Fracking Week in Parliament
Blow-out preventer at Cuadrilla’s shale gas site at Preston New Road, near Blackpool. Photo: Cuadrilla’s PNR Live
The government has not estimated the potential effect on employment of shale gas, according to the Energy Minister, Claire Perry. Nor has it assessed the likely volume of flowback waste.
The lack of information came in response to a series of written parliamentary questions from the Conservative MP, Sarah Wollaston (left).
The answers, released yesterday, also produced no detail on what method would be used to dispose of waste from shale gas sites. In response to this question, the minister said:
“It is the operator’s responsibility to agree disposal methods with the appropriate regulators as part of their planning application for all shale gas development.”
Dr Wollaston, the MP for Totnes, is the chair of the parliamentary Health and Social Care Select Committee. She also chairs the Liaison Committee, made up of MPs who chair the House of Commons select committees. According to information from TheyWorkForYou, these were her first questions about shale gas.
She asked about the potential effect of projected shale gas sites referred to in the unpublished Implementation Unit Report on Shale gas. Contents from the report, released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, indicated that the Implementation Unit estimated 17 sites by 2020, 30-35 sites by 2022 and 155 sites by 2025.
Dr Wollaston asked for Government estimates of the effect of these projected sites on:
- Employment
- Volume of flowback waste
- Disposal methods for flowback waste
Ms Perry (right) replied:
“BEIS [the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy] has not made any estimates of the potential effect on employment from the future development of the shale gas industry.”
And:
“The Government has not made an assessment of the amount of flowback waste which would be produced from any future shale gas development.”
No estimate on number of shale gas wells or their value
Yesterday’s written answers follow another set of ministerial replies about the industry earlier this week which also provided no information.
In these answers, reported by DrillOrDrop, Ministers confirmed there was:
- no up-to-date estimate on the number of shale gas wells in the UK for the period to 2030
- no news on a decision on Third Energy’s fracking consent
In reply to a question about the estimated value of UK shale gas reserves, a Treasury minister pointed to the most recent Economic and Fiscal Outlook, produced by the Office of Budget Responsibility. But this did not refer to shale gas nor separate any contributions from the onshore or offshore oil and gas industries.
Transcripts
With thanks to TheyWorkForYou.com
Question by Sarah Wollaston, Conservative, Totnes, Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee and the Liaison Committee
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the Implementation Unit Report on Shale Gas, what estimate the Government has made of the potential effect on employment of the projected (a) 17 sites by 2020, (b) 30-35 sites by 2022 and (c) 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry, Energy Minister, Conservative, Devizes
BEIS has not made any estimates of the potential effect on employment from the future development of the shale gas industry.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Question by Sarah Wollaston
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the Implementation Unit Report on Shale Gas, what estimate the Government has made of the amount of flowback waste which would need to be disposed of for the projected (a) 17 sites by 2020, (b) 30-35 sites by 2022 and (c) 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry
The Government has not made an assessment of the amount of flowback waste which would be produced from any future shale gas development.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Question by Sarah Wollaston
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the implementation unit report on shale gas extraction, what disposal method will be used for flowback waste from (a) the 17 sites by 2020, (b) the 30 to 35 sites by 2022 and (c) the 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry
It is up to the operator to agree disposal methods with the appropriate regulators as part of their planning application for any future shale gas development.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Question by Sarah Wollaston
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the Implementation Unit Report on Shale Gas, which disposal method is planned to be used for the projected (a) 17 sites by 2020, (b) 30-35 sites by 2022 and (c) 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry
It is the operator’s responsibility to agree disposal methods with the appropriate regulators as part of their planning application for all shale gas development.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Categories: Politics
DRILL OR DROP? 
Seems to me all this is just anti fracking. I doubt many on here understand what it’s about other than the propaganda shown on YouTube.The government has a duty to supply the country with energy these same rather small minded arguments were probably the same ones they had when digging the coal mines.
It is not anti fracking it is actually deeply concerning. The government has changed legislation and planning to push this industry forward without undertaking a realistic assessment of the very real impacts caused, not least from the huge volume of waste and how that will be dealt with appropriately. The government has not held back promoting the over inflated report produced by EY, yet they sat on this less than encouraging report for two years. They have not assessed the impacts or the reality of this industry and that is completely unacceptable and irresponsible.
Well done Dr. Sarah Wollaston, Conservative, Totnes, Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee and the Liaison Committee.
Astonishing!
