Picture post: Hundreds attend ‘Fracking in Lancashire’ event

190209 Ribby Hall gv Refracktion1

Living with Fracking event at Ribby Hall, near Blackpool, 9 February 2019. Photo: Refracktion.com

An estimated 350 people attended an event near Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road shale gas site to discuss the impacts of fracking on residents.

The capacity audience, at Ribby Hall holiday village near Blackpool, heard from the Texan former oil and gas worker, Sharon Wilson, who now works for the US environmental group, Earthworks. She described the loss of water and air quality in her community.  She said fracked gas was not a bridge fuel to a low carbon economy.

There were also presentations from Dr Tim Thornton, a retired GP from Ryedale, where Third Energy wanted to frack but has not yet had permission, and David Smythe, Emeritus Professor of Geophysics at University of Glasgow.

Professor Smythe said he had identified the critical Wakepark Fault, from a 3D geological survey, which had been missing in Cuadrilla’s documentation. But he said the regulator, the Oil & Gas Authority had withheld the survey, at the request of Cuadrilla, and the report was released only following legal action.

Dr Thornton said disadvantaged and young people who live near shale gas sites were at great risk because, he said, the government did not intend to carry out baseline or ongoing monitoring  of the health impacts of residents.

There were additional presentations from local anti-fracking campaigners, Susan Holliday, chair of the Preston New Road Action Group, Barbara Richardson, of Roseacre Awareness Group, and Maureen Mills, of the Moss Alliance.

“Ministerial intention and action are two separate things”

The event’s organisers, Concerned Residents of Lancashire, said:

“It was highly beneficial and excellent timing to hold an event of this nature.

“From what we have heard and experienced so far, it seems as though ministerial intention and ministerial action are two very separate things: the climate crisis will not be solved by the introduction of a new and dirty fossil fuel industry.

“We can’t have daily reports of climate breakdown and an air pollution crisis, and carry on with fracking, regardless.

“Our health and community safety must be paramount.”



112 replies »

      • The people who signed the letter are amongst the most knowledgeable people in the world on this subject – you could learn a lot from them. Also, from what I read they called for the TLS to be reviewed – are you objecting to people examining new data?

        • Judith, that’s such a sweeping statememt, and what evidence do you have that those hundreds of people aren’t informed???? perhaps you have a vested interest like many pro frackers who just seam to focus on the economic value (which isn’t proving very successful haha!) instead of the bigger picture and being more responsible and respectful to our environment.

          • The fact that they attended the event in the first place when they knew who the speakers were would suggest they we’re too well informed. I don’t think people who have a deep understanding of this subject would waste their time. I have no vested interests in fracking and I believe that shale gas can work alongside renewable energy sources to dramatically reduce GHG emissions.

    • Well THIS is an interesting Twitter thread isn’t it Green Judth

      The truth will out eh?

      • Thank you Refracktion, an excellent report and thanks to Sam Knights too, (another Knight, but lives in UK) as you say, the truth will out.

      • Would these be the same group who are so expert reaction, that they help extract the oil that is made into diesel that powers your 3 litre to enable you to drive around complaining to various locations about the evils of fossil fuel and in between type away at your plastic keyboard ?

        Yep, they have a lot to answer for.

        How is someone, or even 40 “very often semi retired”? Maybe why I don’t read Twitter.

      • Why does Sam Knights point the fact of skin colour & gender? Also, the age cohort is significant, not a matter for discrediting those on the the list, but reflecting their long experience & therefore knowledge. What qualifications has Sam Knight anyway to make any call in he has?

        • Refracktion. I agree the pro-frackers sound a bit prickly. At the meeting, Sharon Wilson, a fifth generation Texan who worked in the oil and gas industry for many years, as her whole family had for generations, made a very telling remark. She said the industry have a “great sense of entitlement.”
          It shines through in the pros posts here.

    • Ronin – the sad part is that you don’t even know what well-informed is with relation to this subject. The people who signed the letter have over 1000 years of experience doing this as their day job unlike the people presenting at the meeting.

