IGas Tinker Lane shale gas site at dawn, 2 December 2018. Photo: Tinkerlane.co.uk
The shale gas company, IGas, confirmed this evening that its Tinker Lane well near Blyth in north Nottinghamshire had failed to discover the primary target, the Bowland shale formation.
A statement to investors, issued at 5.43pm, said drilling at Tinker Lane had reached the total depth (depth at the bottom of the well) “significantly ahead of schedule”.
But while the well encountered a shale interval, the statement said:
“The shales encountered did not include the primary target, the Bowland shale.”
Tinker Lane is IGas’s first shale gas well in the east Midlands. It is co-owned with Ineos and is the first shale gas well in which the petrochemical company has an interest.
IGas chief executive, Stephen Bowler, said:
“Whilst the results of this well will help calibrate our geological models of the region and has demonstrated further improvements in drilling performance, we are naturally disappointed not to have encountered the Bowland Shale.”
The statement said IGas would now “conduct a comprehensive logging programme of the well”. This would be crucial, the company said, to “understanding the geological setting and help to refine our basin modelling”. The results would also satisfy the work programme obligation on the licence, IGas said.
In its planning application, IGas said it would drill the vertical well at Tinker Lane to a maximum depth of 3,300m, to target the Bowland shale and Millstone Grit geological formations and take multiple core samples. The Bowland shale had been estimated at a depth of 1,690-1,760m.
The company is expected to move on next year to its other site in the area, at Misson Springs, where it has permission to drill two exploration shale gas wells.
Mr Bowler said:
“The outcome of this exploration well does not change our view on the prospectivity of our next target well at Springs Road, where we believe a thick section of shale is present due to its more central location in the basin and which we expect to spud in the first quarter of 2019.”
The IGas statement came after trading ended for the day. IGas shares closed up 2.1% at 89.41p.
Tinker Lane has seen ongoing protests by opponents of shale gas exploration. Last month, a man and a woman locked themselves together outside the gate for 81 hours. They were arrested on suspicion of obstructing the highway. DrillOrDrop
Last week, IGas succeeded in renewing injunctions against protests at Tinker Lane and Misson Springs and another site at Ellesmere Port in Cheshire. DrillOrDrop report
The Ellesmere Port site is the subject of a planning inquiry, beginning next month. Today, the campaign group, Frack Free Ellesmere Port and Upton, which is participating in the inquiry, released its evidence on the effect of the development on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. DrillOrDrop report
DrillOrDrop Tinker Lane details and timeline
Categories: Industry
DRILL OR DROP? 
What was the final depth reached? Deep enough for high level nuclear waste to be dumped?
That was always the backup plan.
Exactly
Exactly the same thought came to my mind too
Almost deep enough to accommodate one of your Sunday recitals.
Ha! Ha! Awww! You noticed! How sweet?Things are looking up! Or maybe your wrecked R8 LMX full of high level radioactive nuclear waste, not to mention toxic bags of flour and melons?
Provided you have not crashed it into a building at speed again of course?
Hehe … good to see a number plate with a sense of humour.
Phil C please provide a factually accurate link for this statement……
Please provide yours!
I did not post ‘Deep enough for high level nuclear waste to be dumped?’ – you did. Please have the courtesy to explain or provide a factual link for this statement.
GDYOR
David S – Check out the Ian Crane documentary ‘Voices from the Gasfields’ at around 54:40 (I submitted it under the DoD post headed ‘Angus and IGas protest injunctions …’). Crane himself points to that possible scheme and gives reasons but also says it is only conjecture – although (of course) Crane fans have been riffing on that – as fact – ever since. The argument is plausible however and it does raise some interesting questions.
Ian R Crane false flag, chem trails, aliens conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy…
Please address the point in hand Kisheny. I assume you can read? Tell me your response to the Government white paper that is referred to in the documentary. I bet you didn’t even look at the piece referred to, and how the point was made.
Unfortunately, Ian Crane has no credibility whatsoever. GDYOR is just a ‘get out of jail’ response when the poster has no factual evidence to respond with.
