Anti-fracking protest blocks Manchester supply company

190415 Mantank Manchester protest2

Lock-on protest outside Mantank Ltd in Greater Manchester, 15 April 2019. Photo: Roz Aroo

Two campaigners locked themselves together in a protest outside an industrial cleaning company early this morning.

No vehicles have entered or left the premises of Mantank Ltd at Little Hulton in Greater Manchester. The company has reportedly supplied the IGas shale gas site at Misson in north Nottinghamshire.

The two activists, a man and a woman, issued a statement:

“We are trying to highlight the dangers of this industry and actively encourage contractors not to support this for health impacts and environmental reasons.

“We would like a public announcement from Mantank to say that they are stopping backing fracking as many other companies have done up and down the country.”

They also criticised the behaviour of Mantank drivers visiting the Misson site.

190415 Mantank Manchester protest

Lock-on protest outside Mantank Ltd, Greater Manchester, early on 15 April 2019. Photo: Used with the owner’s consent

At the time of writing, the protest was still underway.

A spokesperson for Greater Manchester Police said:

“Officers are there and engaging with protesters. They are facilitating a peaceful protest”.

The spokesperson later added:

“A man and a woman were been arrested on suspicion of aggravated trespassing.

“A 45-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of public order offences.”

DrillOrDrop asked Mantank to comment on the protest and the campaigners’ criticism. No one at the company was available.

65 replies »

  1. Gasman,
    All vehicles that enter a fracking site, unless they are gold standard monitors or one of the emergency services, are helping a fracking operation destroy the local environment and speed up climate destruction by extracting fossil fuels for combustion!
    Accordingly these businesses set themselves up for targeting by Peaceful Climate Protectors who have the right, stated in the High Court just recently, to demonstrate their opposition to Climate Destruction as they see fit!
    That simple enough for you to understand?

    • Pete Roberts: What is see is simply, you are currently using energy / electricity powered by Gas / Oil to power your PC and little knuckle board. Peaceful protesters?, Where are these may I ask you…. I don’t believe you in anyway have changed the way you reduce, reuse and recycle on a day to day basis for the good of the climate. Or am I missing something! What happens when these protesters Win?, if there is ever a small chance of that happening, THEN WHAT? Do we sit in a cave burning eco-friendly products to heat, cook and stay alive?

    • So Pete you have the right to demonstrate in anyway you think fit fit because you think you are right. But I totally disagree with you, do I have any rights? You’re just imposing your will by force. Very scary indeed.

  2. Once more [edited by moderator] prevent others going about their lawful business.

    Hopefully this comes within the scope of the injunction, and the [edited by moderator] are bankrupted for their actions.

    Nice move with the tank of water mantank, make it cold and plentiful in future

    • You need to keep up.
      The Court of Appeal supported the right to peaceful protest and it seems the Police now understand this too.
      The corporations spent thousands trying to crush peaceful, lawful protest and they lost – a good day for democracy and “taking back control” for the many who oppose the few greedy sociopaths who would suck the planet dry to buy another plastic yacht or a trip to the moon.

  3. NO MARTIN ,

    YOU did say “children” and in using the world “children” I thought it was my duty to set the record straight for JENNY … I would not want JENNY to mistakingly take your use of the word “children” to incorrectly assume that yours were still of school age .

    The numbers in the POLLS don’t lie MARTIN …Wherever fracking tries to pop up , ALL but a handful are strongly against it … Now please remind us again for the benefit of the readers, so that they can gauge the popularity of fracking…… How many signatures did Lancashire For Shale manage to muster up in support of Fracking ?????.

    APPROX 300

    With a population in Lancashire of approx 1.2 MILLION only 300 signatures…….. Looks like the cards are heavily stacked against you on this one MARTY…. I suggest a quiet and dignified retreat is in order.

    Leading economists agree ……. Fracking is a great plump PONZI scheme……… Don’t take my word for it Ladies and Gentlemen, just Google ……” Fracking Ponzi ” and read for yourselves.

    • Jackthelad- polls on issues like this are a total waste of time – there are probably less than 1000 people in the UK who understand the issues involved.

    • Err, YES Jack. I do still refer to my middle aged sons as children, as well. Your definition of school aged children may be yours, but I’m not convinced it is universal. Don’t worry, no one has noticed how you have to keep changing your position when challenged. Oops-yes they have.

      “ALL but a handful are strongly against it.” FAKE NEWS. Your own previous post shows that quite clearly is FAKE NEWS-unless there are two Jacks.

