Industry

Picture post: Rig dismantled and equipment moved off IGas site at Tinker Lane

190102 Tinker Lane TLCoUK2

Breaking down the drilling rig at the IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: TinkerLane.co.uk

Images from the IGas site at Tinker Lane in north Nottinghamshire this morning confirm that the company has begun demobilising and removing equipment.

The rig has been dis-assembled and early this morning lorries took off liquid waste and drill pipes. More vehicles entered and left the site during the day.

The demobilisation follows an IGas statement on 17 December 2018 that the Tinker Lane well had failed to discover the primary target, the Bowland shale formation. Details

The company said it 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 exploration licence, PEDL200.

Tinker Lane was one of just three wells drilled by the UK onshore oil and gas industry during 2018. This was a 68-year low in drilling activity. DrillOrDrop report

IGas is now expected to move on to its other local site, at Misson Springs, where it has permission to drill two shale gas exploration wells.

190102 Tinker Lane TLCoUk

IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: TinkerLane.co.uk

190102 Tinker Lane Tina English4

Demobilisation of the rig at IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: Tina English

190102 Tinker Lane Tina English2

Demobilisation at IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: Tina English

190102 Tinker Lane Tina English5

Lorries arriving to remove equipment from the IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: Tina English

190102 Tinker Lane TLCoUK3

Lorry loaded with drill pipes leaving the IGas shale gas site at Tinker Lane, Nottinghamshire, 2 January 2019. Photo: TinkerLane.co.uk

DrillOrDrop Tinker Lane details and timeline and photo page

37 replies »

  1. Good riddance. If you can’t even find the shale, then you have no business disrupting communities in the way you have. As my grandfather used to say, IGas couldn’t find their arses with both hands.

    • So if you can “find the shale” are you saying the “disruption” is okay Ellie? Misson Springs next – perhaps they will “find the shale” this time?

      • No I don’t think Ellie meant that. They didn’t find the shale.
        It wasn’t even – we found the shale but we don’t think the flow rate, when fracked, will be food enough. They didn’t find the shale. They didn’t find the rock that they said was there. A monumental fail.
        To be so, so wrong… they have no business disrupting communities.

        • Perhaps you missed this post by David S on Dec 19th:

          “Paul – the Dinantian limestone and the Bowland Shale are lateral equivalents of each other and are of the same age. The Dinantian limestones were deposited on the shallow water platform areas with the Bowland Shales being deposited at the same time in the deeper water, more rapidly subsiding, basinal areas. This is well shown on the geological cross section on page 16 of the link you posted. The Tinker Lane well was drilled on the platform/ basin margin, on or close to the basin bounding fault, which would have been active in Lower Carboniferous times allowing the basin to subside more rapidly than the platform area, with a consequent thicker succession of basinal shale than the laterally equivalent limestones. The Tinker Lane well was designed to explore the platform margin and not the deeper part of the basin, which will be tested by the Springs Road well. The cross section shows that only a thin section of the Upper Bowland shale was anticipated at the Tinker Lane well with the main targets (shown as ‘R’ on the cross secton) being the transitional shelf edge interbedded limestones/shales of the Dinantian limestones. The thicker Lower Bowland shales were never a target at this location. Hope this helps.”

          Page 16 of

          https://igasplc.com/media/39259/interim-results-2018.pdf

          So the boundary of the extent of the shale is established. But we shouldn’t let geology get in the way of a good story….

          Do you know if they drilled any deeper after logging / before rigging down?

          • Interesting correspondence, however I think it is true to say that IGas were disappointed not to find a reasonable thickness of the Upper Bowland Shale which was shown on their Generalised Vertical Section TL9/4, November 2015, to be around 70 metres thick. They clearly anticipated such and the IGas CEO spoke recently and surprisingly openly of their disappointment in not encountering the Bowland Shale. The responsible IGas Geologist explained the rationale behind the exploratory borehole in a meeting with the Tinker Lane CLG on 15/06/2016 as follows (I have transcribed from the original audio recording). “The TL Exploratory Well is designed to evaluate the resource potential of the Bowland Shale. In order to do that we need to drill through 200 metres or so of Sherwood Limestone. Then through the Zechstein Group and carbonates, through the coal measures, through the Millstone Grit interval and beneath that sits our primary target the Bowland Shale. The idea is to drill through the whole Bowland Shale section into the CLS that sits beneath it (Carboniferous Limestone Super Group). In order to evaluate the resource potential we then want to carry out a comprehensive data acquisition programme etc etc.”
            It seems to me that the failure to find the Bowland Shale is therefore being downplayed in this correspondence. The Bowland Shale was indeed the main target at Tinker Lane. We (CLG) were also told that the results from Misson 3D Seismic/local boreholes etc. indicated that the Misson Springs borehole was a better prospect being central in the basin. We were left wondering why a 3D seismic was not undertaken at Tinker Lane, as it was around the area of interest at Misson. It seemed to us (CLG) that the decision was a commercial one not to undertake 3D but to rely on Vintage 2D seismic data, albeit re analysed from mid 1980’s. A 3D survey would have alleviated the concerns that our local communities had about the drilling at Tinker Lane (the area has seen its fair share of mining subsidence and TL is approx. only 800 metres from coal workings in mid 1990’s) and probably given IGas a better idea of what to expect at depth.
            From observations over the fence we believe that work stopped on reaching the limestone and that the data acquisition program followed with the bottom of the hole standing at around 1,800 metres.