“Don’t Know” which is closely related, no doubt, to “Don’t Care” which is closely related no doubt to “Don’t Want to Know” which is even more closely related no doubt to “Don’t Ask Awkward Questions As They Might Incriminate”
I believe the legal response would be “No Comment”?
Well that is it then isn’t it?
The government have just dissociated themselves from any responsibility whatsoever for fracking and all responsibility is now firmly back in the hands of the operators, and we have all seen what incompetent failures they are?
There can not be assurances of safety or “gold standards” since you cannot have “gold standards” about a process they know nothing about?
Ineos et al, you are on your own, the government you so heavily relied upon to protect you from all the truth of your polluting processes, has just hung you out to dry, i said you did not understand what you were getting into in relying upon government to dig you all out of your own folly.
You embarrassed them with your incompetence, this is the result.
Apologies for quoting from the above text:
“Reply by Claire Perry
The Government has not made an assessment of the amount of flowback waste which would be produced from any future shale gas development.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Question by Sarah Wollaston
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the implementation unit report on shale gas extraction, what disposal method will be used for flowback waste from (a) the 17 sites by 2020, (b) the 30 to 35 sites by 2022 and (c) the 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry
It is up to the operator to agree disposal methods with the appropriate regulators as part of their planning application for any future shale gas development.
Written answer, 2 March 2018, link to transcript
Question by Sarah Wollaston
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the Implementation Unit Report on Shale Gas, which disposal method is planned to be used for the projected (a) 17 sites by 2020, (b) 30-35 sites by 2022 and (c) 155 sites by 2025.
Reply by Claire Perry
It is the operator’s responsibility to agree disposal methods with the appropriate regulators as part of their planning application for all shale gas development.”
So all such questions must now be directed with the highest priority to the operators and the “appropriate regulators” (unspecified)
We can forget government representation, they have chosen the only path possible in such an increasingly contentious hot potato, “Ask Someone Else, Because The Answers May Incriminate”?
Government side stepping at its most time honoured “Get Out Of Jail Free card” avoidance of actually being responsible for anything.
Ian, people are correct to raise these questions otherwise why bother to improve and learn from the past? They used to put young children down pits when they first had coal mines and miners died young from disease and accidents. The world is a different place and the government is being completely irresponsible.
The petro-chemical company Ineos only want shale gas to produce plastics not energy.The Government states that this country is energy sufficient for the next two decades.
Sue Cuthbert
I consider the line that INEOS only want shale gas to produce plastics as untrue, for the following reasons.
1. There is no indication yet that UK shale gas contains elevated levels of Ethane, sufficiently greater that already in N.Sea gas, to warrant the building of further plastic plants in the UK.
2. The plans are ( at present ) to pop the gas into the UK grid at point of extraction or nearby. I see no plans to lit and tanker it to the chemical plants.
3. INEOS have expanded into offshore oil and gas, in addition to their Chemical Business. The company has an interest in being an oil and gas producer, plastic production or no.
So, INEOS will be better advised to continue importing Ethane from the Ethane Rich Marcellus via tanker, as it’s proven, there are plants to extract the Ethane, liquefy it, pop it on a ship and send it to Scotland.
Maybe the frack gas west of the Pennines will turn out to be rich in Ethane, and and INEOS will build plants to extract the Ethane and ship it to the chemical plants by rail or road. But it would be a fair way off, as they have yet to drill their first exploration well.
How it all pans out we shall see, but even if there is Ethane in the gas sufficient to do the above, unless you sell all the other stuff ( primarily methane ) into the grid for energy use, it does not make economic sense.
Re energy sufficiency, we are have that with imports. Without them, we are not energy sufficient for 20 years.
I would say that it was true for the following reason:
The North Sea ethane is not of a suitable quality, INEOS are buying from the US; they hope UK shale will have the quality ethane they require as they have got the current governance in bed with them on their tax payers funded yacht, so they can exploit is as much as they want despite the consequences to the planet, communities and the public purse; likely they will ask for a grant to ‘help’ them before they bugger off back to their offshore tax havens.
Sherwulf
No doubt we shall see. But when chatting to anti frackers and the general,public on the issue I remind them that a lack of Ethane in the gas will not, in itself, result in INEOS or I.Gas packing up and going home after they have tested the shale. So why anti frackers would want to believe that INEOS has no interest in the methane is a bit of a mystery ( they are only in it for the plastic ).
It is not as if we all stopped using plastic tomorrow, that fracking would disappear, but if we all stopped using gas, it would.