      So, Chevron buying into fracking and selling out of the N.Sea-probably to Sir Jim. Yep-looks like a real Giggle! Or, you can have a chat with Mr. Siluanov, Russia’s finance minister, who thinks there is the following dilemma:

      “What should we do with Opec: should we lose the market, which is being occupied by the Americans, or quit the deal?”

      Yep, all looks pretty much Ponzi!

      (Maybe they will have another go to knock out US production, which will benefit the consumers world wide, probably not work-again-and may end up causing long term damage to their reservoirs.)

      • MARTIN ,

        Your two adult ( middle aged ) children, like myself, will not be around to witness the REAL HORRORS of climate change.

        For clarity , it was important to make clear to JENNY, that your two children are in fact middle aged adults, as she may have been referring to children who are still at school. It is THAT generation who will suffer the devastating climate change effects, if we don’t, RIGHT NOW, tackle the route causes ,.

        • So, Jack, the scientists were wrong about the change in solar activity that could cause certain areas to cool dramatically over the next few decades?? Skating on the Thames I believe was mentioned!

          Strange how scientists can be so right and also so wrong. (Mind you, if one or two big volcanic eruptions, they will both be wrong.) Whichever it turns out to be, fossil fuel will be a big factor in continuing the trend of 98% fall in deaths caused by storms, droughts and floods in a century. Thank heavens for those bulldozers, helicopters, aid flown in, generators, chain saws, mobile hospitals ermm, mobilised, pumps, fire trucks etc. etc.

          What Jenny was referring to is Jenny’s responsibility. What she MAY have been referring to sounds like someone trying to speculate.

          • Hi Martin
            Interested in your figure of 98% fall in deaths from natural disasters. The only chart I found seemed to have a very mixed picture – if you compare the 1910s with the 2010’s, deaths appear to be up. It appears that floods and drought are the major causes of mass fatalities, and these vary from decade to decade.
            Note that extreme temperature (in orange) has appeared as a category in the 2000s and 2010s

            There’s more here:
            including a chart suggesting that the number of reported natural disasters has risen steeply since the 1960s (though lack of reporting earlier probably skews the figures)

            • Paul, your caveat regarding the definition of natural disaster is well made. I’m not sure what the definition is and I’ve heard it said that some terms are defined by each country individually with little uniformity which makes the figures very difficult to interpret. The inter-decade variability is especially striking, for example the number of droughts between 1920 & 1980. Makes you aware there’s a big difference between weather and climate even using 60 year time frames.

      • MARTIN ,

        THANK YOU for your opinion, regarding the ,Great American Fracking Ponzi …..

        YOU MAKE quite a sweeping statement there, referring to the information on Google as ” FAKE NEWS ” ………. I hope YOU are going to back that up with some evidence.

        OR ladies and gentleman, are we to accept that what MARTIN has said is just another wild ” off the cuff ” comment , backed up with SWEET NOTHING ???????

        • Just look up Elvis and chip shops Jack! You will find some comments, but little enlightenment about Elvis or chip shops!!

          In other words, Giggle will provide lots of comments, some informative, some not.

          DYOR is a bit wider than Giggle. Sorry to make life difficult-but it is, and individuals who look at DoD are usually intelligent enough to recognise that. Carry on treating them as if they are not if you feel that but I am afraid you will only appeal to a minority. Ohh, I see now!

          Perhaps the majority (even children) have actually looked upon the recent trends in Big Oil playing expensive catch up in the boom in USA from fracking, the fact that USA is shortly to surpass Saudi as the largest exporter of oil, that it has been able to cut $BILLIONS from strategic oil reserves, invest $ HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in new cleaner factories fuelled from the shale oil and gas, have OPEC and Russia struggling as to how to re-impose their cartel. There is a lot more. But, I think I have made my point. So, a Ponzi scheme doing all of that? Really?

          I can understand you not liking that reality but to simply deny the reality is very visibly desperate.

          But, have a word with Mr. Siluanov. I’m sure he would be cheered by Giggle (and yourself) telling him it is all a myth and he does not really need to waste $BILLIONS on trying to deal with it! Perhaps he is awaiting Sir Jim to place some £ BILLIONS back from the purchase of Chelsea FC? Nope. Don’t think either will be in his mind.

        • For your eyes only MARTIN ,

          May I present to you , the Great American Fracking Ponzi





          Even the US Fracking Industry has NO FAITH in what they are doing.