            • Thanks Rob – they were looking for around 100m + of shale which was not there. Otherwise the well was drilled pretty much as prognosed. Not sure 3D sismic would have made any difference in this case but I am not a geophysicist. I have however seen this many times before. The point of drilling the well was to to confirm the stratigraphy and measure the actual velocitys of the formations to calibrate the sesismic. Seismic alone is not much use. This they have achieved. Those living around Tinker Lane who oppose any development should be happy that the shale potential is further to the North and not underneath them.

        • David and Ellie

          Maybe they took notice of the Prof K.Smythe report re Mission.

          http://www.davidsmythe.org/fracking/Smythe%20Misson%20Springs%20objection%20v1.1.pdf

          He notes, on page 7 of that report that, the Bowland Shale is under-the whole of the PEDL, and is also thick ( under the complete PEDL ). Hence there is no need to drill to say you need to drill exploratory wells, you just need wells to frack the shale ( and hence should not call them exploratory ).

          But as you note, for the professor to be so, so wrong ( in your opinion ) would perhaps indicate a lack of competence on his part ( thus joining the Merry band of incompetents who drill to find out what is there ).

          Or maybe drilling to determine the exact geology it is not as straightforward as finding your bottom with both hands?

  2. Good to see someone is working on 2nd January! Not too many wind turbines doing the same. (Perhaps it is because there is a demand for the equipment elsewhere?)

    Gold standard.

    Why would you look at share value over the max. time??? If you want to check share values-have a look at Tesla’s drop TODAY! Now, that really is an “alternative” way to lose money.

    “No business disrupting communities”. Not very supportive of the protestors there, David. But, good job Igas spent the money to acquire an injunction and minimise that.

  3. Don’t spoil it Paul. It is quite illuminating when some of the “expert” antis show their ignorance of the oil and gas industry, which raises the question as to why people should be so against something they have little knowledge of!

    Strange how all these wind turbines find themselves in areas where they can not find sufficient wind, or solar panels that find little sunshine, but that is ignored, whereas finding the optimum areas for gas, or oil exploration, is a different matter all together and has to be exaggerated.

  4. Third Energy walked off site a year ago, Cuadrilla more recently. Now IGas has given up. Looks like Three nil to us.

  5. All you need to know about the ‘oil and gas industry’ –

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings

    https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/exxon-and-the-oil-industry-knew-about-climate-change/exxons-climate-denial-history-a-timeline/

    Billions spent globally on buying political party’s inaction on climate change for decades.

    The bigger the crime the more chance of pulling it off – it’s still going on in the UK with the incestuous relationship between politicians and the extreme energy policy – lining the pockets of the few with the support of the sad bunch of ‘pros’ on here – regardless of the warnings of the UN, NASA, the vast majority of scientists etc etc.

    Why… on EaRtH?… would anyone want to contribute to the destruction of their own planet? You guys make me weep – you’ll make your own unfortunate decsendants weep too.

    Wound my heart with a monotonous langour – the playground tit-for-tat drivel being spouted by some on here trying to score a few points for an industry which should just lay down and die – clutch at your straws – then sink asap pls… for all our sakes (and your won children’s).

  6. Greenpeace and the Guardian to inform about a global industry, Dave?

    Thanks for showing how true my post was. Couldn’t have put it any better myself. Try putting the telescope to the other eye.

    Maybe you will then be able to explain how producing oil and gas locally is more destructive of the planet than producing the other side of the world and transporting it, and thereby reducing our ability to invest in other things (the transfer of tax income)? That is the reality, not the fantasy you wish to exist.

    Cold snap on the way. The current reality in the UK means that will produce unnecessary deaths amongst those in fuel poverty. Perhaps expand your reading a little further and you will find laying down and dying is a real consequence of some peoples fantasy.