      • And every one of those 350 people would compare what they were told with your content and attitude here and on Facebook and deduce (quite rightly) that the industry is arrogant, dismissive and doesn’t give a damn about them.

      • Hhmmmmm I wonder what assessments the good readers of DoD make about you on the basis of you postings on here and on Faceache Judith.

      • Has anyone noticed a significant absence in the published signatory list?

        In case you missed it, here is the Drill or Drop report on that absence: (apologies for the copy and paste Ruth and Paul)

        “The signatories did not include the three authors of a government-commissioned study which recommended the 0.5ML threshold in 2012.”

        “Green, Baptie and Styles based their argument for 0.5ML on what happened at Preese Hall. There, a tremor of 2.3ML was felt across the area and led to deformation of the well casing.”

        – I assume that “Green” was a reference to posts here as that name does not appear in the original report, of January 22, 2019 nor in the list of signatories as published by Drill or Drop on February 10, 2019. – Or are we missing something?

        “Had the threshold been set at 1.7ML, which Cuadrilla consultants had proposed at the time, there would not have been a pause in fracking before the 2.3ML earth tremor happened. (More details)”

        “Dr Baptie has since said that he thinks the 0.5ML limit could be increased with little risk to people. But Professor Styles told DrillOrDrop in response to Ineos comments last week:

        “The 0.5 limit isn’t where anyone believes there will be damage or even disturbance.

        “It is the point where we think we have a transition between fracking-related micro-earthquakes and the onset of stimulation of natural fractures which can move and generate seismic events which may be much larger depending on the scale of the fault and the associated geology.”

        “He also said he and his co-authors recommended what he called “ a more nuanced traffic light system” than the one adopted by the government.”

        Just thought it was worth pointing out, perhaps Ruth the “Green” reference could be explained just for clarity?

        • Apologies, Phil – Green refers to the third author of the DECC report into Preese Hall. Dr Christopher Green worked for a company called G-Frac (also apparently known as E-Frac and the report cover suggests he dealt with the hydraulic fracturing sections while Styles and Baptie dealt with seismic issues.

          • Thanks Paul for clearing that up.
            Its interesting isn’t it that Dr Christopher Green of G-Frac/E-Frac also did not sign the letter?
            I will leave the readers to draw their own conclusions on that.

  1. The people who set these gold standards now want to change them ,they don’t live here they don’t care about the people at Roseacre who wait with baited breath to get the result about their village I believe they hanging on to the results so IF the levels are raised they destroy another beautiful village with three very profitable farm which will be ruined plus the de value of their property which we have personally experienced From Marie Taylor

  2. Perhaps a letter could be generated from the antis?

    We could have it signed by an “engineer” who has a blind spot between red diesel and vegetable oil, together with another expert who comments upon corporate governance without knowing which corporation he refers to, an economic expert who refers to loads of cheap gas and oil sloshing around the world, others who believe emergency services should be called upon without verifying whether they were needed. There are plenty more who could add their “weight of experience”.

    However, I suspect the likelihood of it being published within a main stream publication is somewhat remote.

        • Personally I think he is an anti fracking double agent as no one could actually do such a poor job of promoting the industry as Marty McFly, or could they?!

          • “Personally, I think”-ah, you are into the oxymorons now Pavlova. Hardly new, but entertaining.

            I do wonder however, if 49/50 experts in their field are to be dismissed, why not dismiss all the climate change experts? They all receive income from the industries they work with.

            A continuing weakness amongst the antis-they get so carried away with a particular line of irrational thought they ignore where it takes them.

      • No, I do not claim to be an expert, Crembrule-but I do tend to like to have experts supplying information, as I prefer to improve my level of knowledge.
        “Alternatively” I could rely upon two who are ashamed of their real identity and refuse to put their credentials up there for inspection-other than one has only experienced closed meetings and another who wants to be subsidised.

        Nah, I think I will go with those who come out of the shadows and put their experience out there that is of value to the discussion.

        Old fashioned, I know.

