A crane has been installed today at Cuadrilla’s shale gas site at Preston New Road in Lancashire.
Local reports also said lorries had gone onto the site, where two wells are due to be plugged and abandoned.
A letter from Cuadrilla sent late last night to a resident living close to the site said:
“I am writing to let you know, that Cuadrilla plans to begin moving equipment onto the Preston New Road site from Monday 7th March to start work on plugging the two gas exploration wells with cement and removing the valves and surface pipework from the wells and from the site. This work, in industry terminology referred to as “plugging and abandoning” the wells, follows-on from formal notification issued by the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) in relation to the plugging and abandoning of both wells.”
“Our well plug & abandonment works, which includes the mobilisation and demobilisation of the rig and associated equipment, will be undertaken in accordance with our planning permission.
“The works will be completed in line with all applicable Regulatory and HSE requirements. It is anticipated that it will take approximately 5 weeks from rig set-up to complete the work on both wells.”
Opponents of the site have welcomed the abandonment of the wells.
Frack Free Lancashire said it was:
“pleased to see that work has finally commenced to plug and abandon the fracking wells at Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road site, following the OGA’s formal instruction to do so. We hope that work will be carried out swiftly and without further distress to local residents, who have already endured this insidious industry for far too long, against local democracy and consent.
“We will never get back the time, energy and emotional investment spent battling against the fracking industry and their dirty PR campaign, but we are looking forward to a future where clean and green energy is prioritised over dirty fossil fuels.”
Under its planning permission, Preston New Road is due to be restored to farmland by April 2023. The company has said restoration would take about 12 months.
Susan Holliday, of Preston New Road Action Group, said:
“Cuadrilla have a poor track record of timely site restoration so we will be looking to Lancashire County Council to ensure Cuadrilla meets its obligations at PNR.”
Plugging and abandonment at Preston New Road was announced last month by Cuadrilla’s owner, the Australian mining group, AJ Lucas.
Yesterday, several newspaper reported the work would start on Tuesday 15 March 2022.
Preston New Road has been largely mothballed since August 2019, when fracking caused an earthquake measuring 2.9 on the local magnitude scale.
In November 2019, a moratorium was extended across England because of the uncertainty about fracking-induced seismic activity. The moratorium remains in force.
Last week, the Preston New Road wells were the subject of a parliamentary question from the Conservative MP, Steve Baker. He asked what steps the government would take to prevent plugging and abandoning the wells at Preston New Road.
The energy minister, Greg Hands, replied:
“Gas wells need to be safely decommissioned at the end of their useful life. The Oil and Gas Authority is acting within its statutory remit to require the operator of these wells to decommission them.”
Yesterday, Mr Baker was quoted by the Daily Mail and the Sun saying:
“The minister’s suggestion that these wells are at the end of their useful life is outrageous.. they are ready to produce shale gas so that we can create British jobs and tax revenues, energy security and a faster route to Net Zero.
“The only thing that is causing a problem here is… the state mandating that we pour concrete down Britain’s only shale gas wells at the height of an energy crisis.”
DRILL OR DROP? 
All the while we could have ensured our energy security, raised taxes and use home produced stock in times of need, now we are in REALITY heading for $300 a barrel, only 2 years ago the US couldn’t sell oil as it was in negative territory! All the protesters, the secretary for BEIS sitting b on his hands, Boris pandering from Carrie, the UK is in net zero mode with an energy catastrophe away to happen and nothing renewable ever ready to take away the pain from the £ as the pumps, transportation of food, etc…
XR have gone the way of the dodo, but I’m sure they require FF’a too for everyday produce!! What a farce
https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/russia-oil-300-per-barrel/
Fascinating isn’t it KatT, that the entire antitheses BHP PR desk cabal [Edited by moderator] practically leap for joy over the excuse of the Russia/Ukraine situation. I said this would happen as soon as the Russian/Ukraine situation became a hard war.
