Politics

What would it take to relax fracking rules?  – Tory backbencher asks minister

The Conservative MP heading the Net Zero Scrutiny Group has asked the government what would be needed to ease the controls on fracking.

Energy minister Greg Hands (left) and Conservative backbencher Craig Mackinlay (right)

Craig Mackinlay, who represents South Thanet, asked the energy secretary this week to “publish the criteria for revising the seismicity limits that apply to shale extraction”.

The current rules require operators to suspend operations if fracking caused earthquakes measuring 0.5 or above on the local magnitude (ML) scale.

Earlier this month, Mr Mackinlay also called for publication of the criteria for lifting the moratorium on fracking in England.

This was imposed in November 2019 after fracking-induced earthquakes at Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road shale gas site near Blackpool.

In both parliamentary questions, he referred to a scientific review of shale gas commissioned by the government in April 2022. The study, by the British Geological Survey, is expected by the end of June 2022.

Responding to Mr Mackinlay’s seismicity question, the energy minister, Greg Hands, said:

“In 2019, the Government confirmed that the pause on the exploration of shale gas reserves in England would remain in place unless and until further evidence was provided that shale gas extraction could be carried out safely. Any exploration or development of shale gas would need to meet rigorous safety and environmental protections both above ground and sub-surface.

“The Government has commissioned the British Geological Survey to advise on the latest scientific evidence around shale gas extraction. Unless the latest scientific evidence demonstrates that shale gas extraction is safe, sustainable and of minimal disturbance to those living and working nearby, the pause in England will remain in place.”

On Mr Mackinlay’s moratorium question, the minister said:

“The recent request to the British Geological Survey has been made to assess if any progress has been made in the scientific understanding which underpins government policy on hydraulic fracturing.

“The Government has always been clear that the exploration of shale gas reserves in England could only proceed if the science shows that it is safe, sustainable and of minimal disturbance to those living and working nearby. The request to the British Geological Survey does not indicate a change to government policy.”

67 replies »

  1. What would it take to relax fracking rules?
    The lights to go out, an apocalyptic event, the woke virtue signalling nimbies to understand to true meaning of how energy is produced and that profit means a company has money to invest in creating jobs, energy security net zero and paying windfall taxes!!

    • If the lights do go out for 6 million in Europe at the start of next year, as reported in some news outlets, it wouldn’t be fracking coming to the UK’s rescue, given it is an unproven, unestablished industry. And even if viable, realistically how long with the negotiation and leasing of sites, planning and regulatory process plus the construction, drilling and fracking would it take to extract sufficient quantities of gas to make a significant difference?
      Cuadrilla’s claims were fact checked and based on Cuadrilla’s own figures it would require over 20,000 wells to supply the substantial quantity of gas they were quoting. How long would that take and how realistic is that in a small densely populated country? Probably not realistic, according to ReFine’s study.
      And then there is the issue of waste water, treatment estimated at circa £1m per well and according to Dr Stuart Gilfillan the U.K. has insufficient capacity to treat the volume of waste water that would be produced and this could pose serious waste management issues.
      And then there is the seismicity, people don’t like their homes shaken, and then there are those, well respected, ex industry, experts such as professors Gluyas and Fraser that simply say fracking won’t work in the U.K. we have the wrong kind of shale and complex geology.

  2. USA to cease supplying the UK with LNG, and keep the fracking output to themselves??

    Greg to have to explain where and when UK energy security vanished??

    Or, for each household to realise how £160B will divide up to pay for the new nuclear to compensate for the unreliable renewables that were miss sold and now identified by the households as already adding a large chunk to their energy bills, even without the extra £160B subsidy??

    Or, the need for another windfall tax to give money away to many who do not need it, but is required to get spending accelerating?? (Which it probably will, and create higher inflation!)

    Or, for the youngsters who have been saving to buy a house to realise that the costs of clay pipes have risen by around 50% as such items rely upon a high energy input, and together with other similar costs, mean their aspirations are down the drain-that they can not afford??

    • And for the government to sort out the energy market so that electricity being produced for less is not sold based on the price of gas, as Mr Sunak admitted yesterday. Most European countries are not facing price rises as high as the U.K. For the government to have supported more energy efficiency measures in homes and buildings and to have kept the green homes standard for all new build. For the government to have kept Rough storage in operation.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sunak-energy-reform-cost-of-living-b2088420.html

      • Except, KatT, Rough looks to cost around £2B to patch up! So, what areas of spending would you suggest were cut to pay for that, and are they the same areas of spending that will now be cut? Interesting though that you are starting to recognise the requirement for gas! A small start but a start. Next, where will it come from?