        • Whoops! Someone’s getting desperate! Franticly fiddling around for that discredited grubby worn out little list again. Collywobbling about trying ineffectually to score a point…any point?

          But of course, there is no point to it is there boys and girls? There never was…..and never will be.

          Awww shame.

          The old dead weasel red diesel wheeze again eh? Quite well known of course, but do we have to do this all over again for the umpteenth time? Apparently yes, that old Martian noggin must be furring up again.


          There, but will that stop it trotting out the same old nonsense? We doubt it dont we boys and girls?

          Any moment now it’ll be that other totally discredited Oopsie Martian discredited wheeze, the French fiction novelist and “The End Of Foggy” Philae’s Fogg next and various imaginary Fog Fixated companions, but that is just as much smelly badger doo doo as everything else that emerges from that particular orifice isnt it?

          Oh yes it is!

          Pity Pointless Paunch the Petty Purveyor of Pathological Poultry Poo!

          Or not, as the case may be.

          This was fun….

        • What do you mean are not an expert? You talk a good game.

          Oh hang on no you don’t.

          You claim to rely on expert knowledge yet are regularly found to take an uninformed position purely for arguments sake. When asked to provide evidence or proof to back up your flaccid claims you come out with nonsense about DYOR or how your are not here to provide links.

          [ edited by moderator ]

          • So, you didn’t follow up my reference to Rainer Zitelmann yesterday?

            As you didn’t, then to yourself, it is an uniformed position. For those who did, they are now informed.

            Sorry, old fruit, I can lead a horse to water etc.etc.

            • I did Martine, it was all Nazis and the money grabbing at the expense of other Which one of his fields of interest best matches your outlook Martian or is it both?

            • Oh the one that was being discussed, Pavlova-attitudes to filthy rich, by country, and the recent detailed survey . Science against opinion-and all that stuff.

              I know it is so difficult to actually look at context, but if you want to, Dr. Zitelmann’s book Society and the Rich, will be published in English this year. Then you can “drink” it all in-but get your order in quickly as JC will be trying to remove all the stocks from circulation to prevent others becoming informed. Jono may also have an order in as the question imagining a millionaire losing a fortune showed the British were inclined to be sympathetic!

              Tends to indicate that some messages on here may excite a minority but the majority are not sympathetic.

              Ever thus.

            • I’ll give it miss thanks Marty, not my cup of tea I am afraid.

              You never did say which of his fields of study you were keen on was it the Nazis were bad but Hitler had some good ideas schtick or the Gordon Geckoesque Greed is Good mantra?

            • No you didn’t
              though did you Foggy, you mentioned why you thought an unrelated German authors work was relevant to a previous discussion, which it obviously isn’t because you had already veered off on a typical MC tangent from the original point in question. However you never actually said why his work resonates with you.

            • Oh yes I did, Pavlova. You couldn’t understand the reference-which is something else altogether.

              However, if that was too difficult, how about the parody version, also published:

              (John to Jeremy)

              “There was a survey in the paper. British people are less hostile to the rich than French people or Germans or even Americans. In fact, they’re hardly hostile to them at all.”

              So, lucre may not be so filthy.

              Taken a little sip of water now?


  3. I actually read that nonsense PhilC.

    Of course no one realises and remembers that your claim was red diesel was red to prevent it being confused with vegetable oil??? Nothing to do with the possibility that some vehicles could be converted to run on vegetable oil. A different issue altogether.

    Now, I do not claim to be an engineer, but I used to employ them and if I conducted an interview alongside my engineering manager and we were presented with that it would have ended pretty quickly.

    I know it is embarrassing, but there you go. Wriggle away, try the smoke/fog screen, post the usual ramble, but we know what that signals now. Safer to stick to the fog-reality seems to be a difficult area.

    Oh, just a reminder. It is red to stop it being used illegally outside of its target market, and thereby costing HMRC revenue.

    • Whoops! Manners darling!

      Still franticly wriggling in your own drivel Martian?


      How hilarious!

      Too late, buddy, wriggle and struggle away, you have hooked yourself on your own barby as per usual.

