Cuadrilla breached permit over venting unburned methane at Lancashire frack site

pnr 181102 Cuadrilla Resources

Gas flares at Cuadrilla’s fracking site at Preston New Road near Blackpool, 2 November 2018. Photo: Cuadrilla Resources

The Environment Agency has warned Cuadrilla over allowing climate-changing methane to vent into the atmosphere from the Preston New Road fracking site.

The company breached three conditions of its environmental permit and has been instructed to update its procedures.

The breaches emerged during an audit of flaring and gas management at the site near Blackpool during February and March 2019.

An estimated 2.7-6.8 tonnes of methane were sent unburned through the flare, the Environment Agency (EA) said.

The regulator concluded in a compliance assessment report released today:

  • Cuadrilla vented methane for reasons other than safety, against permit conditions
  • Cuadrilla failed to follow operational procedures for the flare
  • Cuadrilla failed to follow the permit condition on monitoring methane concentrations in the flare

The EA said the permit breaches did not represent a risk to people and had “minimal to no impact on the environment”.

But a local community group questioned whether similar failures could happen in future with more serious consequences.

190521 PNR CAR report EA

Extract from Environment Agency compliance assessment report for Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road fracking site

Cuadrilla has previously been warned about other minor breaches of its permit at Preston New Road:

These breaches covered issues including methane levels, monitoring frack fluid, waste management and surface water and site drainage.

Methane venting

The methane problems arose when gas levels from the fracked well were low, the EA said.

This followed the failure of the company to fully frack the stages of the well during October-December 2018.

Cuadrilla added nitrogen to help lift the methane to the surface of the well. But this reduced the concentration of methane to less than 40% and, on one occasion, down to 30%. This meant that the gas mixture, now including large amounts of inert nitrogen, would not burn in the flare.

The environmental permit for Preston New Road has a condition which states there should be “no venting except where necessary for safety purposes”. (permit condition 2.1.1)

The EA said:

“The flare register provided by the operator up until 31 December 2018 … shows that venting had occurred for reasons other than for safety purposes”.

It said unburned methane was recorded by the monitor at the site boundary. It gave as examples: 35 minutes on 14 January 2019 and 80 minutes on 20 January 2019.

The EA said there were four reports of methane above the external notification threshold of 7.1 parts per million (ppm) and two reports above the internal threshold of 5.0 ppm.

At the lower level, Cuadrilla should review onsite activities for the cause of the methane levels. The higher level should prompt a report to the regulators.

The EA said:

“We consider that the risk of incurring elevated levels of methane at the site boundary was reasonably foreseeable in these circumstances”.

It said Cuadrilla had not submitted an impact assessment or management plan with the permit application, or an assessment of appropriate measures to mitigate potential pollution.

Breaches of environmental permits are classified from 1-4, where 1 is the most serious and 4 the least. Methane venting at Preston New Road was classed as a category 3 breach.

The EA said:

“In respect of the … non-compliance you have been issued with a warning. At present we do not intend to take further enforcement action. This does not preclude us from taking additional enforcement action if further relevant information comes to light or offences continue.”

The company was told to provide the EA with an update on whether it wanted to apply to vary its permit condition on venting.

190114 methane monitoring ggs

Methane chart from GGS report on monitoring at Preston New Road shale gas site on behalf of Cuadrilla

Support fuel

Cuadrilla had propane on site at Preston New Road as a booster fuel for the flare when methane levels were low. But the EA said the company chose not to use it.

The procedures for operating the flare, as part of the permit, required:

“where sustained periods, but inadequate quantities of combustible well returns are encountered, the flares will be supported with supplemental fuel after five minutes” (condition 2.3.1 (a)

The EA said:

“Contrary to the approved procedure, the operator chose not to add the support fuel (propane) as this may have resulted in increased emission, there being a high probability that propane could also have been released unburnt.”

The breach was classed as a category 4 (least serious). The EA said Cuadrilla should review operational procedures to take account of high volumes of nitrogen in gas returns.

Flare monitoring

A third condition of the permit required the operator to carry out continuous methane concentration monitoring of the gas in the feed to the flare.

The EA said:

“The operator monitored at a frequency of 30-minute intervals instead of 10-minute intervals as stated by their procedure.” (permit condition 3.5.1 (a)

It added that there was no impact on human health, quality of life or the environment from the breach of the condition. It was classed as another category 4 breach.

The EA added:

“Operational procedures are required to be submitted to take account of any updated monitoring frequency.”

“Non-compliances are very worrying”

The EA said it had reviewed data at Preston New Road for other substances, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes, during the period of venting. UK air quality objectives had not been exceeded and there were no likely health impacts, it said.

But the Preston New Road Action Group, which has campaigned against Cuadrilla’s fracking operations, said this evening:

“For those of us who live close to the site to read about these non-compliances is very worrying. Methane has been released into the air we breathe and will also be exacerbating our climate change emergency.

“Approved procedures have not been correctly followed and the permit has been breached. How can we be certain that other failures like this will not happen again in the future, with far more serious consequences?

“This report shows that the amount of gas returning to the surface is pitiful, as they were only able to light the flare 6 times. Is it really worth all the problems it is causing? ”

“Most monitored site in Europe”

Nick Mace, permitting, planning and environmental manager at Cuadrilla, said the team continued to work closely with the Environment Agency in a proactive and transparent manner.

“We are fully committed to delivering our shale exploration operations in a safe and environmentally responsible way as a top priority and have amply demonstrated how we do this on a day to day basis. We publish a range of monitoring data each month online so people are able to hold us to account and be reassured about the high standards we have in place.