        Strange comment about energy efficiency, as well. My home is very energy efficient, I spent money to make it so, yet I am still paying a high price for my energy. I may use less, but not much less as I get older and require more energy, but the cost of the energy is still high. I believe it is something to do with supply being constrained and demand not so, and then the price goes up. USA doing a great job with extra rigs drilling most weeks. How long ago was it that Biden was at COP26 to then wake up, return to USA and start to place threats upon the oil and gas companies that they needed to drill more? Chesapeake Energy share price more than doubled in a very short period of time, so there are some happy bunnies in the USA whilst others elsewhere can look from afar and suggest they are really unhappy.

        Possible rationing of electricity in UK! A new definition of Net Zero? Flick a light switch and Net Zero is the result.

        Lobotomy? No, just some ability to remember all that was promised and what has not been delivered. Most people here in the UK do have pretty good memories. Energy security for instance. Yes, “we” have it, oh dear perhaps “we” don’t. Please find another £2B for starters, to be followed by another £160B to get back to somewhere near what was claimed as gospel. £2B buys a lot of school meals. Ah, the choice of heating or eating again.

        I did hear another interesting question from another member of this group, after he had listened to a number of people quoting the same line about how being advanced in renewables would secure all the export of technology-often quoted on this site too. He asked, that taking into account all the £billions UK had invested into transition to date, how many wind turbines had been exported to date? The reaction was as if he had asked them to undress! Shocked that someone would actually ask something aligned to common sense and questioning the “truth” that they wanted to suggest but couldn’t support when questioned. There will be a lot more of the same as the chickens, or pigeons, come home to roost. However, there may be issues there with constraints upon wheat to feed them!

        And, still no apology.

          • “Providing helicopters”!!!!

            Oh well, I suppose as they have blades going round that was fitting to include them-except they are driven by fossil fuel, and sales of helicopters are usually all about the performance, and price of the helicopters.

            If that is the way the arithmetic has to add up, then I see a bright future for some more Scrutiny.

        • MARTIN

          YES the entire population of the UK would need to of had a ” Lobotomy ” before accepting such a highly toxic , dangerous to human and animal health, environmentally damaging, climate changing, energy intensive process .

          WHY would anyone want to put the health of themselves, their family / friends and the future of thier children/ grandchildren at risk exposing them to such a process ??????

          WHAT extra financial burden will this put on the NHS ????????

          WHY would people living in close proximity of a Fracking site want to see their homes devalued ????????

          WHY would the UK population want to give their grandchildren and future generations the financial burden of the ongoing maintenance cost of abandoned / orphaned wells????????

          YES , to accept such a process , you’d either have to NOT know anything about the dangers of Fracking , be certified insane, of had a Lobotomy , or be morally bankrupt and have your sticky fingers in the financial pie of the Fracking industry.

          FRACKING will NOT bring cheaper gas to the UK , as any gas we produced will be sold on the open market to the highest bidder .

          ONE thing we can be certain about Ladies and Gentlemen , the MP’s and individuals pushing for Fracking in the UK , will NOT be living with their families in close proximity of a Fracking site.

          [Typo corrected at poster’s request]

          • Hello again Jack.

            Perhaps you can do better this time and not have to deny reality and then seek help with that?

            Oh dear, not so-see David’s comment regarding the Express survey. So, there are those who already disagree with you.

            So you start with “anyone” and end with admitting that some are quite keen on the possibility, and even more than your last sentence as demonstrated by the Express survey.

            Sorry, Jack, your way of trying to fit what doesn’t fit has ceased to amuse me. And, please don’t try and discard and insult those who disagree with you as less intelligent. That is just childish. Not very intelligent to yell the ONE thing, that is known to be incorrect at PNR. Just think about it. Where does the site, or others, come from? Oh yes. A landowner who is usually living in close proximity. Same sort of landowner who may allow noisy bird mincing wind turbines on their land. Mind you, many of them make so much money out of that they can move somewhere quieter-apart from the noise of singing birds!

            • MARTIN

              What on earth are you talking about ?????? Quote, “Perhaps you can do better this time and not have to deny reality and then seek help with that? ”

              Please , PLEASE enlighten us .

              OK MARTIN , you find my forum posts , warning about the dangers of Fracking “amusing” do you ??????

              How ” amusing ” do you find this ??????

              Breast Cancer Action, don’t Frack with our health

              https://www.bcaction.org/the-root-causes-of-breast-cancer/our-fossil-fuel-work/dont-frack-with-our-health/

                • Going back Jack to US supplying Europe with the gas it needs, that you were unable to source even though I provided the reference, perhaps check the Telegraph today?

                  “UK gas prices surged by more than one third after a fire at a large export terminal in the US threatened to wipe out deliveries and compound supply fears.

