Regulation

New Wressle application published with wrong location plan

Egdon Wressle 1 10 000

Location plan submitted for the Egdon application for Wressle – which refers to an Aurora Resources site near Formby

The latest application by Egdon Resources for the Wressle oil site near Scunthorpe has been published on the North Lincolnshire Council website. But a key document – one of the location plans – is for a site about 100 miles away.

Opponents of development of the site were quick to criticise the company for the mistake. They have successfully fought two previous applications and a six-day public inquiry.

Elizabeth Williams, of Frack Free Lincolnshire, described it as “shocking beyond belief”:

“How can we even begin to trust the oil and gas companies to operate the hazardous chemical and mechanical procedures safely when they cannot even get the preparatory paperwork right?   And this is significant mistake.

“In this case I do not blame North Lincolnshire Council planning department because I know that they are short-staffed and working under pressure.”

The location plan at 1:2500 scale shows the access track to the site.

egdon-wressle-1-2500.jpg

1:2,500 scale plan for the Wressle site near Scunthorpe

But the location plan at 1:10,000 scale (see first map) is for another site, on the other side of the country. This shows the setting for a proposal by Aurora Resources for a yet-to-be-submitted planning application for Altcar Moss, near Formby in Lancashire.

Look out for DrillOrDrop’s review of the new planning application coming soon.

21 replies »

  1. Well, Elizabeth, I am shocked you are under a “Frack Free” tag when Wressle is nothing to do with fracking.

    This is a significant mistake.

    • Martin , you should be a politician the way you take an article about total incompetence of an oil and gas company who obviously don’t know their base from their apex and turning it into a fraccing debate. Hardly inspiring is it from a company that has had all their mistakes listed by the council on previous occasions. You know as well as I do what they intend to do is fraccing under a different name .

  2. Looking at both maps, I can see there is a good similarity to the sites ( off the beaten track ). I am surprised to see that people still think that Wressle is fracking even though it has been confirmed by both North Lincolnshire Council and The Secretary of State Planning Inspector. Do people actually read his report? There seems to be a lot of people in the UK who are “fanatically” shouting fracking at everything. It scares me to think that if ALL drills are tarred with the fracking label then this will muddy the waters. I spoke to a drill rig supervisor last week. In the past his rig was attacked when he was drilling a water borehole for a farmer. My biggest concern is, if people restrict ordinary drills, then the Government will indeed spit the dummy out and open up a can of worms for actual fracking companies.

  3. Oh no it isn’t Jono.

    You know as well as I do that scaremongering and misinformation is a standard tool for the antis. It has failed to convince the majority, and will continue to do so. The majority are much more interested in their fuel bills. But, you will continue to utilise that strategy because there is not much else.

    And GBKs comment is a valid exposure of exactly how it continues. It seems credibility is not important amongst the one third, but it is amongst the two thirds.

    • Such a lot of fuss over such a ​nasty ​silly little word as “fracking”?

      It appears Paul Tresco has no such foibles

      “In the oil and gas industry, rising prices have helped investment in production rise 4% last year and is expected to grow 5% this year. The US’s shale boom will drive much of the growth, and frackers are on track to achieve positive free cashflow this year, for the first time.”

      And nor does kisheny?

      “​Jack I live in the area and I would go nuts if fracking occurred during a hosepipe ban and my living wall died which needs watering a few times a day that’s why I rang United Utilities. Tomorrow ring both UU and Cuadrilla. Please post what they say​”

      But you guys all have a kniption fit every time a protector even so much as mentions the word? A bit oversensitive? Not good press? Or just a diversion tactic? A bit silly in any case. Same old same old, nothing to say, so just pick on a single word and blow that up out of all proportion to change the subject? Too much methane perhaps? Pedantic isnt it?

      nothing better to offer than silly word play it seems? I prefer this definition, that covers a multitude of “sins”?

      “Consider “fracking’ a synonymous derog a tory epithet and you have your unnecessarily pedantic answer.”