The excuse then becomes that all the severe local disruption effects, the geological effects, the pollution of clean water supplies, the worldwide climate destruction effects, the worldwide and local deaths and severe health concerns due to fossil fuel pollution, are then all thrown to the wolves. [Edited by moderator]
Those who will be in energy poverty and poverty in food and water, and cannot either feed their children and themselves, or pay the rising massive increases in energy bills come April and beyond. All that is conveniently ignored.
No mention of a windfall tax or to reduce, or entirely remove the fossil fuel subsidies and tax relief benefits. Put the fossil fuel corporations on Universal Credit may be the well deserved fate for the fossil fuel polluters?
The displays above from the antitheses, indicate no trace of morals or ethics. Just “drill baby drill” and “time the get fracking and to h£ll with the Anti’s!!”. Notice the “£” sign in the word “hell” by the way? That was a Freudian slip wasn’t it? It just goes to show that in their cognitive dissonance mentality, “Hell” or as written “h£ll” actually equates to money? [Edited by moderator]
Perhaps the answer to all that nonsense is to say “Time to get renewable energy (funded and implemented) to (get) out of the trap of fossil fuel monopolies’ holding everyone to ransom, and to heaven with the greed and profiteering of the antitheses” (not one £ sign or satanic “hell” reference is necessary)
I would say that all that “fog of war” just goes to illustrate, that the first casualty of war, is the truth. That must not be allowed to take a hold in Great Britain.
I wish everyone a peaceful day in these insane times.
[Text amended at poster’s request]
[Comment removed as previous comment edited]
Renewable energy?, (funded and implemented) by who exactly phil c? It wouldn’t be funded by your pocket surely? Oh the greed!! From tax subsidies and benefits to the rich owners of the renewable companies!
Including Shell, BP & Total getting in on the renewable act, oh phil I thought these were dirty oil companies only for greed?
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/oil-industry-accepts-big-changes-needed-to-fight-climate-change-deirdre-michie-3539570
#godblessukraine
[Edited by moderator]
are you saying [EG] that intention of the fossil fuel moves to renewable sources and uses are a renewable energy “act” now is it? Not a serious attempt to get this country out of the grasp of the fossil fuel monopolies that hold the entire planets populations to ransom then?
Just an “act” is it? That was another Freudian slip wasn’t it?
[Edited by moderator]
Exactly, E-G.
Where is the funding coming from for renewables? Taxation, from certain Golden Geese and then some remaining profits invested by said Golden Geese into more renewables! The attempt of suggesting fossil fuel investment precludes renewable investment is fake. It has been shown to be fake many times over, not only on this site, but across the world. The crowd funding is being used to stop it, not to support it.
No wonder the so called answer is Internet hysteria. But, I suspect unlike some geese, the Golden ones will not be scared away by hysteria. Fortunate really. I await my contribution arriving in a few weeks, to assist with my energy bills. If the geese thrive, I may receive some more going forward. Meanwhile, I will continue to produce locally to cut down on those transport emissions, and also help family and friends to enjoy the same.
[Edited by moderator]
Who initially funded the research and development into early renewable energy projects? is an interesting one.
It turns out that funding from one of those evil polluting fossil fuel companies (Exxon) in 1973, enabled researchers to break the cost barrier that was preventing solar energy from becoming established.
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/30/763844598/how-big-oil-of-the-past-helped-launch-the-solar-industry-of-today
Mass production and installation of solar panels was assisted by another fossil fuel company, when BP established a solar division in 1981, by 1999 the company was the world’s leading PV producer. BP exited the solar market during its ‘back to basics’ reorganisation in 2012, by selling its solar division to the Tata group.
That’s very interesting John.
The anti’s better not admit to reading that! Dirty oil enabling and investing in solar and diverting from the norm. [Edited by moderator]
Nothing like the thought of home produced and locally sourced UK shale gas straight from the reservoir and refined and consumed locally! 🙂
The futures bright, the futures Shale…
To add to John’s comment on the previous page:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60656673
“Russia has said it may close its main gas pipeline to Germany if the West goes ahead with a ban on Russian oil.
Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said a “rejection of Russian oil would lead to catastrophic consequences for the global market”, causing prices to more than double to $300 a barrel.