                  Freeport LNG gas facility in Texas makes up about 20% of all US exports to shut for three weeks.”

                  So, Jack, that is the reality for the UK currently, where that will soon arrive at the door of UK bill payers, who also will see today that they were forced to shell out £507m last year to cover the costs of switching OFF wind turbines.

                  Never mind, for around another £2B UK may get some storage for gas to alleviate some of that problem. Alternatively, it could look to use more of it’s own gas which is already stored underground and requires no liquification or very much transport!

              • [Edited by moderator] “Has ceased to amuse me” was the phrase I used.

                [Edited by moderator]

                How much radioactivity compared to £160B worth of nuclear reactors, added to existing ones? Oh dear, so much haste, now time for you to repent at your leisure.

                • Stop being so childish, Jack.

                  The readers already know. I do not need to ask them to revisit. You appear to have a far lower expectation of their powers of scrutiny, but you always have had that. You need a link? Well, Chesapeake Energy was a separate recent example, plonked out there by yourself expecting no one would scrutinize. But, they could, and they did, Jack.

                  [Edited by moderator]

                  Meanwhile, US fracking is keeping people alive in USA, Europe, including Ukraine, currently. That is the reality. Who would be interested in turning back the many cargoes of LNG from USA? Hmmm. Good company you keep, Jack.

                  (I watched “Yesterday” again, last night, which you will need to research Jack, and it reminded me a little of yourself, but a reverse version. In the film, the “star” knew something that the world did not, and was a “star” because of that. When the reverse is the case, Jack, it is not a route to stardom. Sorry.)

                • MARTIN

                  How many times, do I keep having to repeat the same things ????????

                  During ” normal ” oil prices Chesapeake Energy was a HUGE debt ridden, toxic, white elephant . With unsupportable debts of £9 BILLION …

                  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/29/chesapeake-energy-fracking-pioneer-files-for-bankruptcy-owing-9bn

                  Now at the moment during the current conflict with Russia, the very costly process of Fracking in the USA may be able to keep its head above the water line but then so can anyone in the Oil and Gas industry.

                  I could extract Oil from discarded human toenails and become an overnight success during these uncertain times.

                  BUT , what the forum members need to consider is this ….. What happens when this war is over and the price of Oil and Gas stabilize again??????? What happens as the world moves away from Fossil fuels .

                  The answer for the Fracking industry is simple…………HUGE DEBTS , BANKRUPTCIES, and costly toxic legacies will be left for the ” good old taxpayers “, financial institutions, banks and pension funds to shoulder.

                  Just look at American shale debt over 15 years .

                  https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Has-Lost-300-Billion-In-15-Years.html

                  MARTIN, You may say , quote, ” Meanwhile, US fracking is keeping people alive in USA, Europe, including Ukraine, currently. That is the reality.”

                  BUT AT WHAT PRICE ????????? Is the health of the American people , the environment, the climate, the ongoing financial costs future generations to maintain thousands of abandoned/ orphaned wells really a price worth paying MARTIN ,?????????

                • Wrong again, Jack.

                  The price of oil was high before the current conflict in Ukraine.

                  You really need to check the laws of supply/demand and what that does to price. Yes, wars impact it but so does basic supply and demand. You could start with just watching the oil price and see what happens if China decides to lock down or open up a particular region. Or any other indicator of activity across the world. I have several times pointed you towards the weekly drilling data in USA. Surely, you are able to read numbers and dates? They were rising fast back into 2021.

                  Good try regarding Chesapeake, and a big change from your original suggestion. So, now you are saying that Chesapeake Energy is making loads of money and some investors have made a lot of money! Not what you suggested when you posted the link. As always, Jack, when your posts are scrutinized, they fall apart pretty quickly, not just a tad but the reverse of what you suggest is shown to be the reality. Yes, that is childish Jack. Claiming something is reality when it is not, and when others can easily observe that. Even for you, Chesapeake Energy is outstanding!

                  Having a different opinion is one thing, but trying to alter reality to make that work is indeed what some children do.

                  At what cost? Well, Jack, ask those who have their lives saved. I suspect they may tell you that they are alive, and healthy, thanks to fossil fuel and are looking forward to enjoying a life expectancy not envisaged pre fossil fuel era. For those who want to do without they can always consider the potential health impacts of other things-like nuclear reactors. This renewable energy is not so green, and not so clean, and not so cheap. The third one is being noticed now. The first two will follow. Cobalt, a known carcinogen, being required, is just the tip of an iceberg awaiting discovery. Ocean mining is the one that I suspect will become a bigger issue. That is the thing with reality Jack. It may take a while, and vested interests may try and mask it, but because it is reality it will become apparent.

