Results from the latest government survey on fracking shows that public opposition has risen to its highest level so far and support dropped to a record low.
The quarterly Wave tracker survey indicates that opponents regard fracking as a risky or unsafe process and are concerned about earthquakes and the impact on climate change.
The survey was conducted in March 2019 at a time when the shale gas industry was calling for a relaxation of regulations on fracking-induced earth tremors. There were also continuing discussions about government proposals to make non-fracking shale gas schemes permitted development, avoiding the formal planning process.
Opposition
According to the latest results, 40% of participants opposed fracking, up from 35% in the most recent survey conducted in December 2018, and up from 21% in December 2013.
This survey saw the largest increase in opposition since it was first carried out and the third consecutive rise in opposition.
Strong opposition was also at record levels, up to 16%, compared with 13% in the previous survey.
Who opposes fracking?
As in previous surveys, the results found that opposition was higher among people who knew more about fracking.
Among people who said they knew a lot or a little about fracking, 16% of people said they supported the process and 56% said they opposed.
Opposition to fracking was highest in north-west England (50%), Wales (49%) and Scotland (49%). It was lowest in London (30%), east England (31%) and the west midlands (32%).
Why do people oppose fracking?
The main reasons why people opposed fracking were:
- Loss or destruction of natural environment 57%, (down from 62%)
- Risk of earthquakes 45% (up from 40% after a previous rise from 26%)
- Risk of contamination to water supply 23% (up slightly from 22%)
- Too much risk/uncertainty 26% (up from 20%)
- Not a safe process 29% (up from 24%)
- Use of chemicals (up/down from 15%)
Support for fracking
Support for fracking fell to 12% of participants, down slightly on 13% in the previous survey. This is the lowest level recorded by the survey so far and is 17 percentage points below the peak in March 2014.
Strong support for fracking remained unchanged at 2%.
The gap between support and opposition is now at its biggest so far. The 28% difference increased six percentage points from the previous survey and passed the previous high of 23% reached in September 2017.
Why do people support fracking?
The main reasons people gave for supporting fracking were:
- Need to use all available energy sources 35% (up from 34%)
- Reduces dependence on other fossil fuels 33% (up from 26%)
- Reduces dependence on other countries for UK energy 26% (up from 25%)
- May result in cheaper energy bills (unchanged on the previous survey)
- Positive impact on the UK economy 17% (down from 19%)
Neither support nor oppose
45% of participants neither supported nor opposed fracking. This was 2% down on the previous survey and the lowest figure since December 2015.
3% said they did not know whether they supported or opposed, down one point on the previous survey.
The survey found that 77% of people who knew less about fracking said they neither support nor opposed it. Among this group, support was 6% and opposition was 17%.
Awareness
78% of participants were aware of fracking for shale gas. This was unchanged on the previous survey.
13% said they knew a lot about fracking (up 2 points from the previous survey). 45% said they knew a little and 19% were aware. 22% said they had never heard of fracking, unchanged on the previous survey.
According to the findings, awareness of fracking was higher among:
- Men (82%, compared with 73% of women)
- People aged 55+ (91%, compared with 58% of those aged 16-24)
- Social grade AB (90%, compared with 64% of respondents in social grades DE)
Reaction
Friends of the Earth clean energy campaigner, Jamie Peters, said:
“With support for fracking at all all-time low and overwhelming public concern about climate change, it’s time to pull the plug on this destructive, unnecessary and unwanted industry.
“Ministers must listen to the mounting scientific evidence on climate change, huge backing for renewable energy, and growing demand for tougher action.
“This means abandoning support for climate-wrecking fracking and fossil fuels and instead championing energy saving and power from the wind, waves and sun. This is what the science requires and the public demand. It’s time to stop dithering and get on with it.”
Daniel Carey-Dawes, Infrastructure Policy Manager at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said
“Not only does the government’s own survey demonstrate that public opposition to fracking has reached an all-time high, but support for this fossil fuel industry has also dropped to a record low.
“Almost one year later, the government has yet to respond to its consultation over plans to fast-track fracking, which would remove the voices of local communities in decisions over fracking proposals in their area. What further evidence does the government need in order to drop these proposals?