I think its a good discipline to check out what is said or what is written and relate to that rather than being spooked by people just out to attack credibility or integrity, as a form of debate (a disease of the internet/social media era) . I would be interested to see your response to the point as it was actually made.
Philip P – As requested, I have watched the relevant part of the documentary and read the UK Government White Paper referenced in the documentary. I have also read the IAEA document ‘Model Regulations for Borehole Disposal Facilities for Radioactive Waste’ referenced in the White Paper. I note the following: The White Paper states ‘3.15. The underground facilities are expected to comprise a system of vaults for the disposal of intermediate level waste (ILW), and an array of engineered tunnels, for the disposal of high level waste (HLW) and spent fuel. HLW and spent fuel require different disposal structures from ILW because they generate heat.’
The IAEA document states ‘ Article 39: Site- and inventory-specific design 1. The applicant or licensee shall design the borehole and the engineered barriers to take account of the site characteristics and the inventory of wastes to be disposed, and to ensure operational and post-closure safety. Article 40: Construction 1. The disposal facility shall be constructed in accordance with the design as described in the approved safety case. It shall be constructed in such a way as to preserve the safety functions of the host environment that have been shown by the safety case to be important for safety. The borehole shall be constructed so as to facilitate operation. 2. Construction of a BDC facility could continue after the commencement of operation of part of the facility and after the emplacement of waste packages, for instance in an adjacent borehole. Such overlapping of construction and operational activities shall be planned and carried out so as to ensure safety, both in operation and after closure. 3. Borehole construction shall not commence or proceed until a licence has been granted. This requires the regulatory body to review, assess and approve the impact of the proposed construction on radiological safety during both the operational and the post-closure periods. 4. Construction shall be accompanied by a planned programme of testing, commissioning and inspection (including regulatory inspection) so as to demonstrate that the facility has been constructed in accordance with the safety case.’
Now does this sound like a borehole drilled as an exploratory fracking well or any other exploratory hydrocarbon borehole. The answer is no.
Good follow through David. You may be in a position now to lay the matter to rest. As Crane himself said ‘this was a matter of conjecture on his part’ and I am presuming it was based on the material/papers he could access at the time – 2015. You might have got further. Crane, and especially his followers, tends to amplify certain ‘conjectures’ and a few get out of hand. He’s made himself an important irritant but shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. I rate his credibility higher than several of the pro-frackers posting regularly on this site.
But I think you’ve answered your own initial query on this topic now … thanks for sharing the research.
Thank you – maybe Phil C will take note…….
No chance of that David S.
Dear me, touchy touchy? How interesting? What do we have here boys and girls? The usual ankle biter response i see? We know that response dont we boys and girls? So touchy on high level nuclear waste? Practically scrabbling for denial?
It was just the same sort of statement that pours out regularly from the anti anti brigade, i just thought you would all like some of your own medicine? But what a palaver it caused?
No sense of humour for some here it seems?
But what perhaps is really interesting about this is the immediate explosion of outrage and accusations, that is only too telling. There are clearly some very raw nerves on that subject?
Apparently i was not the only one who thought that either?
We have discussed this at length, well over a year ago, all to this instant knee jerk reaction from the PR hotdesk denial department. That in itself is highly revealing.
Methinks thou doth protest too much. Not a good look.
Look at the new Infrastructure Act? That allows anything at all to be buried beneath our feet, without notification or permission or public consultation, and then look at all the, still old style permissions for what was it 38 sites? That also require no notifications or records to be taken for any activity on site, and then the plans to bury high level nuclear waste in deep boreholes.
Its not rocket science.
You could ask Martian to provide a link, but apparently there is a giggle gagging order in place? Funny that?
Such fun!
Always a pleasure!
Have a nice day!
[Image removed over possible copyright issues]
Waiting to see the sp bomb out tomorrow morning, down 15% by end of play maybe?
What a pile of garbage to waste ones money on, unless of course you go short after spudding has taken place.
Excellent news. And more reason for shareholders to withdraw from the failed UK fracking experiment.