                • Jack, you may still be in denial, but for those interested in the reality they should look at American Oil and Gas Reporter. Two useful, and current articles there that sum up the reality.

                  Firstly, “Global LNG.”

                  Secondly, “Permian Activity.”

                  I will not attempt to change the text of those articles, the meaning of the content, or whether anyone should welcome or panic about the content. People can Giggle away, find the articles and see the reality of supply/demand/price for themselves. For those who believe the supply/demand/price equation is going to change anytime soon, sorry, you have been sold a mirage. Don’t blame me, blame the mirage sellers.

                • Oh dear MARTIN

                  Since the conflict in Ukraine the US oil prices have hit record HIGHS , a 12% increase in the last 30 days alone.

                  These are the facts

                  https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-start-summer-travel-season-beset-by-record-gas-prices-11654037695

                  As far as Chesapeake Energy go , the FACTS of the matter remain the same and I stand by my original comments with supporting evidence …..

                  I REPEAT AGAIN,

                  During ” normal ” oil prices Chesapeake Energy was a HUGE debt ridden, toxic, white elephant . With unsupportable debts of £9 BILLION …

                  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/29/chesapeake-energy-fracking-pioneer-files-for-bankruptcy-owing-9bn

                  Now at the moment during the current conflict with Russia, the very costly process of Fracking in the USA may be able to keep its head above the water line but then so can anyone in the Oil and Gas industry.

                  I could extract Oil from discarded human toenails and become an overnight success during these uncertain times.

                  BUT , what the forum members need to consider is this ….. What happens when this war is over and the price of Oil and Gas stabilize again??????? What happens as the world moves away from Fossil fuels .

                  The answer for the Fracking industry is simple…………HUGE DEBTS , BANKRUPTCIES, and costly toxic legacies will be left for the ” good old taxpayers “, financial institutions, banks and pension funds to shoulder.

                  Just look at American shale debt over 15 years .

                  https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Has-Lost-300-Billion-In-15-Years.html

                  Now you can try and spin the above as much as you want with your own ” OPINION ” but an ” OPINION ” is all it will ever be unless you start showing the readers some tangible evidence in the form of ( LINKS )

                  MARTIN, You say, quote “As always, Jack, when your posts are scrutinized, they fall apart pretty quickly, not just a tad but the reverse of what you suggest is shown to be the reality. Yes, that is childish Jack. ”

                  But MARTIN I always supply ” evidence ” to back up my comments…. You on the other hand only give an ” OPINION ”

                  Your comments are riddled with more holes than a Swiss Cheese and are therefore always easily picked apart.

                  I could say I’ve sang a duet with Elvis Presley on the Moon , but who’s going to believe me without supporting evidence????????

                • MARTIN ,

                  DANGERS of Fracking

                  Would you say Jack is ” childish ” for presenting for forum members with this evidence ???????

                  Just look at the list of names , none of these people support Fracking.

                  https://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2728/rr

                  Dr Robin Stott, Co-Chair, Climate and Health Council
                  Professor Sue Atkinson CBE, Co-Chair, Climate and Health Counci
                  Professor Hugh Montgomery, UCL
                  Professor Maya Rao OBE
                  Professor Martin McKee, LSHTM
                  Dr Clare Gerada, GP and former Chair of RGCP
                  Dr Christopher Birt, University of Liverpool and Christie Hospital, Manchester
                  Professor John Yudkin, Emeritus Professor of Medicine, UCL
                  Dr Sheila Adam, former Deputy Chief Medical Officer
                  Professor Klim McPherson, Chair of the UK Health Forum
                  Dr John Middleton, Vice President UKFPH
                  Professor Alan Maryon-Davis, KCL
                  Helen Gordon, Board Member, Climate and Health Council
                  Dr Frank Boulton, Medact and Southampton University
                  Dr Sarah Walpole, Academic Clinical Fellow
                  Professor Allyson Pollock, QMUL
                  Dr Julie Hotchkiss, Acting Director of Public Health at City of a York Council
                  Professor Jennie Popay, Lancaster University

                • Yes, you are being childish.

                  Children, when get caught out, often just double down as a defensive measure. Sorry, I have provided you with the links to reality today. I notice you try and avoid the fact that I did, but that is the way you operate. Attempt to create a false and fake narrative, but it has been too obvious Jack.

                  As far as Chesapeake Energy is concerned you have lost that one completely. Their issues were clearly related to the depth of the pandemic, now over. Same with a lot of businesses.
                  Normal prices? What are they, Jack? There is no such thing within the oil and gas market, and certainly not likely to be so in the future. Once again, state “normal prices”, which is a fiction, and then you attempt to get things to fit around that. Perhaps you are aware what inflation will do and whether it will continue? No, you don’t otherwise you would be employed elsewhere.