The US has been exploring a potential ban with allies as a way of punishing Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.
But Germany and the Netherlands rejected the plan on Monday.
The EU gets about 40% of its gas and 30% of its oil from Russia, and has no easy substitutes if supplies are disrupted.
While the UK would not be directly impacted by supply disruption, as it imports less than 5% of its gas from Russia, it would be affected by prices rising in the global markets as demand in Europe increases.”
Thanks for some rationality Paul. The effect of all this however, will almost certainly to be to encourage even more lobbying by the oil and gas corporations to allow them to exploit every litre of oil and every molecule of gas in great Britain, in order to export to the overseas market and to “make a killing” to excuse the term. Though precisely who and how many that will “kill” is the purpose of this discussion and unfortunately, based upon the BMJ report, is not open to vague speculation even when it is inconvenient to do so.
Nor I might add, will any windfall tax, or reduction or removal of fossil fuel subsidies and tax relief, kill any fictitious fantasy “£golden £geese” but perhaps the little fantasy critters and their fantasy mythos may find themselves in the grip of the Anatidae tax neuter and egg confiscator, with the inevitable unfortunate consequences?
phil c: where do you believe the ‘greedy’, oil and gas corporations invest their ill-begotten gains? You would like them to pay a windfall tax!, hence this impacts on every element of which you argue… oil and gas companies are businesses, are you willing to allow the renewable companies you have so invested in to be party to the same? To pay back the ‘subsidies’ they were honoured when we pushed for renewables as a ‘Carbon “NET” Zero!!
Do your own research EG.
Start with the Panama Papers and move on to the Pandora Papers and then drill deeper into the offshore and onshore tax havens and the accountants highly paid machinations to hide the real £$trillions in multiple convoluted shell companies and “Trust Funds”. Look at Trust Funds and what they are and how they are managed in tax havens.
Its all there, but you will have to do the hard drilling down work to find the truth. Sorry to disappoint you but I’m not going to do it for you. I have said it all before on Drill or Drop before years ago anyway. So maybe start there. Weren’t you paying attention?
Actually, “greed” is a weakness. greed only becomes a collective weakness through peer pressure, coercion and bribery amongst fellow weak victims. Regardless of location or profession or business. As was indicated in the link to the film “Headwind 21” I supplied. Regarding the same environmental devastation from greed and corruption in Wind Farm generation in Sweden.
I have never said “ill gotten gains” anywhere, in any post. That is your term, not mine.
As for subsidies, then the future will have to rely on renewable energy sources and uses. Whereas subsidies and tax relief on fossil fuels is only pandering to the power of monopolies and the ability of any monopolistic business. Whether that be energy, food, water, land, medicine, health, financial, banking, onshore and offshore tax havens, politics, dictatorships, totalitarian regimes or military weaponry. M.A.D.
No monopoly is healthy or needed. In fact monopolies are invariably destructive to those who are locked into their particular monopoly and those who perpetrate monopolies. it is reminiscent of the “recreational drug” industry, in both its operation, and the results which are always destructive in every way. The prime concern of the “dealers” is for more and more profit at the expense of everyone in their sway.
If you were to step back from the polarised brink for a moment and rationally analyse what is happening in the world at the moment. You may, or may not, dependent upon how far you can step back from the emotive brink. You may perceive, that what is going on worldwide at present, is not necessarily fossil fuel energy itself, though it is still a deadly trap and a perceived saviour for some at the same time. Its the vehicle of choice for a far deeper malaise. There are many other such “vehicles” for you to do your own research. If you know what you are looking for that is.
But that, is for another time. Since your are still enmeshed in your favourite fog of war cry. Maybe you will see what all this is about, and maybe you will not. But don’t say I didn’t tell you to pay attention at the very least.
Again. Do your own research.
Sorry, E-G, you should know by now that actions and the link to consequences can be conveniently ignored to create a fantasy world.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, decisions will be taken based around reality-one hopes.
