines, most industry, most housing, and much more. While you might be happy to do away with all of these life-saving and life-giving tools, condemning large portions of the world’s population to certain death, most of us would not.

      Your cries about climate instability and polar ice cap melting are accurate enough, but attribution is not wholly decided with respect to these changes. We understand that greenhouse gasses have increased dramatically for anthropogenic reasons. Yet the scientific community does not know that the increase in greenhouse gasses explains climate change wholly or partly. The variation seen is within historic norms as far as we can tell, though there is debate on this subject too.

      At any rate, there is quite a bit about climate change that is not yet understood. But we do understand that without fossil fuels most of us would not exist, and you would not be able to make comments on internet bulletin boards. So, I suggest that you try to keep things in better perspective going forward.

      • Work through your logic Rex. 200 years of fossil fuel usage has got us where we are today. Fine, let’s start the next phase, away from dependency on mummy’s breast and actual acknowledge that getting 200 years worth of buried hydrocarbons (getting us to where we are now) has meant stuffing CO2 and methane into the atmosphere by the gigaton. This actually has an effect on an atmosphere believe it or not that relative to the earth is like the thickness of an apple skin compared to an apple. How could it not?

        Of course there’s debate but the precise science. Climate, weather, oceans etc are huge complex dynamic systems but the observations, the measurements, the logic, and the direction of causation are all clear enough. Yes, science is expressed with margins of uncertainty .. but always its the denier types, fossil fuel advocates and other merchants of doubt who will latch onto those small margins as a ‘gotcha’s just to magnify the uncertainty as if it is huge. They are the hysterical ones – truly – those who are still clinging to the past.

Add a comment

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s