                  The pattern is so established, and so contrived, yes, it is childish that you continue with it.

                  Meanwhile, I have provided the references for those who wish to look at the reality, and have the freedom to simply check the references out.

                  As far as the BMJ is concerned, I may go to them for medical advice, but certainly not for advice regarding energy. I wonder what their opinion is of pneumonia? My opinion is that a lot of elderly people in the UK contract pneumonia and die from it when they have difficulty with keeping themselves warm. To try to avoid that, guess what? The fossil fuel companies give a load of money to be forked out to said elderly people to help them keep warm this winter and prevent that from happening.

                • MARTIN ,

                  SO THATS IT IS IT ???????

                  You only supply ” LINKS to reality, “what on earth is that all about ??????

                  You’ve supplied ZERO evidence to back up one single thing you’ve said . It’s all just your OPINION… Your forgetting, the readers can actually read your above posts .

                  So I suppose if you say in one of your ” LINKS to reality ” that you’d just had lunch with the Wizzard Of Oz , we’d all be expected to take that on board as the truth

                  You talk about the elderly getting pneumonia because their cold……… Fracking won’t bring down energy prices in the UK , any energy produced will be sold on the open market to the highest bidder, don’t you know that ????

                  So you think £2 a litre at the Petrol Station should be classed as normal do you ????? These are not ” normal prices ” and would be a lot , LOT lower if it wasn’t for the Covid pandemic and the current conflict in Ukraine.

                  As far as ” childish ” goes ,we’ll let the readers decide on that ….. They can either accept the evidence that I put forward from reputable organizations and people that are at top of their field , that warn about the dangers of Fracking , or they can accept your OPINION, backed up with nothing ..

                • So, Jack, you are now unable to read my post of 10.27am??

                  It is not me forgetting that DoD readers can read, Jack. Obviously not all, but you have had that issue several times before-even with your own posts!

                  Therefore those who did read, have now acquired some knowledge Jack. When you have caught up, let me and the other readers know and then the childish nonsense of claiming something doesn’t exist that clearly does, can be left behind-again.

                  £2/liter is to a large part taxation, Jack, so yes, that may actually become quite routine, especially if £160B is now needed for new nuclear, and expensive EVs are to be forced upon reluctant UK motorists! I certainly expect that taxation will be increasingly used in UK to
                  rebalance that reluctance.

                  Sorry, that is what happens when you desperately seek some salvation, you may simply be seeking in the wrong area, and entering the “don’t go there” zone.

                  Meanwhile, the dual reality is that Europe will be relying upon US frackers for some time yet who will be profiting from the reality, as clearly shown within the documents I referenced that you claim I did not! Maybe some of that US income will somehow reach into their medical profession and UK will have even more of an issue with our medical professionals upping sticks to pop across the pond and feast upon such income?

                • MARTIN ,

                  I see that you are still , even after relentless prompting from Jack , still rigidly sticking to your policy of dispensing ” OPINIONS ” only .

                  Just looked back at your post of 10:27am , 6th June 2022.

                  Sorry about that old chap , missed a little of your ” opinions ” in that post.

                  You said in that post of 10:27am , quote , ” Secondly ,Permian Activity. ”

                  Would you be trying to alert the readers to the toxic , climate disaster of the Texas Permian Basin ?????

                  https://www.momscleanairforce.org/making-methane-visible-in-texas-permian-basin-fracking-boom/

                • Ahh, I see now, Jack. You are not allowed to access certain parts of the Internet and are only allowed to use it to type out your scripts. I recall similar issues in your past with the National Trust. (By the way, there are still issues regarding the management of that organisation here in the UK.)

                  That explains a lot.

                  In which case, why so concerned about what information references I post???? You don’t read them. Perhaps it may be better that others do not read posts about Chesapeake Energy that are plonked out there in an attempt to demonstrate something that upon scrutiny demonstrate the opposite? No, better read them and check what the reality is.

                  However, for those other readers of DoD who have that freedom, they are now aware of the reality that faces the European market over the coming years. Good job that the US frackers are there helping Europe to alleviate the worst that would otherwise befall them. Goodness knows what level of activity will be required when US export terminals and European import terminals are expanded for LNG! It looks as if there will be plenty of opportunity for employment for those who find the US frackers a problem for some while to come. That is normal for many successful businesses. They are successful and others not so as a result.

                  Meanwhile, Jack, I suspect there will be increasing opportunities for those interested in $60k/year for washing dishes in Texas! Looks as if Mr. Musk will be helping out and releasing some of his employees who may then be seeking new employment. I believe that could be referred to as somewhat ironic.

                • MARTIN,

                  AHH the National Trust saga recycled again.

                  Let’s refresh the readers memories on this matter .