If others wish to suggest other choices they should at least consider the consequences, rather than totally ignore. After all, that is what they accuse others who have enjoyed the benefits of fossil fuel of doing, even when they can show it has saved lives.
I just find it fascinating that when the inevitable has actually happened there is no acknowledgement of the reality. Yes, windfall taxes do kill off the golden geese. They have done so before and would do so again. Even the SNP clarified that when the daft idea was discussed. All who are left are those who just want the golden geese killed, no matter what the consequences.
That’s ok Martin: I had decided enough is enough, and I have taken sound advise as to the transition from our collaborators, as to where to invest my dirty money!, ( ie the Panama through the Pandora papers, and I have booked a one way ticket on greta’s carbon neutral Malizia II to ‘airy fairy land’ where the unicorns fly!
Long May the Manure fire burn…
Cheerybye….
And an interesting article on President Putin:
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/3/6/putins-macho-doctrine-implications-for-ukraine
This a stark and revealing 2015 Frontline documentary called “Putin’s Way” which traces Vladimir Putin’s KGB history in the former Russian controlled East Germany to becoming President of Russia after the ailing Boris Yeltsin:
[Edited by moderator]
It’s really quite straightforward. I mentioned the Chinese Belt and Road initiative, and the implications of Nordstream 2 on here a number of years ago. They were mechanisms for Russia and China to achieve world domination. Obviously.
The greens got well and truly stuck into my comments on here at the time, saying I was away with the fairies. But lo and behold it seems all along that Russia and China were FUNDING these green organisations to sway public opinion away from oil and gas. Why? Because while the west were fiddling with ridiculous wind farms, net zero and solar energy to appease the greens, the ones setting the agenda, Russia and China, could exploit coal, oil and gas, in order to become dominant world powers.
So, where does this leave the likes of those opposing UK energy self-sufficiency at a time when we may be on the brink of war? [Edited by moderator]
Hi Terri
Can you provide some evidence that Russia and China were funding “these green organisations” and which organisations you have in mind?
Otherwise the comment will be removed.
Are you saying this isn’t the case, Paul? Maybe rather than remove my post you’ll post stating this isn’t true.
Terri
If someone makes an accusation, it should be up to them to provide evidence backing this up.
It is not up to others to prove the statement isn’t true.
In the early days of DrillOrDrop (and much to our amusement) we were accused from time to time of being funded by the Russians. It was not down to us to prove it wasn’t true (how could we?).
Since Paul has kindly provided some links, your previous post can stand. We can now all make up our own minds on the quality of the evidence which has been supplied to back up your assertion.
Not something I am familiar with but a quick Google (in my case Duck Duck Go) results in lots of links about this.
Check out Sea Change Foundation
https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/sea-change-foundation/
and
https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-discredit-natural-gas-fracking-635052
And even in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking
Thanks for the links, Paul.
Looking at them the Guardian link refers to the opinion of the then-head of Nato, Fogh Rasmussen. At one point in the article he says “This is my interpretation” and declines to give any further details of how he has come to the conclusion that Russia is funding green groups. The article is now more than 7 years old, and presumably no further information has come out to back up this allegation.
The Newsweek piece refers to a letter from two Texas congressmen which quotes Mr Rasmussen’s “interpretation”.
The Sea Change Foundation is maybe more interesting, and needs some more following up
One would hope that a head of Nato has some sources of information that he might not share with the public. Nato’s sources of information seem pretty close to being spot on, currently.
Bit more reliable than those sources of information, one would hope, that have been quoted on this site that oil and gas companies have enjoyed a profit bonanza over the last few years, yet 2020 can be researched and it can be found that is just fake news.
Just a thought.
Hi Paul Seaman, in fact far from “not wanting to admit to reading that”.
Quite the opposite is true.
Actually I am fascinated by the suggestion(s), even though in the usual antitheses’ parlance, both would be called, “conspiracy theories”. However, in honour of the supplied links to documents proffered by John Harrison and Paul Tresto, which I will be sure to follow up myself, just for fun, you understand, I will look at what the likelihood of either of those “conspiracy Theories” is in any way truthful, or just convenient propaganda?