“At a time when the warnings about the severity of climate breakdown and the urgent need for decarbonisation are becoming more and more stark, it is beyond belief that the government continues to doggedly pursue their fracking agenda in defiance of public opinion.”
A spokesperson for Frack Free Lancashire said:
“The results are indicative of the battle the shale gas industry has faced since appearing in communities where they are not wanted. The long-term trends are clear: fracking is continuously and increasingly failing to win the support of communities, in spite of the intensive green-washing efforts by the industry.
“Support for renewable energy remains high, with 84% of respondents polled expressing support, and with strong support surging from 30% to 37%.
“With the damning report by the IPCC released last month, urgent global action to decarbonise is now needed. This also means there is no need or room for a new dirty fossil fuel industry like fracking.
“We require urgent political action on climate change and investment on clean energy sources if we are to mitigate the impending impacts of climate change.”
Methodology
The fieldwork was carried out for the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy from 13-24 March 2019 using the Kantar TNS Omnibus. The results of the Wave 29 tracker were based on face-to-face home interviews with a representative sample of 4,224 households in the UK.
The survey dropped a question on attitudes to fracking in July 2018 but reinstated it in September 2018.
Categories: Research
DRILL OR DROP? 
Gov can’t support Fracking whilst talking about the effects of pollution!
Be interesting to see how that opposition holds in the light of ever increasing price rises for gas & electric its one thing being green as you call it but not everybody can afford to be.
Ever increasing? Really?
My green electric domestic tariff just went down and gas futures are trending down too – see https://www.erce.energy/graph/uk-natural-gas-futures-curve
Yep, and my tariff with Octopus Energy has gone down twice since last October. It seems that the “ever increasing price rises” are due to the major energy suppliers behaving like a cartel.
A report today says the government need to spend £1 billion EVERY year to combat the results of rising tides and flooding. They admit some people will have to be moved.
We cant’t afford NOT to stop burning fossil fuels.
How will we pump the water away when the defences are still not 100% then Pauline, and the electricity lines are washed away?
Looking at the “climate change” filming from around the world it seems that good old fossil fuel is still the answer and why deaths from natural disasters are now a small fraction of what they were.
As more homes become insulated energy bills go down. Simples.
The majority STILL not against fracking!
Pretty decent result after years of being unable to show the benefit side of the equation. If they get to that stage a lot will really know about fracking and view the whole picture. (How can you “know” a lot about fracking but have no economics (UK) to go on?)
You OK hun?
Yes thanks, reaction.
Just been reading the recent nonsense on the IOW! So much fake news around one subject. All becoming rather obvious now.
Even Jack may have seen the figure from the SMMT that shows fewer than 25k zero-emission car sales in a 2.5 million market, and can do the sums on that one as well! You could make it plus one, reaction, but the basic sums would stay the same. (Did you take advantage of the current Sainsburys offer I advised to top up with diesel, as well? Still running!)
They don’t count no show vote, abstentions or spoilt ballots in an election. If they did we probably wouldn’t have Brexit.
Martin, the gap between the don’t support/oppose fracking and those that oppose is closing and if you read the survey most of those sat on the fence have limited knowledge about fracking but it also says the more people learn about fracking the more likely they are to oppose it. So that follows that once they do become informed the majority of them will oppose fracking. But until we have the facts no one can say. Likewise you cannot claim the majority don’t oppose fracking. No opinion is no opinion. No matter how many times you repeat your claim it does not make it accurate or correct. Perhaps sometimes you should just accept the facts even when you don’t like them. And it is very telling that opposition in the North West at 50% is the highest, the only area to have experienced two shale wells fracked.
Those that oppose it have limited knowledge too KatT! So it does not follow at all. More fake news.
No opinion means you neither support or oppose, which also means you are not against. You can not just wipe out that group KatT. No other Market Research into anything does that. You may try and position this subject as totally different, but it is not.
For a subject that has no real financial benefits to demonstrate to the public, as yet, the results are perfectly normal.