Why only 17 sites by 2020? how many gas wells on a site? In my Pennsylvania County in US , we have over 500 sites so far and they are still drilling ; we have over 1300 gas wells so far. We have an area that I just measured on google earth in kilometers, that is 118 kilometers by 39 kilometers and it’s basically a square shape county; we are 830 sq. miles if that helps. What size area are the 17 sites covering?
as far as waste you can find all the figures of waste from each gas well in my area and across the State under this site: http://www.marcellusgas.org and it shows all the various wastes and the amounts per well and what they do with it , where it goes. Here is an example of total waste from one gas well in my county: Total Drill cuttings : 2,533,980 pounds (1,267 tons)
Total Other oil & gas wastes : 2 gallons (0 bbls)
Total Produced fluid : 1,085,080 gallons (25,835 bbls)
Total Soil contaminated by oil & gas related spills (in : 3 gallons (0 bbls)
Total Synthetic liner materials : 925 gallons (22 bbls)
Total Unused fracturing fluid waste : 425 gallons (10 bbls)
Total Waste water treatment sludge : 8,000 gallons (190 bbls)
This is a tentative estimate Vera- because to date the UK fracking industry has failed to drill and frack one single well since the moratorium has been lifted. This is multifactorial- but to say that the industry is now facing opposition from every community it tries to frack, and direct action on the ground starts to explain this.. Recently there has been a shift to suggest that local planning authorities will no longer be able to determine fracking applications and that the decisions will be made at Westminster. Shale gas applications may be deemed Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project as the UK gov know they will get no consent from local planners, as the people all over their shoddy applications. They cannot do this my fair means and are looking into removing all local democracy to get this 17 by 2020. We will stop them.
Hi everyone, its Sunday March 4th and the snow and ice has almost melted and the daffs and tulips are poking up into the spring sunshine.
While i was cooking this song popped into my head, so i thought it a good Sunday song to cheer us all up.
With only a few words altered just for fun of course.
For someone we all know and……well……know anyway?
Taken from “Plastic Man”
By Ray Davies and The Kinks
A man arrives at 10 Downing Street street
And the tories think he’s helpful and sweet
‘Cause he never swears and he always shakes you by the hand
But no one knows he really is a plastic man
(Plastic man, plastic mad)
He’s got plastic heart, plastic teeth and toes
(Yeah, he’s plastic mad)
He’s got plastic knees and a perfect plastic nose
(Yeah, he’s plastic mad)
He’s got plastic lips that hide his plastic teeth and gums
And plastic legs that reach up to his plastic bum
(Plastic bum, plastic bum )
Plastic man got no brain
Plastic man don’t feel no pain
Plastic people look the same
Yeah, yeah, yeah
Tricky as sin and spit in your face
Pollute and dispose all over the place
He wont consider what a disgrace
Plastic man
(Plastic man, plastic mad)
He’s got plastic money coming out the walls
(Yeah, he eats plastic food)
He eats plastic food with a plastic knife and fork
(Yeah, he’s plastic mad)
He likes plastic cups and saucers ’cause they never break
And he likes to frack our gas for his plastic fake
Plastic man got no brain
Plastic man don’t feel no pain
Plastic people look the same
Yeah, yeah, yeah
Tricky as sin and spit in your face
Pollute and dispose all over the place
He wont consider what a disgrace
Plastic man
(Plastic man, plastic mad)
He’s got plastic waste and wears a plastic hat
(Yeah, he’s plastic man)
But our children don’t wanna eat plastic from a frack
(Yeah, we’re plastic bad)
He’s got a phony smile that makes you think he understands
But no one ever gets the truth from plastic man
(Plastic man, plastic man)
Plastic man
(Plastic man, plastic man)
Have a great Sunday with family and friends!
Don’t be fooled by drill or drop to think that the antis are winning the war on fracking. Every major legal decision has been in the favour of fracking, and our dependancy on gas imports has been highlighted by the ‘best from the east’. I can see an increase in support for fracking by 5% or so happening and decrease of 2% or so opposing it in the next poll.
Crystal balls G….reg? I think the Beast from the South East rather than the “beast? from east” is putting as much distance as possible between herself and fracking before it takes her down with it?
I think that Emmageddon has also blown itself out too”
Let’s see what the tory trolley astroturfers have to say shall we?
Looks like the ‘Beast from the East’ has caused little more than a few days of concern.
https://www.ft.com/content/8c503ed0-1df3-11e8-aaca-4574d7dabfb6
‘I can see an increase in support for fracking by 5% or so happening and decrease of 2% or so opposing it in the next poll.’