However, what fascinates me, is that the post from John Harrison (March 8, 2022 at 7:48 pm) which does provide a link, indicating that early research into renewable energy systems were developed by BP and Exxon?
So here is the “rub”. Does that indicate that BP and Exxon were promoted by the Russians and the CCP “were FUNDING these green organisations to sway public opinion away from oil and gas.”
So I would suggest, let these two contradictory antitheses “conspiracy theories” argue it out over which, or either or neither is anywhere near the truth?
This looks like it will run and run…..
To everyone involved in this fracka (see what I did there?):
Have a Nice Day!
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
Oh you do like a swing and a conspiracy!
Fact is painful!
Ha! Ha! Nope. Not painful at all EG. In fact, it’s hilarious. That the same antitheses contradict each other in the same post on the same day! The “conspiracy theories” have all come from yourself, Terri, John Harrison, and Paul Tresto! Nothing to do with me.
Enjoy exploiting your conflicting “conspiracy theories” and look to BP and Exxon for pandering to Russia and the CCP to bring about renewable energy, which were created by BP and Exxon to promote renewable energy by the Russians and the CCP….. and so on and so on. Round and around and around they go. Where the “Shell Companies” go, no-one knows….
Oh, I am enjoying this!
[Edited by moderator] akin trying to argue with cotton wool phil…
(Peeing in to the wind springs to mind)
The first time in history fuel prices have breached over 156p and 166p, respectively, should have gone fracking….
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/fuel-watch/
Do you still not believe your own words, and those of your fellow contributors, EG?
[Edited by moderator]Apparently you do like a swing and a conspiracy (theory)!
Sorry EG. But all it indicates, is that it was your decision to jump on two entirely contradictory antitheses “conspiracy theories” (or facts) whichever you think is true. But you didn’t think the implications through. The implications are clear. Yet you refuse to admit that the two antitheses “conspiracy theories” (if true), indicate that BP and Exxon had pandered to Russia and the CCP, to promote renewable energy over fossil fuels right from the start?
Either both theories are facts, and implicate each other, or one or the other is incorrect, or both are incorrect. But to claim both are true only leads to the same conclusion, that BP and Exxon conspired with the Russians and the CCP to promote renewable energy over fossil fuel energy.
So which is it? A logical, rational reply would be better than the usual knee-jerk response, by the way.
Fact (and logic) are indeed painful, aren’t they?
Have a Nice Day.
Thanks Paul Tresto x
Fracking back on the agenda as Boris Johnson blocks imports of Russian oil
PM sees Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as a ‘moment of great clarity’ about the dangers of Europe relying on Russian oil and gas
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/03/08/boris-johnson-looks-fracking-amid-energy-supply-crisis/
OMG-that was interesting!
However, if I bothered to list numerous unsubstantiated claims from certain antis the list would be removed as it is not fair to “attack” individuals by showing their claims were not only unsubstantiated but incorrect, or just hypocritical. The rules seem to be a little selective, putting it politely. But, hey ho, the fact that they are is more revealing than a level playing field.
The substantiated bit is also rather suspect. This summer there will be substantiated claims-again-that Lionel Messi will be playing for around 15 different clubs next season. They will be trotted out to further agendas, but anyone interested in the subject should just ignore as they will see very quickly where they come from and their intention. Truth and fact will still be far removed.
Not sure the factual bit is that much of a guide. The definition of fact still seems to be up for debate on DoD, with teacher claims, superior intelligence, and English ability being set against the OED.
I see from debate in the HoC yesterday, the windfall tax nonsense has resulted in it being “allocated” instead of an NI increase, although it would be unable to meet more than around half of just one year requirement, whilst it is also being continued as the route to subsidise energy bills! It really is a magic money tree. I could provide the link, but it would remain absolute twaddle. Edited bits of the debate will appear in various places to excite, but it will remain absolute twaddle that fails basic arithmetic, just for starters.
Who said life should be straight forward?