      I wonder who said that?

      Have a nice day!

      Always a pleasure!

      Oh, yes,……..FRACKING!

      • Phil C – the whole debate seems to be about shale gas (UK), gas / oil (other countries). Stimulation by hydraulic fracturing, your “fracking”, is generally utilised on shale wells. Most of the antis on this BB are anti shale and anti “fracking”. Or are they anti “fracking and therefore anti shale – who knows? Some it would appear are anti all hydrocarbons – without understanding that hydrocarbons are going to be with us for many years to come and neither peak oil or peak gas have been reached on a global basis. And of of course there are the many who are anti anything that may impact on their homes.

        The clue in the quote from my post is shale… Wressle is not shale, and not to be “fracked”.

        • It aint my fracking, and never will be, that is the point, the term originated in the USA, and they are not so scared of the term fracking as you in UK seem to be.

          Just because the UK government has “reframed” the word to avoid that very unpopular term, whereas in the USA at least they call a frack a frack, regardless of such scaredy flat fat cat frack hat logic chopping of the term and its associated avoidances of the word fracking is of no importance whatsoever and never will be.,

          I notice that only protectors are criticised for as much as displaying the word or daring to write it, but not i notice by anti antis amongst each other, you lot use it freely and maybe we should point that out all the time now?

          That whole mini tirade is just desperately attacking people over silly words and is just childish and clearly intended to divert away from the issue at hand and try to sound and feel “superior”, well it aint, and its not, its just childish, a simple diversion tactic nothing more and i will continue to call the entire processes “fracking” whether anyone likes it or not.

          As far as i am concerned the entire industry uses “fracking” as a cover all term by any other name, and it is only logic chopping to say it is not. That is not acceptable and any attempt to “reframe” the word is rejected.

          I really dont care if you and your colleagues are so supersensitive to the word, and i refuse to move on that, even you use the term as a coverall description remember, dont deny it, i copied and posted it, as i did kisheny’s accidental use of the word fracking.

          you still have not provided a definitive description of “proppant squeeze” why? Because it is a purely magicked up phrase to avoid using the word “fracking” in its universally understood meaning of the word, that is why.

          The process is universally known as fracking, i will continue to use the term correctly in that context as everyone else understands the word, but you lot seem to object to it because you feel it gives you some sort of put down and feeling of superiority to choose a single word and blow it up out of all proportion, very sad/

          Well i am here to tell you it is not, and does not, that is it, end of conversation on the word fracking.

          Can we move on out of this childish name calling display now?

  4. I’d prefer everyone kept calm and didn’t turn a very informative site into a slagging match whilst hiding behind a keyboard. For arguments sake I’d actually like a discussion that covers the fallout of WHY? oil is required “at present”. Because if you haven’t seen the fallout first hand as I have, then you may want to eat humble pie.

    Four families I know personally are using food banks to feed their children. I come from what was a mining area, already destroyed in favour of coal imports.
    When you see a kids meal that would struggle to fill a ferret, it kind of hits home. This is due to rising food costs (a direct knock on effect of distribution costs when logistics transport companies have to raise their prices)

    Fuel goes up, food goes up, that’s a real “inconvenient truth” and there’s a lot more behind this, including the suicide of a father who could not support his family and felt worthless, his job was lost when his boss looked at the annual accounts and decided profits had been destroyed by rising fuel costs.

    I hope people feel their cause is not the only one worth thinking of.

    • perhaps James, the oil and gas industry has failed utterly to engage a constructive debate and had refused to discuss the relevant issues of the processes and would rather run rough shod over any opposition for little more than the dangers of speaking the truth simply cannot be defended?

      We have seen a process of actively ignoring the planning regulations and conditions, overturning local decision making in central government, an entirely secretive hidden liaison with the rubber stamp regulators, ignoring and contravening any regulation that stands in their way, nefarious at the very least financial behind locked door dealings, intimidation and threatening protest with injunctions and generally acting like no one else either has, or should have a say?