                  A long time ago the National Trust gave a FIRM two finger salute to Ineos who were wanting to do surveys relating to Fracking on their land .

                  The National Trust said NO and so Ineos tried to bully their way forward.

                  Since then MARTIN has despised the National Trust .

                  Same with the Electric Vehicle industry and all that it represents,… MARTIN forgets that Mr Musk is the richest man in the world . He must be doing something right .

                  On the other hand , MARTIN tries to bolster support for fossil fuel companies whose individual share price is barley worth more than single sheets of Toilet Paper.

                  It’s a funny old world

                • It is a funny old world indeed.

                  However, in this part of the world Jack, most people would be aware that at the time the NT was trying, but failing, to deal with Ineos it was under considerable scrutiny in the UK for the way it was managing a variety of issues, including staff relationships, and also tenants. Jack was unable to consider that at the time, and appeared unable to access the various references to it, and instead tried to imply that membership of the NT was somehow going to mean support for their management activities, at a time when even a substantial and vociferous section of their own staff were disgusted with their activities! Jack was unable to view that so insisted it was not the case, just like an ostrich with head in the sand. Martin, meanwhile, has never despised the NT, and is a shareholder in Tesla. (Not my decision, but not inclined to alter it.) But Jack does need to distort reality when fake news becomes required. Thanks for showing how routine that is for you, Jack. (By the way Jack, that Mr. Musk who must be doing something right, was desperately searching for major investment not long ago to keep the business afloat, which he did. Almost a parallel to Chesapeake Energy!)

                  I have been a member of numerous organisations but not wedded to all their management decisions-and that includes the NT. There are only a few areas left in the world where being a member of an organisation dictates total agreement, so that bit is indeed a funny old world, but not to be recommended. If that is your experience Jack, then I feel sympathy, but it is a position that most in the UK are unfamiliar with, and all the better for it. Hundreds of thousands can be heard shouting their disagreement with management every Saturday during the footie season, Jack, in the UK!

                  Would this diversion suggest you have still not been allowed to read those two articles/reports Jack? Or, having done so, just find the reality requires more sand for your head to be covered? (Careful, there is a shortage of sand in Texas now! Guess why? Read the report and you may be informed as to why.)

                  Meanwhile, the gas supply situation is there for all to observe, and so is that for oil. I have supplied the references. Maybe there will be some small variation as time goes by, but I would not bet your farm on it.

                • Further, to concerns from estate agents, perhaps they should have a word with Israel Campos and wife Veronica who own Pody’s BBQ in Pecos, Texas in the middle of the Permian Basin? (Maybe “owned” now.)

                  They might find their property was worth a lot before the pandemic, not worth so much during the pandemic and now is worth a lot again-all thanks to fracking activity, or during the pandemic, lack of.

                  So, reality again seems to be somewhat different from speculation. But, that is usually the case.

                • Reference the concerns to human health, Jack:

                  Well, the fact that cobalt is classified as a carcinogen is already established.

                  Now, the European Commission is currently assessing a proposal by the European Chemical Agency to classify lithium carbonate, chloride and hydroxide as dangerous to human health. (see Reuters.)

                  So many dangerous situations out there, Jack. Surprising that life expectancy has risen so much over recent times-“strangely” coinciding with the development of oil and gas use. Shame that life expectancy may now take a step backwards with more lives at risk from pneumonia.

                • MARTIN

                  WOW such bitterness towards the National Trust ( NT ) and so long after the event.

                  Your bitterness must really run deeeeeeeep.

                  Let’s remind the readers what started all this of shall we .

                  https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/fracking-firm-challenge-national-trust-high-court

                  It’s all about the firm two fingers that the NT gave Ineos , regarding them wanting to do Seismic surveys on their land.

                  The NT being firmly against any Fracking related activities, , no matter how small the operation .

                  Now you MARTIN , may not care about the countless places of outstanding beauty and fabulous historic buildings that the the NT maintains for ALL people to enjoy .

                  BUT I think you’ll find that the people of the UK , except you of course , DO .

                  The choice is yours Ladies and Gentlemen, side with MARTIN for industrialized toxic Fracking, which is proven to be dangerous to human and animal health , environmentally damaging, climate changing, energy intensive process which also leaves a financial burden for future generations maintaining the abandoned/ orphaned wells.

                  OR , you can keep your health , protect the environment, protect your children’s future and keep your outstanding places of natural beauty/ buildings and continue to oppose Fracking like the NT.

                • Yeah sure MARTIN ,

                  I’m sure there’s going to be a stampede towards the estate agents in areas of UK Fracking activity.

                  With swarms of people wanting to ” feel the earth move ” between their legs with earthquakes and people wanting to increase their chances of life threatening illnesses .