“The nitrogen lift relates to a standard oil and gas procedure which is performed by operators throughout the world. The impact of the non-compliance is considered minor, with minimal to no impact on the environment. The resulting emissions did not represent a risk to people and the EA confirmed there were no exceedances of the UK air quality objectives and no likelihood of health impacts. Cuadrilla will work will the Environment Agency to proceduralise this approach for future operations.

“Local people can be reassured that Preston New Road is the most monitored site in Europe and we continue to work closely with a range of regulators each and every day.”

25 replies »

  1. We are constantly told the Regulators will ensure that shale gas companies adhere to Gold Standard Regulation. The way they carry out this Regulation appears to be simply reviewing records, charts and data provided by the company themselves. The industry marking it’s own homework. Hardly Gold Standard.

  2. There is naturally occurring methane, would you like to report on that also? One of the biggest culprits is decomposing food and garden waste, which contributed to climate change! Do we want to slap the hands of the green fingered grandads and nana’s?

    • Yes it is naturally occurring methane but it cannot move – it is trapped in impermeable or very low permeable rock.
      It cannot move, it cannot escape, it cannot migrate to the surface. It is not a problem unless you deliberately fracture the rock.
      No need to get it out. No need to let it loose.
      I agree we need to cut own on food waste, but don’t frack the rock AS WELL.

      • Naturally Occurring Methane permeates to the surface and breaks the surface! Fact! David don’t be naive and don’t believe that it doesn’t! I know of EU data, that NATURALLY OCCURRING METHANE is a serious and under appreciated concerns from the EU energy council of climate change, signed in Brussels.

        • I seem to remember pictures of cows in fields around PNR. Naturally occurring surface methane producers.

          Much better to cover over the grass with a well pad, and accept an odd cows belch equivalent in order to produce something of value to one of the poorest communities in the UK.

          I even have a solution.

          Change the traffic light system, allow much greater quantities of gas to be produced and hey presto, should be able to light up the darkness to compete with the illuminations.

          No need to get too excited Waffle about PNR activity. I suspect it is on hold until a new Cabinet is up and running and decisions are being made again. You may have missed the reality that exists currently for just about any decision for anything.

          Even whether high energy industry users should be rescued from administration.

  3. Eli, no need to try and divert blame onto others. We are all perfectly aware of other sources of methane. This topic is purely about this company’s inability to stay within the rules. With pumping liquid nitrogen into a weak flow of gas, why on earth were they so surprised when it would not ignite? I take it that you have visited the ghost of a well site at PNR recently? Completely devoid of any action. Long may that remain. I hope for your sake that you do not have any financial investments in UK shale.

    • What a load of Waffle! You may say why invest in UK shale when you the anti’s are happy to buy US, Russian and Qatari Gas! Doh

  4. Eli, I was just trying to save you from potential financial disappointment, should you be an investor. Investments can go up or they may go down, down and further down. Have a nice evening.

    • Indeed, Waffle.

      Yesterday it emerged that the UK driver does not want to buy electric vehicles. Today it is reported that Morgan Stanley feel Tesla could lose 95% of its value within 12 months!!

      I suggest “alternative” investments are not such a sure thing either. However, you could always rely upon the fall back-M&S. Or not.

      So, should you be an investor trying to protect your interests from some competition, I shall not try and save you from financial disappointment. DYOR. A novel concept, but valid.

  5. This shows how toothless these ‘gold standard regulations’ are in reality. Cuadrilla have breached the rules time and time again, yet all they get is a slap on the wrist. Why are these cowboys still allowed to operate?

  6. Ellie Gold, they are allowed to continue operating because they have only made minor breaches of the regulations, not ones that were deemed serious enough to shutdown their operations.

  7. At the ‘most monitored site in Europe’, Cuadrilla knowingly vents Methane, contrary to regulation and also knowing that Methane is a highly potent greenhouse gas. The environmental permit for Preston New Road has a condition which states there should be “no venting except where necessary for safety purposes”, but this wasn’t for safety purposes and the circumstances could have been reasonably predicted by Cuadrilla’s ‘experts’. Irrespective of the size of the emission, this can only be put down to incompetence or a flagrant disregard for regulation. It doesn’t bode well for a future commercial scale fracking industry when the monitoring disappears – or for ghg emissions and accelerating global warming.

    • For fracking to be carried out on a commercial scale in this country it would need hundreds of sites such as this and many thousands of wells. The pro frackers can scoff at this “small” breach. However, multiply this by those thousands and it all adds up to a great deal of methane which, as we know, is a far more potent gas than CO2, for the first 20 years, in regard to climate change. In addition, PNR is reputed to be the most highly monitored site in the country yet as we can see, already the regulators are relying on reports and data supplied by Cuadrilla themselves. There is no chance of Regulators ever having the resources to monitor hundreds of sites, especially when the fracking companies’ monitors happen to conveniently “break down” just at the right time – for the frackers.

  8. Thank you, Mike, for reminding us what the point is.If the exploiting companies persist in vaunting their gold standard regulations, then the least they can do is observe them. One might think it was in their interest to do so when all eyes are on them. But no. This cavalier attitude tells us that they are supremely confident that this blinkered government will support them through thick or thin, or, as you point out, Mike, they are incompetent. In either case, keep them away from energy supplying.

    • So, all this excitement but no mention about the recent large fine imposed upon a N. Sea operator!

      So, thanks for reminding us about the hypocrisy.

Leave a Reply to Jono Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s