Interesting comment though from the Treasury that higher bills for vehicle fuel do not put more money into the Treasury. Only 5% VAT there, so people spend more on fuel (DYOR on price elasticity) and less money on items with 20% VAT. However, corporate taxation is based largely on profitability, so tax coming from the N.Sea will rise as oil and gas prices rise. Look after those Golden Geese! Otherwise, crowd funding may be required.
Plugging of the wells postponed until June to allow for further research at the site?
Oil and Gas are commodities, like that of any other consumable source i.e. grains, gold, beef, olive oil.
Extra supply generated from untapped shale reserves in the UK “won’t materially affect the wholesale market price,” Kwarteng said.
“This includes fracking – UK producers won’t sell shale gas to UK consumers below the market price. They’re not charities.” – Neither are any other conglomerate, a charity! What they can do is pay tax, tax to the treasury to pay the trillion pound deficit, and increase the eventuality of achieving NET Zero!
This government is utterly abysmal!!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/02/28/fracking-not-answer-energy-crisis-insists-kwasi-kwarteng/
What exactly is his point?,
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/09/uk-fracking-position-not-changed-phase-out-russian-oil
John, according to the Guardian today end June is the official deadline.
Thanks Paul, I see that geothermal activities have once again equalled the seismicity level that led to the moratorium on shale, although it must be noted that 1.5 is nowhere near the limit they are allowed to operate within.
http://www.earthquakes.bgs.ac.uk/induced/recent_uk_events.html
https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/fifteen-earthquakes-recorded-cornwall-just-4564615.amp
No traffic light system for geothermal……hopefully they don’t have a seismic event similar in size and impact as in South Korea (5.5):
https://www.thestar.co.uk/read-this/evidence-links-fracking-to-huge-2017-earthquake-46739
There have been bigger geothermal seismic events in Switzerland & France as well.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1365160907000834
It seems that for the greater (greener) good, induced seismicity is okay. Perhaps similar limits should be used for shale gas going forward? This would perhaps make UK shale gas economic?
https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/tle39120873.1?journalCode=leedff
Geothermal reservoir production and associated induced seismicity may experience pronounced attention in the near future, given the ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions toward a carbon-neutral economy and society. At some geothermal sites, the occurrence of hazard- and risk-prone induced earthquakes caused by or associated with reservoir stimulation has resulted in project shutdown (e.g., Pohang, South Korea, and Basel Deep Heat Mining, Switzerland). At other geothermal sites, the maximum event magnitudes were successfully maintained below a threshold defined by local authorities (e.g., Helsinki St1 Deep Heat project in Helsinki, Finland). In this study, we review some of our results from seismological and geomechanical reservoir characterization at The Geysers geothermal reservoir in California, USA, the largest producing geothermal field worldwide. We relate our findings to other geothermal sites to better understand the variability of reservoir behavior. In particular, we obtain a constant and relatively low seismic injection efficiency at The Geysers, which is interpreted to be related to the large energy dissipation through thermal processes and additional dissipation through aseismic slip, the latter now being considered to play a fundamental role in earthquake nucleation. We discuss some characteristics of the seismicity from The Geysers that suggest stable reservoir seismic injection efficiency and possibly low potential to rupture into large induced earthquakes, reducing the associated seismic hazard.
I watched with interest PMQs today. What a confused and silly effort from Labour regarding energy policy, including more on shore wind turbines! They do really have issues with keeping up. But, I note, Boris will present a policy to create energy independence in the next few days. That may be illuminating, although I suspect the costings to keep illuminating may be a little thin. He likes a few mega projects, so look out for those.
Looks as if there is some land coming available that could house a mini Chernobyl shortly, at PNR! Would be a shame to waste that security fencing.
This would be illuminating Martin: my concerns would be the governments specialists, advisors and those history of economics academics?, who are running the show??, at BEIS wondering if this will hatch this £olden £oose without conversations with UKOOG, onshore operators, industry scientists, geologists and some people who have a clue!! We need to bring back the Thatcherite pioneers of the North Sea, Tony Benn of yester-year…. #homeproducedenergy
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60646124