                  Don’t make me laugh , YOU must think we’re all ” brand new ” MARTIN.

                  The public may of been hoodwinked in the early stages when companies were trying to get UK Fracking of the ground , but people have had time now to research the Fracking process and wherever it now rears its ugly head , people are saying no , no , NO.

                • Well, Jack, that was your usual misinformation.

                  Firstly, the NT lost against Ineos. Sorry, but that was the reality. It may be difficult for you to keep up with the facts, as it was in the past regarding the NT, but that was the outcome. They had to climb down after getting themselves out on a limb.

                  Secondly, why would I be bitter about the NT? What a strange fake picture you try and paint. I enjoy what the NT do well. That does not mean I am blind to what they do badly, and end up charging visitors the cost. I know no current members who would be happy with that. They would not be bitter, they would just like to get best value for their membership and not be subject to costs included that should have been avoided. As I have explained to you, membership of the NT in the UK does not require total obedience. It is usually because a discounted fee is achieved. Why, having achieved that, would members be happy to lose some of that benefit?

                  I also know the NT site that was the subject of the Ineos request and there was absolutely no possibility that it was going to adversely influence customer enjoyment of the Park. You again try and paint a fake picture. Seismic testing has been conducted in that area over a long period of time and I know land owners in that area who quite enjoyed it happening, as it did indeed cause them little inconvenience and they were quite interested in discovering what was below their land. At the end of the day, they also knew that it was not in their power to stop it and so there was no point to wasting money trying. Perhaps NT could simply have spoken to others and so avoiding wasted time and then a climb down?

                  Cobalt is a declared carcinogen. You reference something that “could” pose health risks. I suggest one is known, the other was a suggestion. I would start with the known. I recognize that is against everything you attempt, but that is-again-reality over speculation and worse. Yes, I am concerned about the health of children, so why is cobalt still causing severe injury to children in the DRC?

                  I knew you wouldn’t be able to resist the housing one. Well, Jack, in that case you had better find a job recycling on shore wind turbines, as it looks as if they will have to be removed to fit your argument! Not just in UK but also in France where some even had to be turned off due to adverse noise impact upon local housing. (ref. previously supplied). Then there are solar farms that open the door to more housing, that then reduces the price of existing housing as the area changes from rural to urban/industrial. And, yes, Jack that is the reality in the UK. Don’t try and deny it from a distance, because it is well known here and not appreciated by those who have suffered. Then, there are householders who leased their roofs to produce solar power and now find they can not sell their houses at all!

                  Wherever it is you live Jack, in the UK there are more people who were not saying no, no, no then were. That again is the reality, not your fake version. You can check the survey data.

                  Meanwhile, the US frackers are still helping out Europe with oil and gas supplies, and will do so for some while according to the projections regarding gas supply and demand, that I supplied. Qatar with their North Field Expansion Plan may modify the European requirement in the future, but that is someway off. Even then, now UK has actually discovered the myth that was energy security, I would just suggest that LNG from US will remain more secure than LNG coming from the Gulf, which has never been that secure and will become less so as US pivots to securing domestic supply and focus upon the Pacific.

                  Never mind Jack, the employment opportunities will continue also, but many more will benefit much more from supporting than that rewarded to the few employed opposing. I see Pody’s etc.doing good business for some time to come. I see local communities continuing to welcome extra funds to support the activities of the PTA. But, I do see a shortage of sand, so maybe burying heads will have to look for another medium.

                • MARTIN

                  It’s clear you aren’t reading, or fully understanding Jack above posts ….. If you are having difficulty understanding certain words, Jack will be more than delighted to help….

                  INEOS used legal threats to force their way with the National Trust . Lets make that clear ……. BUT LOOK what’s happened, NOTHING , no Fracking , nothing.

                  Ineos may be able to legally, against the will of the National Trust force their way in to making them accept non disruptive non invasive seismic surveys on their land , but they will never, NEVER allow Fracking on their land .

                  Your back’biting and sniping at the Nationsl Trust has stood firm since they gave a two finger salute to Ineos a umber of years ago.

                  To try and deny such facts , will only dispense disbelief and amusement to the readers .

                • No, I understand the words Jack, just more misinformation. That is what you think your remit is, but you make it too obvious.

                  Firstly, NT tried to prevent Ineos doing something they, the NT, had no authority to prevent.

                  Secondly, it then required a legal move to make NT aware of that, which they should have been aware of before they climbed out on the limb. I would suggest that any manager in any position should check such things out right at the beginning.

                  Thirdly, Ineos had made it very clear from the start that they had no intention, or requirement to frack on NT land.

                  Finally, there is a moratorium here in the UK which has prevented any further progress for Ineos, absolutely nothing to do with NT.