I disagree
The original 4000 wells has now been replaced with 155 wells. All those jobs and energy security from the 4000 gone.
The Government don’t even mention fracking in their energy and economic and fiscal outlook reports.
The next poll may well be twisted to try and get some public support. That will backfire straight away. The anti fracking movement will publicise the way the words have been manipulated and even more will become suspicious of the industry and oppose it.
The ‘Beast from the East’ may be around for a few days but will be forgotten soon after.
The ‘Force from the North’ is here to stay
I respect your opinion. Either way I feel 2018 is a crucial year.
I genuinely believe that once either Third or Cuadrilla have smooth operations and local communities begin to benefit, the Public will have less against it than they currently do.
A lot of concerns are due to lack of knowledge and trust. Should these concerns be addressed, the majority will be in favour imo.
David Cameron should use his time and promote it back into popular opinion.
Once British regulation minimises risks, what are your real reasons for opposing it? don’t like Fossil fuels? get used to it, with China and other countries reducing their coal usage, demand for gas will increase. Its the bridge between more harmful fossil fuels and electricity.
(Cue an essay from Phil C, beginning with Ha! Ha! get a life pal)
Oooh! Touchy? Charming dear?
I didn’t know you cared? Love you too?
Get a better crystal ball pet! Or better still, two of them?
Yes Ian there are You Tube videos that show how Fracking companies deal with flowback ,Dumping waste in the Manchester ship canal is one of the Gold standards these companies use it is well documented and proven .
Excellent jono, thanks, scary stuff!
So it looks like the Captain’s left the sinking ship before the crew; how shameful. I expect the crew [Ineos et al] will trample the passengers [investors, contractors and associates] in the rush to get to the yacht parked off the port side…..
Jono
This point has been discussed in past posts.
However, to recap
The waste was treated and discharged into the canal by the waste treatment facility ( not dumped by Cuadrilla ).
All legal and above board then.
Since then the law has changed. So a plan B is required.
The UTube report is fine, other than at 08.30 when the reporter refers to a letter addressing the use of sewage plants to treat waste in the US ( don’t do it ), when the Cuadrilla waste was treated by a pukka Haz Waste treatment plant.
Then later, in regard to the N,Sea, he says all produced water from offshore platforms is discharged overboard. This is not quite true, as some produced water turns up at onshore terminals where it has been typically sent to similar onshore treatment plants for treatment and discharge. That water is radioactive as well. However the bulk of the PW is discharged into the Sea.
So it’s as good as true, other than the click bait heading.
The issue of how large amounts of waste water will be treated remains. As noted a few times on here, no doubt best to find out if there is sufficient gas to warrant an industry before working out how to deal with large volumes.
Then, the same SCurve of technology which is driving rapid progress in renewables will help provide the solution here.
Despite the government verbal support and media release claims by shale company of the economic and potential resources of UK shale, there are still no official or concrete evidence to support these claims. No progress no empirical evidence no result. It is hard for the frackers to keep their argument holding up while opposite are mounting. The interest and support for uk shale are waning everyday politically and financially.
TW
I think you nailed it. Despite claims of the potential resources …etc etc, there is no empirical evidence …. etc etc.
Hard to back up potential claims until you get actual results. Then they become actual results ..hey presto.
For potential claims see UKOG, and actual, see same. So far so bad, but we shall see.
It is the same with the Hazards of Fracking in the UK. No concrete evidence to support the claims of potential hazards etc etc outwith some interesting stuff about dry ditches, saline wells, muddy ditches and so on.
But we can always look at the results from elsewhere which floats boats from both sides of the argument.
Hewes
Very true…..both sides of the arguements are making extravagant claims with no empirical evidence to support their claim.
lol dumped!!!
Pretty much stark proof that these cheerleaders for fracking are either paid quislings or the kind of swivel eyed imbeciles you always need to run a ponzi scheme
“Shale gas revolution” bahahahahahaha
Francis.
US example is a shale revolution. If you cant accept or admit that then you have been living under a rock.
You always know when the tide has turned and the support is declining by the repeat of the financial motive or “they are not as intelligent as us”.
Cheer up-we all getting happier. (Although DOD would indicate otherwise.)
Not selling enough solar panels this month Francis? Perhaps John could advise some N.Sea investments to switch to? Why should there only be a financial motive on one side of the debate? After all, we are all paying a premium for “alternative” energy, so there are financial implications to all of us, whether we know it or not.