Your very telling is not that, it is simply Nimbyism. Not very telling, just bog standard. Think you might find that 50% would move quite quickly downwards if/when benefits were added to the calculation.
By the way, they have not experienced two shale wells fracked-yet. You missed out the attempted.
“For a subject that has no real financial benefits to demonstrate to the public, as yet, the results are perfectly normal.”
Oh really – let’s have several concrete examples from you about industries that have nearly 4 times as many opposed as supporting because they haven’t been able to demonstrate a positive case then Martina. I mean you say this is normal. Prove it.
I think you will find they have fracked wells at Preese Hall and at PNR Martian. Not very well in either case but do keep up.
Ahhhh! As you have great experience in Stimulating / Fraccing John.
Im sure you see if regulating so tightly an industry where it struggles, ship building, steel works, coal industry!
What is it you have experience in again, career protesting?
What has your contribution been except for a drain on the public purse… please post your tax return.
Calm down Eli – you’ll find that it helps when it comes to posting in comprehensible English. My tax returns are my own affair and totally irrelevant to the point under discussion but I can assure you that I have paid my fair share of income tax over the years. Maybe that’s because I am not, as you rant, a “career protester” but a professional businessman who can analyse and evaluate from a commercial perspective.
I’m sure Martian can speak for himself without needing you to act as a shield for him by posting irrelevant drivel. He normally does and at great great length. Maybe his silence here is because he doesn’t have an answer? He’s probably frantically wondering how to weave a diesel BMW into his response. 😂
“My tax returns are my own affair!”
So are Sir Jims.
Oops. Seems to be some double standards showing within the fold-again!
There, reaction. I spoke for myself. Perhaps not what you wanted me to “speak” but, if you present the open goal I am happy to boot the ball. I may even achieve a narrow margin of 7-0 shortly!
No double standards Martian – Monaco Jim’s tax return is his own affair but the place he is domiciled in for tax purposes is public knowledge and open to criticism. I pay my substantial tax due in the UK. Still no substantive answer from you there I see.
Yes, double standards. So does Sir Jim pay taxes due in UK, and any taxes due in any other countries. Where he wants to call his home within his global business is up to him. He has long owned houses around the world. What has changed is the possibility that some countries may look to penalise him in the future if he did not take precautions. He is not alone in that and recent records would show he is a late developer in making the necessary plans to avoid that.
But just think of all that tax he could be paying if he was fracking in UK rather than paying tax to USA for fracking over there! So, maybe even more than double standards.
So why do you imagine Monaco Jim and his acolytes are moving to the Riviera Martina? I’ll look forward to your convoluted attempt to say it’s not to reduce the tax they pay in the UK.
My suggested answer to your question is in my post of 8.57pm, reaction. Must have “crossed” with yours of 10.14pm. LOL
Perhaps your new energy deal is creating some sort of time vortex amongst your electronics?
But, to try and break the (INEOS) cycle, perhaps think Marx Bros.?
So Martian you are seriously trying to suggest that Monaco Jim will pay the same tax to the UK from the French Riviera or are you just ignoring the question? And as a follow up if you manage to answer for once, how much VAT did UK PLC lose when he moved INEOS to Rolle in Swtitzerland for a few years?
The guy has a net worth > £20 billion – honestly, why does he care if he pays a bit more tax to the country that nurtured him.
Here you go – “In February, the Sunday Times reported that Ratcliffe, 66, was examining ways to structure his fortune to save as much as 4 billion pounds in taxes, including possibly moving to Monaco.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/richest-brits-gain-28-billion-since-brexit-even-as-economy-ails?fbclid=IwAR1qvkojluFZcLCpl1NIV6zqtMf6qOIFWPRcElvf-b7PiILyCc_XUBYtuMs
4 billion pounds! That would pay for a lot of nurses who could have been looking after you Martian!
No they have not fracked wells fully at either of those locations. You also missed out the attempted. We all know that reaction-it is quite clear to anyone. So, whatever point you are trying to make I do not know-other than try and excite a few. Meanwhile, we have antis who constantly speculate about the economics of UK fracking simply because of the fact there is no data.