Have we filled up all the salt mines with nuclear waste then? I thought there was enough space there to take decades worth yet.
If such mines were suitable, Martin Collyer, they would have been used years ago. Once again you need to be up to speed with the current situation on nuclear waste and deep geological disposal before sharing your ignorance.
I think it is yourself who needs to keep up to date Jon. David S has done the research for you. Interesting how you follow someone else’s nonsense and suggest it is knowledge.
David S was kind enough to do your research. Some of us took the other stance that nonsense was better managed by some humour.
Martin
It seems that such mines are good places to grow food. Constant temperature and with much cheaper LED lighting ( and cooler ). Not just mushrooms I guess.
Old coal mines are not so good for this as they are primarily a collection of roadways. Salt mines are caverns .. miles of them.
So .. old salt mines, gypsum and potash maybe ( ie mines that do not cave ).
I saw that reference hewes62. Storage of documents has also been proposed, but not sure if that is developing.
The salt industry is always something I note at this time of year as I used to sell tonnes of the stuff into the agriculture sector. They always thought that salt was always readily available and then found in a cold snap it disappeared to domestic users to spread on their paths and then the agriculture sector was scrabbling around.
DeepStore in Winsford has been storing documents and valuables, and lately geological cores, for the past 20 years. Theres an area of tunnels equivalent to 700 football pitches for storage which are used every day. More than enough crumbs of conspiracy to provide Ian Crane with an income in appearance and publishing fees for the rest of his life..assuming THEY dont get to him first.
So you think 10,000ft is deep. It’s barely a post-hole!
Actually it appears they have only drilled to 6000ft. Amazingly this is not the first duster ever drilled.
It appears high level nuclear waste disposal in salt is an option currently in use in the US (or was in 2014) and Germany. But there have been issues with water movement from the bound water in the salt.
I don’t know the dimensions of the IGas well but it is unlikely of sufficient internal diameter to warrant nuclear waste disposal as an alternative use. Despite the geology being totally wrong. IGas will have stopped drilling at basement top or shallower in accordance with their licence obligation.
“The concept consists of drilling a borehole into basement rock to a depth of up to about 5000 metres, emplacing waste canisters containing used nuclear fuel or vitrified radioactive waste from reprocessing in the lower 2000 metres of the borehole, and sealing the upper 3000 metres of the borehole with materials such as bentonite, asphalt or concrete. The disposal zone of a single borehole could thus contain 400 steel canisters each 5 metres long and one-third to half a metre in diameter. The waste containers would be separated from each other by a layer of bentonite or cement.”
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-wastes.aspx
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/solving-nuclear-waste-with-wipp/
Paul
The nuclear waste point is a wind up by Phil C. Not the first time.
We should save the comments above and then cut and paste next time it crops up.
However, in his initial comment his last point has no question mark. So is it his plan to drop nuclear waste in the hole? Hmmmmm
You make it too easy, by making all this fuss about it though, hewes62 anyone might think that such a hair trigger response indicates that there is something to hide?
Hows about that for a wind up?
Phil C
Yes, a good wind up.
I am sure the issue will crop up again in due course.
Oh, I can guarantee it?
Notice the question mark?
It’s OK, its not a real one, since there is no question about it……?
Phil C
Yup, one has to be careful about where those question marks go, or ponder on their absence in headlines.
Not exactly a good ending to a year what was supposed to be a turning point for uk shale. With Cuadrilla unproductive well with current fracking regime restrictions and now IGAS bite the dust, the frackers are clearly with their tail between their legs.
Cuadrilla’s wells will work for nuclear waste storage assuming they have a “plumbers trap” before the horizontal section:
[Image removed over possible copyright issues]
Perhaps Cuadrilla, IGas and INEOS may need to bring back “Project Gasbuggy” and go nuclear fracking? Two much negativity about a few micro seismic events with conventional hydraulic fracturing in the Fylde – go the whole hog….. ground water monitoring provided FOC…
https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/
[Image removed over possible copyright issues]