Do you really want the fracking companies to join in with the fabrication, TW? When they have real data to claim economically they will not be slow in coming forward.
“After all, we are all paying a premium for “alternative” energy”
Let’s look at some facts.
Multi billion pound state subsidies for fossil fuels
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/fossil-fuel-firms-billion-pound-uk-state-subsidies-oil-gas-firms-leak-climate-change-environment-a7690966.html
And renewables
“This puts them among the cheapest new sources of electricity generation in the UK, joining onshore wind and solar, with all three cheaper than new gas, according to government projections”
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-auction-offshore-wind-cheaper-than-new-gas
John
The inflated subsidy rates for fossil,fuel have been mentioned before here. For new readers, the number is mainly guarantees to UK industry. So we have not shelled out those billions from our pockets to anyone yet, if at all. Likewise the so called subsidy for renewables reflects the size of our renewables industry, not the direct subsidy from my pocket to generators in order to buy electricity.
So, it’s not what it seems, but the article lays that out once you read it and go into,the supporting documentation.
So, for example, we have supported the manufacture of mining machinery here in the UK for export to Russia. But not for much longer, as production has shifted to a China ( hooray I hear you all cry ), so now Jobs and tax revenue are in China, not the UK, and China is subsidising Russian Coal by the same metric. Likewise we export oilfield equipment. I am sure that if we decided to export wind turbines the gov would be as accommodating in terms of credit support, no matter who we exported them to.
Re cheap,offshore wind, I think that has been aired here before, but it’s good to see that it is almost subsidy free.
I note that to say it is cheaper than new gas, you must assume rising gas prices, and take into account the carbon tax ( subsidy ).
I am not sure it has a direct comparison to fracking as that gas can be used in old gas fired power stations. Either way it leads back to intermittant supply and storage.
I await some proclamation in a couple of years that our coal fired stations will remain open, waiting for cold days.
You can build up a big pile of coal at a power station ready for trouble, not something you can do with wind or gas in the uk. And, if all that stuff about methane in the atmosphere from oil and gas is taken into account, we can welcome back clean coal as our saviour, a bridge fuel to renewables ( although there are also articles giving eye watering subsidy numbers for coal ). Maybe the Germans have got it right, big coal and big wind, the dream team.
As they say, be careful what you wish for as you sometimes get it.
Time will tell.
what’s the state of the tide at kirby misperton?
I’m struggling a bit here. If the government doesn’t have any estimates for what they expect from this industry, how can they be thinking of calling applications in as “nationally significant”? That’s what we now call Brexit thinking isn’t it?
Refraction
They should say it’s Potentially Nationally Significant maybe?
Re Brexit thinking, is that not thinking you know what the voters will vote and getting it wrong?
Examples would be SNP and the out vote, the remainers and the Brexit Vote, TM and a general election, the Republican party and Trump, and so on?
Think they already did ‘potentially’ in 2010 hewes; no longer even that as wind and solar generation ‘potential’ has taken over. The head has come off the doll. Time to throw it away…..
Sherwulf
Maybe….Things can be potential for a long time. In this case potentially profitable and or potentially useful can be time bound depending on renewable development I guess. BP was very supportive of the potential of solar panels way back in the 1990s, a support that was not likely to be timebound by advances in alternative technology. The Chinese entrance into the market put them off ( much cheaper ).
I am not really fussed who makes them as long as they are rolled out; clearly quality may be an issue, but consumers will make their own choices. I don’t think the Chinese put them off at all, BP just imagined they would carry on regardless and sod the future….
Having lived with alternative technology for 20 years, given puzzled looks and frowns of misunderstanding to begin with, and then after four more adoptions of clean energy generation around me, called ‘foresighted’, I can assure you that with the technological advances, speed of deployment and public demand, we will not need shale plastic, petrol cars, GCH in twenty years time. I wish it would be sooner, but sadly we will have to wait for many of these ‘I’m alright Jack’ members of society to move on to the next chapter so that the rest can rescue their future.
Our country is about to go through one of the worst economic outages ever, there is no more money, no more assets to borrow on, all our savings and pensions are already in hock to the hilt. The population is existing on the work ethic of the baby boomers who are forced to work later and later and the generation behind is smaller, up to its eyes in debt because of the mythological narrative given to them at school. The survivors of this storm will be those who are problem solvers and who look to the future now, disengaging themselves from the system.
Generating all or much of your own energy will create the freedom to choose which narrative you wish to follow, rather than be coerced into one that leads to suffering.