  7. Yes, I do have a heavy heart when I do those things because if big oil and gas had turned it’s expertise towards developing clean energy decades ago, when it new about impending climate chaos, instead of focussing on squeezing out the last drops of a finite asset, we wouldn’t be in this mess. BP, Shell, ESSO, could all have still been market leaders controlling the energy market. Why you lemmings still support them in this unnecessary route is beyond me, but carry on – wheel out your jaded old chestnuts about cars and heating, I’m sure you’ve got your own private planet to live on and climate change won’t affect you. Humanity can move rapidly from oil and gas just as it did from steam, unless lazy ignorant individuals and corporations attempt to perpetuate a suicidal (ecocidal) system for the sake of profit that could have been made by doing the right thing. Change is inevitable and is happening, but not fast enough, but yet some cling onto the lie. Yeah – a very heavy heart. Those who try and point out the truth of the folly get assaulted, jailed, convicted, labelled as terrorists and endlessly, wastefully and intrusively surveilled by faceless ‘security forces’, merely for opposing the folly of corporate dictated government policy. Enjoy your work – I can’t.

    • Well, Dave, you have the opportunity to avoid the heavy heart and avoid oil and gas, in all it’s forms. It is possible, but whilst you are at it, maybe have a word with the antis driving around in their diesel BMWs to take pictures of protestors. Or those who have to utilise their plastic keyboards.

      Meanwhile, I will have a heavy heart around 5pm this evening when the locals fire up their “wood burners” and the whole area is smelling of burning plastic as they dispose of their household waste to save the planet. (Wood smoke smell starts around 7.30pm) Irony is, all local household waste is incinerated properly with correct filters upon emissions if it was placed correctly within their bins. But, not so beneficial for the dinner party conversation. Where is the EA when you need them? Hmm.

      • Ahh yes, more imaginary neighbours; gosh you must live in a very heavily populated area? Another half inch, ‘wood’ say?

        • Yes, for those of us in the real UK world, we have neighbours! Shock/horror. Which country is it that you live in where you have none, Sherwulfe? I suppose, even in the UK, there are still a few odd exceptions where a small number live removed from society and reality, apart from the power of the Internet, but I am a sociable sort of chap who sticks with the human “tribal” instinct. Mind you my parents had no neighbours for 1.5 miles in any direction, but they were still neighbours.

          Over 10k new houses planned within 10 mile radius of me over the next few years, so I will have a few more-most with their gas boilers in their new houses and two vehicles on the drive (garages? no, take up too much space) but not to worry a few more added “wood” burners and that should sort the plastic! LOL. Oh, forgot to mention, there is a new business within 300 metres that just fits wood burners-doing a “roaring” business. Mr. Gove needs to accelerate the tree planting-if he can find space to fit them.

  8. Dr Dave, I assume you have already seen this, but just in case:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/03/uk-power-stations-electricity-output-lowest-1994-renewables-record

    “Green energy was boosted primarily by new windfarms connecting to the grid, as well as new biomass plants, which included the conversion of a coal unit at Drax power station in north Yorkshire and the conversion of a former coal plant at Lynemouth, Northumberland.

    Meanwhile the coal-driven output was down 25% despite warnings of a coal comeback driven by high gas prices. Nuclear power also had a weak year, with generation down 8%, mainly due to ageing reactors being taken offline for safety checks. Gas remained the top source of electricity supplies, but fell 4%.”

    The Guardian / Government continues to state that Drax type biomass is renewable and okay. Others disagree. Either way electricity demand is going down which is a good thing, and we have gas to replace coal which is also good. If demand had not dropped more gas would have been used…..

  9. Yes, Paul, I read the same report, but elsewhere. Biggest problem I could see was that electricity demand was dropping basically because of a decline in industry. This was reinforced during Beast from the East where remaining heavy users were asked to reduce electrical consumption. Not sure that is a good sign.

    • uh oh, gas fell by 4%…

      Read the report again MC, no big lean towards decline in industry, just more efficient use and less consumed due to price.

      ‘This was reinforced during Beast from the East where remaining heavy users were asked to reduce electrical consumption’? – link please

      • Really?

        You missed the bit about “Electricity generation has reduced thanks to VARIOUS factors, including more energy efficient appliances AND a shift away from energy-intensive industry towards high-value manufacturing and services.”

        Strange one, that the media generally misreported as well. Wonder why? Could it be that some want to misrepresent for their own motives?

        Heaven forbid, that would not be the case surely? Oh yes it would.

        [Typo edited at poster’s request]

        • Yes, but not because of ‘because of a decline in industry’….stop making it up Marty, you are not good enough 😉

Add a comment

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.