      And then they blame everyone but themselves for having promoted their own terrible reputation and behaviour?

      The industry obtained their licences from whoever, i do not care, and without so much as a by your leave, appeared in the midst of communities and then acted as if any opposition was a criminal behaviour?

      What are people supposed to think when an invader appears in their midst and then makes outrageous demands on peoples living conditions and endangers their water, their air, their land, their livelihood and in the end the entire ecology and climate and expects people to put up with that and roll over and play dead?

      Whose fault is that? The residents?

      No.

      The government who failed to even so much as discuss it in parliament apart from vague propaganda promises?

      Yes.

      The industry for failing to engage and speak honestly and frankly and then run to central government to enforce it upon people for daring to stand up and say “No”?

      Yes.

      The media for failing to debate the subject freely and openly until it i almost too late, and still raises barely a mention?

      Yes.

      And here, on Drill Or Drop, where the protagonists can barely construct a sentence with out filling it full of derog a tory remarks and personal attacks, where once there was at least some semblance of a rational debate? Argument over the word “Fracking” indeed! What a farce.

      Hell Yes.

      And people suffer, as you say, and will continue to do so, especially if “fracking” and its associated avoidances of the word, go ahead, because the issue was never going to be allowed to be whether fracking is beneficial or not, or should be allowed or not, it was always about ramming it down peoples throats whether they liked it or not and hoping there was not too much of a backlash, and then if there is, and there is, to make such protest illegal and bully and rubber stamp it out of the way.

      What sort of future will us and our children have in a polluted, ransacked burned out husk of a planet just because certain purely financial interests want to make yet another fast buck out of a suppressed intimidated compliant population under the heel of a totalitarian regime?

      Is that the sort of discussion you mean?

  5. Where fracking is being applied for, then fracking is a sensible term to use. Where it isn’t being applied for, it is not, and in most cases is deliberately added to the mix merely to misinform.

    Some seem to feel DOD is a vehicle for that purpose. If done accidentally, fine. If done deliberately, it is something very different.

    It will continue, because it seems important for some to misinform. However, others will continue to correct such attempts, to inform any newbies who may actually want to add to their level of knowledge.

    At the same time this section was posted by Ruth, another one relating to PNR was posted. It is perfectly straight forward if DOD can be accurate about which site is the one about to involve fracking then no one can claim the information is confused. They really do not need to add a great deal of research.

  6. I thought someone was moving on from childishness?

    What is not childish is someone who wants to continue to utilise false arguments. Is there a shortage of correct arguments, is it too difficult to research correct facts or is it a desire to continue a fog? I suspect all with have their opinions on that.

    Meanwhile, whilst someone feels that others debate can be controlled by their instruction, I would suggest that is Pauls job.

    Off to the soccer now, to watch the fifteen (f)racking up the tries.

  7. Returned from my match-a bit late because the vegetable oil and my tractor didn’t gel-well, it did hence the lateness.

    Unfortunately, the umpire ruined the whole experience introducing foot faults every time the players crossed the white lines! Fault?

    Someday, someone might understand which “game” we are playing.

    Sorry to be so “gushing”, must be a few hundred miles adrift-it’s the “fog” I blame-but that’s never stopped the antis.

    Trying? Yep, very-to the controllers.

    • Wrong location, we are all over here 100 miles away, throw that Pratt Frack Nav out the window and one day perhaps the industry will know where it is.

      In a country that doesn’t want it.

      Maybe the industry suffers from quantum non location?

      It doesn’t know where it is or what it is doing at the same time?

      If it knew where it was it wouldn’t know what it was doing or what to call itself?
      And if it knew what it was doing or what to call itself, it wouldn’t know where it was or what it was called?
      Sort of a double frack pit experiment, neither a Mexican wave or a practical operation at the same time? Probably neither?

      Werner Heisenberg’s incompetence principle in action, neither location or position can be observed at the same time, but never observably both?
      Stupid spooked action at a distance?

      Have a quantum spooky day

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.