I have plenty of concrete examples of that being perfectly normal within a tracking of a potential product that is still awaiting trial results to show the economics. I have conducted several such studies, over time, myself. Many others will have done the same but you would not recognise them unless the product came to market which it would only do if the economics were determined and the group being interviewed showed they valued the economics produced!! Dohh.
There are plenty of text books out there reaction around marketing and market research for new products. Suspect there are more than a few Product Managers doing the exercise for thousands of new products currently. The difference is that most of those new products will not have the same limitations to demonstrating the economics, hence the timescale is a lot quicker. (Mind you, the person conducting the study for HS2 may be experiencing something quite similar!) Also, if you were looking at a product that required not only UK but EU authorisation, which is quite common, you would find that this situation is perfectly normal.
Might make you tearful, but reality sometimes does that. Checked the price of diesel recently?
LOL we cross posted – not much concrete evidence in that stream of waffle Martina – situation normal – but I was right about you desperately trying to distract by weaving in the diesel rubbish again. Predictable toi?
No, we didn’t cross post, reaction. What you mean is you did not research before you took advantage of Sir Jims plastic. Quite simple to do, the time of the posts shows that. (Too busy focusing upon Eli, you took your eye off the ball.) Becoming a bit of a habit that together with avoiding the actual issue being discussed. Wonder why?
Concrete evidence? Diesel rubbish? I even offered you the opportunity to reduce the cost of your error! If you believe it rubbish, don’t use it. Even I have moved that far! Meanwhile, you can try and erode the credibility of others but I suspect you need a stronger foundation. Something concrete, like a “zero emission” vehicle, whatever that might be!
Er you posted while I was typing an answer Martian. That’s cross posting. And your responses sound like very cross posting LOL. Calm down. As to avoiding the issue being discussed how about you stop doing that and provide some concrete examples . Oh sorry you don’t have any do you. My bad.
So, your post of 2 LINES was 4.41 and mine was 4.31 but you were still typing your post when I posted!
Oh really! Don’t think of writing a book, they would be extinct by the time it was completed.
You do seem a bit below par currently. Cross? No, observant (someone has to be)-quite different.
Re your attempt to press HS2 into your argument – “An ORB survey for The Sunday Telegraph found that 38 per cent of people oppose the scheme, compared to 26 per cent in favour”. That was in September 2018
In 2014 according to COMRES the numbers were 52/30 so opposition has fallen significantly with support remaining at a similar level (38/26) since then – totally unlike the fracking data where opposition has soared and support has absolutely tanked, and therefore nothing that you could use to “normalise” the fracking findings.
I do hope nobody is paying you for your “in-depth” analysis here Martian!
Soared and tanked! Well, my analyses shows that within all that soaring and tanking more than 50% are currently not against fracking, reaction! So, better add some more hyperbole, but it will not change the maths.! It simply magnifies the concerns of the antis. Perhaps there should be a traffic light system to control those concerns? Your comments are showing they are well into the red!
You are just showing yourself up now Martina. Come on – where are your numerous examples that show how normal this situation is as you claimed? I’ve already demonstrated that your first attempt to use HS2 is rubbish. Are you going to try again or have we reached peak Collywibble?
Still waiting for even one concrete example Martian. Have you given up then?
How desperate you sound, Martin, by ignoring the lowest support for fracking in history and instead pretend the ‘not sure’ vote is secretly in favour.
To paraphrase your comment, pretty dreadful result for the fracking industry and the government after years of trying to show the benefit side of the equation.
Except I didn’t Ellie. I said it is (OPENLY) not against. So, maybe I don’t sound so desperate to those who carefully read what I have posted.
Seems that fake is the new anti fall back. Shame it corresponds to a wider understanding of fake news amongst the population, especially the young. Many are even receiving lessons about spotting it (except those avoiding schooling.) But, keep it going, the more it is done the clearer it becomes. As I mentioned to reaction, it seems it has boarded the ferry to the IOW now as well.
