Broadford Bridge: New oil zone reported and UKOG responds to opponents

Broadford Bridge 170525 Weald Oil Watch

Broadford Bridge. Photo: Weald Oil Watch

A previously unidentified oil-bearing zone has been found in Kimmeridge Limestone at Broadford Bridge, it was reported yesterday.

UK Oil and Gas Investments, the company behind the West Sussex exploration site, said the new zone extends the possible thickness of what it calls the Kimmeridge continuous oil deposit to around 1,200ft.

In a statement to shareholders, the company said the new zone was intensely fractured and found at a depth of 5,508ft-5,640ft. It accords with observed oil and wet gas shows, UKOG said.

The finding is based on analysis of cores and image logs from the well, near Billingshurst.

UKOG also reported that it is mobilising equipment to test whether mobile light oil in the Kimmeridge could flow to the surface at commercial rates and volumes.

Link to UKOG statement

UKOG defends record of public engagement

Objectors to UKOG’s application to extend its planning permission at Broadford Bridge have criticised the company for failing to answer questions about operations at the site.

UKOG responded today with Answers to frequently asked questions.

The company said it was “proud of the level of openness and transparency” it had shown since drilling began in May this year.

It said it had declined to take part in two public meetings organised by a local campaign group, Broadford Bridge Action Group (BBAG), because it was “not confident of receiving a fair hearing”. It added:

“We disputed the validity of the so-called ‘experts’ who would form the Action Group’s panel.”

UKOG said public consultation had already taken place in 2012-2014 when previous applications were made by the previous operator for planning permission and an environmental permit. The new operator, a UKOG subsidiary, was not required under planning regulations to hold further consultation meetings, it said.

Despite this, UKOG said it “engaged extensively”. It gave answers to questions raised by BBAG on water contamination risks, faulting, drilling fluids, wildlife sites, traffic impacts, emergency treatment, flaring and climate change.

Link to Answers to frequently asked questions.

8 replies »

  1. I would suggest, having seen the reports on the meeting that UKOG did not attend, and the subsequent debate on DOD, they were completely correct in their assessment. I know it is the expected thing now that the gauntlet of public humiliation should be run, but it does little to further public knowledge, and often merely produces the fog of who is shouting the loudest, even when the shouting is irrelevant.

  2. Ukog have followed the rules. Endured endless surveys, impact assessment and public scrutiny. . All the while adhering to procedures. What more does this company have to do to see a positive story on Drill or Drop. Give them a break and start being impartial and well as INDEPENDENT.

    • I totally agree with you totally ukog have done everything by the book time the protesters look at some things in the past that have been more harmful than this like farmers and there chemicals they use and spray our countryside with and have done for years, is this an attempt to stir there attention away from nuclear energy but with no avail even after the accident in china where so many died. this an economy that will help the uk to balance the books
      I am one that supports anything that will help our country survive now and in the future don’t our children and gran children deserve that
      U K O G should be granted for this to happen

  3. Sorry Mrs M-no chance. You just have to do a little “what if” analyses-most commercial companies have that to do as well, as all the other procedures they endure.

    What if-UKOG discover a large commercial deposit of oil at this site, that can be readily extracted?

    What if-that discovery links to a much larger “sponge” across the Weald, that can also be readily, commercially extracted from other sites?

    Then you get the sort of warm, welcoming reaction from the public that happened at the time of the discovery in the N.Sea. And more so, as many are not too fond of Queen Nic.

    Then you get the public thinking, if this is possible for oil within the UK, why not go for the double-let’s get fracking for gas. Because at the end of the day, few members of the public are hypocrites, they know they will have an economy based upon oil and gas for the next thirty years and would prefer to be in control of that. Many of them will embrace alternative energy but not in the stupid way of rushing into alternatives at the expense of oil and gas until all pros and cons are ironed out (they remember the “drive” towards diesel!)

    This is what the antis are terrified about. They want to stop the public having a choice in the matter and will sway from “vast swathes of industrialisation” to “it is not economical”, often in the same paragraph, to try and make a justification. Fortunately, they are running out of fingers, and the holes in the dyke are multiplying so eventually we will see independent analyses based upon UK relevant data-and if that shows the right economics to enable replacement of imported materials it’s game over. So, the activists will become more extreme and the rhetoric will become more fake because there is no where else for them to go now, but as soon as that water starts to exit the dyke they will be swamped-but they have knowingly positioned it so.

    There will be more butterflies and buzzard stories regarding Broadford Bridge but none about the thriving smooth snakes and red squirrels around Wytch Farm. Hey ho, that’s life.

    Enjoy your weekend.

  4. Well done to UKOG we should support their activities . So far there has been minimal environmental damage.
    Mrs M and Mr Peter are perfectly correct in their opinions !
    [Comment edited by moderator]

  5. I see someone on one of the bb’s was questioning whether they would go ahead with the flow testing as they would not get 1/2 of it done before planning permission runs out.

  6. “If hydraulic stimulation is proposed as part of the EWT, a hydraulic fracture plan (HFP) also must be agreed with the Oil & Gas Authority in consultation with the Environment Agency and Health and Safety Executive.”
    Anyone know why testing needs HSE approval at Broadford Bridge as they are not supposed to be fracking and how long this approval takes to get?

  7. I understand the protesters points but you also need to look at the side of the argument, jobs and uk’s independence, our country needs this.

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 )

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