          MARTIN , who is going to be left to carry the can ( LONG TERM ) for clean up costs and on going mainatance of orphaned / abandoned wells ???????
          WHO also will pick the financial burden of these HUGE Billion Dollar fracking bankruptcies in the USA ??????

          ANY IDEAS ?????

          ANSWER ………. The good old American tax payer.

          Ladies and gentlemen , if they can’t make Fracking pay in a country with almost ZERO regulations ( USA ) ,

          How on earth is fracking ever going to pay in a country like the UK, with much stronger regulations on drilling and waste management ALL these regulations will cost the companies money , a LOT of money .

          • I find it difficult to believe that taking gas out of the ground near Blackpool and pumping it into the Gas grid (which runs less than a mile away from the site) cannot be done cheaper (and with a lower carbon footprint) than taking it out the ground in Qatar, cooling it to minus 160 degrees C, shipping it to the UK as LNG, and then bringing it back to normal temperature. A government minister did refer to “low carbon gas” the other day and I suspect Uk sourced natural gas could fit that description.

            By the way, is the USA really a country with no regulations, I’m no expert but I’ve always perceived it to be a country with a posse of lawyers ready to pounce on any injury caused by industrial neglect or mistake.

    • Fracking Ponzi,? Really? The USA is now the biggest oil producer in the world, having overtaken Saudi Arabia recently and an enormous gas producer with the vast majority of the increases being due to unconventional production. There are difficulties with gas production ( and indeed in parts of the Permian gas prices are actually negative – if only we had that problem in the Uk!). The difficulty in the US is mainly pipeline capacity, getting the gas to where it is needed, which wouldn’t of course be a problem in the UK, being so much smaller.

  4. Of course Jack, a TOTAL rebuild of Notre-Dame may be possible. Alternatively, one could wait, and wait, and wait etc. for Tesla to make a profit and make a contribution!! Ermm, I wonder which looks more like a Ponzi scheme?

  5. “Expert, texpert choking smokers, don’t you think the joker laughs at you (ho ho ho, hee hee hee, hah hah hah)”

  6. john Powney, I find it remarkable that you are so loyal to those who clearly, as shown by their own actions, have little thought for the air they breath, or the deaths their habit causes, or the land that is taken up not for growing food, but instead for lethal tobacco crops.

    • I find it remarkable that anyone with any common sense would think that fracking for oil and gas is the best way forward for energy security. An industry that pollutes the air we breathe, causes injury and death, and removes land from food or clean energy production.

      • Please note that the reduction in motorway lighting to “save energy” has led to a 90% increase in road deaths and injuries on those stretches alone. That’s “injury and death” isn’t it.

        Note also my post below regarding reductions in home heating by the poor especially in electrically heated rented accommodation. As Greenpeace have reported cold houses equal significant increases in winter death rate. As I’ve said before my “catastrophe” is that we will be congratulating ourselves on saving the planet while leaving the frail & elderly to free. I just doesn’t make sense. Energy policy must take account of environmental sensitivities but balanced with 24/7 reliability, cost, and security of supply.

      • John I find it remarkable that anyone with any common sense can think that weather dependent, intermittent renewables will come anywhere near meeting our energy needs on a freezing windless night in February. How do you propose to meet the gap?

        Just think, the National Grid has said we will need three times the current level of electricity supply to replace gas central heating, that’s 150gw compared to 50gw now; from where please. It’s a lot of very expensive low carbon heat pumps, batteries, wood chip burners or nuclear power stations.

  7. john Powney, America is not here. Nor is much of the evidence promoted by anti frac campaigners as reliable as you appear to accept. I am talking about here. You continue to avoid acknowledging that anti frac protesters in this country, who smoke, completely undermine their case. But as is typical, you will insist on having the last word. I have no more to say. I have no need to.

  8. You can’t save the planet at the expense of the poor.

    According to the fuel poverty report recently released by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, nearly 70% of UK households are heating their houses less than is required to meet the levels thought necessary to deliver comfort and health.

    The poorest households were under-consuming by the largest margin, and it is in this category that those most vulnerable to policy costs, the 2.2 million UK households using electric heating, are concentrated, particularly in rented accommodation.

    In other words a significant proportion of our heating bills go towards Green energy subsidies and its the poor who get the sharp end. Please read this Jeremy Corbin and think about the people you are supposed to be representing instead of just looking for the next opportunity for virtue signalling.

Leave a Reply to Jackthelad 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