      That miserable rubbish is utter bilge, just as it always was and always will be.

      Sorry old thing its utterly discredited.


  4. Dr Nick Riley. I don’t think you should be insinuating any racism or ageism in Sam Knight’s comment. I took Sam Knight’s reference to “white men, who are often semi- retired” to mean that, in the first instance, the consequences of climate change will be far more severe on the low lying areas of the world where land will disappear and extreme weather will,cause droughts, floods and crop failures. These are predominately the areas inhabited by of people of colour. In some instances this is already happening but the effects will be far worse in the future if we don’t start to take climate change seriously. Older people may be gone before the full extent of man’s folly becomes apparent.

    • Pauline, to me it was clearly an attempt by Mr Knights to undermine the validity & expertise of the signatories in an underhand way. Mr Knights has zero qualifications it appears (from his Twitter site) about geoscience, or energy issues, which meant he had to resort to prejudicial remarks about gender, race & age as a cheap slur (I am one he has targeted) , because he is not able to judge the technical ability, experience & qualifications of the people who signed the letter. As regard sea level rise, that is definitely going to affect every maritime region, worldwide, whoever lives, works & or farms there, of whatever race, culture etc. It is possible to decarbonise fossil fuels, and is especially easy for gas. It needs the political will & international leadership to do this. So far that will is not there, unfortunately, even with respect to present government. I have been critical of governments for many years for not getting on with decarbonising fossil fuels (I have been involved in Carbon Capture & Storage for 2 decades now – in both policy & technology). I also made the issue of ocean acidification (due to CO2 dissolving in the sea) prominent to policymakers, way before it became mainstream in the media (similarly with plastic & it’s fate in the sea, especially microplastic particles in sediments). Gas is definitely a bridging fuel to a sustainable future, as a source of hydrogen & electricity, and works well with renewables, not against them. Since the UK is now looking like it will lose its nuclear generating capacity, gas is even more important. Electricity is going be in much more demand as the transport sector is going to be electrified. There will be massive changes on our roads over the next 20 years, as electric cars become common. Where is all the electricity going to come from? The Fylde is well placed geologically and in terms of energy infrastructure & geography to pull through that transition from fossil fuels (gas) through to renewables. But it will only happen if people see energy in a joined up & creative, pragmatic , collaborative way & government deals with market failures that prevent us getting there.

    • If that was what he was attempting Pauline, it was very clumsy.

      Has he not heard of Holland?

      People are people. Use of gender, age, colour or religion looks like an attempt to add some rather unfortunate prejudice.

      • Martin and Nick. I can only say how I understood Mr Knight’s post. You are free to read what you like into it. Maybe we should ask Mr Knight if he intended any ageist, racist or gender based slur on the contributors. As far as “cheap slurs” are concerned, pro frackers are not averse to hurling those and generalisations towards anyone who is anti fracking, myself included.

        • Pauline, I answered you with respect. Putting Mr Knights’ tweet to one side, what about the other content in my reply to you?

  5. Upcoming Brexit means the uk will need as much farmland as possible to keep citizens fed as the ridiculous scenario is played out!
    Hopefully our fishermen will be able to help out, if there are any left.

    • Solar and wind take up far more land than a well head ever will. In terms of fishing, the government could really help the North Sea recover its fishing stocks by keeping much of the oil and gas infrastructure in place.

      • Yes, Judith. My local solar farm has been placed on what was agricultural land, (99 year lease) and having obtained the foot in the door, the first housing development is being built next door on some more of the same agricultural land. The traffic lights were out on the main road last week whilst the gas main was connected!

        Another housing development is just completing its show house, and it has already placed a couple of solar panels on the roof. Unfortunately, they are pointed in the wrong direction!

        • Photovolatic (PV) solar with current technology is not well suited to our weather & latitude. The UK Government’s own statistics show that for solar PV average load factors in the UK are only @ 10%. So taking the UK as whole, a panel rated as capable of generating 1KWh of electricity, on average, only delivers @ 100Whr.

Leave a Reply to Martin Collyer Cancel 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 )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s