My own category Dork. is that I strongly support that fracking be properly tested in the UK-as I have stated a number of times before. (I don’t have enough information yet to decide what you think I have decided, which is why I support the proper testing.) Again somewhat different from what you state, but hey ho, why not join in the fakery? But, then, as no fracking being done or tested in the Weald, or IOW, a separate issue. In the Weald I am interested if UK on shore oil can replace some of the US imported oil from US fracking-not because of the fracking but I see it as a better solution. Nimbys who may miss out on the 6% may see it differently, whilst the 6% does encourage others. Not there yet with fracking, but that may come into play elsewhere.
Some of us can actually distinguish between two situations, even when some try and conflate them.
The minority of protesters that Ratcliffe was talking about last week don’t exactly look to be the minority in these graphs. I think he even used the words “miniscule” and called us “ignorant”. It seems to me that Ratcliffe is the ignorant one for not realising the level of opposition to his toxic plans.
Except, A.D., mathematically the antis are the minority, and the protesters even more so. So, maybe he is not so ignorant, just determined. Suggest you check his business history. The clues are there.
Martian you need to have a little think about the huge difference between a large minority (40%) and a small minority (12%). You are just embarrassing yourself again.
No, I am not the one ignoring the third group, (slow) reaction. With your grasp of maths. and speed of communication, I hope you received a lot of good input as to how to run a business.
Nobody is ignoring the 3rd group Martian. It’s very simple. A slight majority either don’t know or don’t care. That has remained a constant throughout DECC / BEIS’ s wave polling since Wave 8 in 2013 when the questions were first asked.
Since then support fracking has plummeted from a high of 29% to this weeks 11% whiles opposition has risen remorselessly from 21% to 40%. I think even you should be able to understand what is going on there.
So we agree that the antis are a minority (as 40% is not a majority). We must also therefore agree that the pros are a much smaller minority at 11% so every time you take a swipe at the antis for being a minority you are in fact shooting yourself in the foot. Particularly as you belong to the 2% who “strongly support” fracking. 2%. Do you not realise that there are more people who “strongly oppose” fracking than support it in total? FACT.
Thank you for you concern about my business. I did receive a lot of good input about how to run it and I listened which is why I was relatively successful. You should try that sometime.
Looks like Government policy is working perfectly!
This quarter has historically been the best for the industry because of the winter months. They think its all over it is now
Ha! Nice attempt to spin it Martin, I see your own category, “Strongly support” is rather niche at 2% 🙂
Interesting how “Risk of earthquakes” is a strongly rising reason to oppose shale extraction. Shame your lot can’t seem to avoid drilling through faults isn’t it?
Here in the Weald of course targeting them is the modus operandi, it’s the only place the oil flows. The downside is the potential for earthquakes and contamination.
Apart from support for Lib Dems , Greens and Independents , opposition to Fracking is about the only thing to rise during Tory government , oh sorry did I forget poverty and foodbanks ?
You forgot wages too, Jono! And levels of employment! And numbers of households with someone earning! And numbers of children in good schools! And money for the NHS! etc. etc.
I think you need to have that forgetfulness checked out.
😂
Jono: 13 years of labour government started the down fall, Blair and Brown causes the financial crash, reduced regulation on the banks… the conservatives started north sea oil and gas exploration, which has produced over £500 billion in treasury receipts.
What have the lib dems, greens ever done??
‘£500 billion in treasury receipts’
A pity that in 2011 George Osbourne decided to massively increase taxation of the North sea industry and force it to cut jobs and exploration.
2011 was around the time that onshore shale gas tried to emerge. There is no connection between George Osbourne and the UK shale gas industry is there?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/mar/27/fuel-duty-windfall-tax-chancellor
Even the Tories oppose fracking now, they just can’t admit it in public. They’re just hoping it dies on its own.
Ellie: evidence? We need evidence!
No wonder Ms Engels did a runner. She presumably had sight of these results. Part if her job was to try and convince the general public that fracking (generic term used by industry and her – even if it does not actually meet the revised definition) is needed and that it is safe.
She failed miserably, I am pleased to say. The government is currently in turmoil and fortunately it’s support for this industry appears to be less than lukewarm at best.
Last few nails. All bad PR for the industry.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/08/we-are-hammering-the-last-nail-in-the-coffin-of-the-fracking-industry