                  So, yes, I do understand what you are trying to state. However, as routine, it is incorrect, fake news. Chesapeake Energy recent attempt just shows that is continuing. You call upon the ladies and gentlemen for support, whilst you insult their intelligence.

                  With regard to the NT, I did point out to you at the time that they were under a lot of scrutiny in UK for management decisions which even many of their own staff disagreed with. You preferred to reject that based solely upon ignoring what was in the public domain in the UK, even after being supplied with the references to do so, and instead tried to peddle absurd fiction that the membership numbers indicated supporters of management decisions, even at a time when staff numbers did no such thing!

                  Now, you have moved to trying to claim I am bitter towards the NT, although unable to show why I should be bitter! In other words, trying to create a false narrative, a smokescreen.

                  Nope, Jack, no bitterness, just stating the facts. I will visit the NT again one day, with no bitterness, enjoy what they do well, as long as they don’t try and charge me an arm and a leg to cover the costs of what they do badly. Exactly as I did prior to their little spat and climb down with Ineos. They are not a monopoly, I have other ways to spend my money and enjoy the UK countryside.

                • HAHA MARTIN ,

                  More ” misinformation ” you say .

                  Oh yes and your evidence to challenge the strong indisputable evidence ( LINKS ) that I put forward from world leading agencies like NASA ………………….. is as you say, quote , ” LINKS to reality ”

                  Ladies and Gentlemen, let’s look in to this further.

                  MARTINS , quote , ” links to reality ” is in fact a method used to supply NO EVIDENCE whatsoever . It just MARTINS OPINION only .

                  I suppose if you said with one of your ” LINKS to reality ” that the Moon was made of Swiss Cheese , you’d expect the readers to accept what you say .

                  OF course you have a deep rooted bitterness towards the National Trust , just look at the way as YOU , as a ” one man band ” try unsuccessfully to chip away at the organization….There’s only you trying to do that , it stands out a mile

                • MARTIN

                  How many times, do I keep having to repeat the same things ????????

                  AGAIN I SAY ,

                  During ” normal ” oil prices Chesapeake Energy was a HUGE debt ridden, toxic, white elephant . With unsupportable debts of $9 BILLION …

                  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/29/chesapeake-energy-fracking-pioneer-files-for-bankruptcy-owing-9bn

                  Now at the moment during the current conflict with Russia, the very costly process of Fracking in the USA may be able to keep its head above the water line but then so can anyone in the Oil and Gas industry.

                  I could extract Oil from discarded human toenails and become an overnight success during these uncertain times.

                  BUT , what the forum members need to consider is this ….. What happens when this war is over and the price of Oil and Gas stabilize again??????? What happens as the world moves away from Fossil fuels .

                  The answer for the Fracking industry is simple…………HUGE DEBTS , BANKRUPTCIES, and costly toxic legacies will be left for the ” good old taxpayers “, financial institutions, banks and pension funds to shoulder.

                  Just look at American shale debt over 15 years .

                  https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Has-Lost-300-Billion-In-15-Years.html

                  ARE YOU understanding this MARTIN ?????????

          • You could always support UKOG who want to build their own, on land, Rough, KatT!!! (Although I suspect own may be a stretch. Like the Swansea Lagoon, perhaps the idea is good, but the financials may not be.)

            Excommunication from the ranks may follow for you, but you would be in good company.

            Yes, I have a heat pump too, but for supplementary heating. Works well for that. To convert fully would be beyond my pay grade especially with a much higher proportion of my disposable income being spent with Octopus, £15k on a new roof to reflect heat both ways in the conservatory to assist the heat pump, (then another £1k to repair the damage done to the roof!) and also into the tentacles of those mini octopuses less well off, close to me. Seems that many are insisting that holidays can not be sacrificed either, so I do wonder what people will prioritize after that. Eating out probably-I note Sir Jim’s investment into the Pig chain is showing fully booked for two years! (Although I have heard of someone jumping the queue.)

            Back to energy usage, it is something to focus some attention upon but is often outside of an individual household to control. My own usage was pretty low, then father lived with us for a period when well into his 90s and our usage rocketed. Then he needed to be in a nursing home as his needs became beyond us, and our usage dropped. Then Mrs. C needed treatment for cancer and our energy usage rocketed again. One of my sons also lives in a well insulated house, and his energy usage was low. Now there is a grandson and his father moans about his new energy usage that I see clearly when I baby sit and note on the monitor what room temperature the alarm is set to-and rightly so. Mind you, he has such a noisy kettle I have not added that electricity to his bill to avoid waking grandson, but will take a flask of hot water next time. It takes a lot of energy to look after our grandchildren, especially when their favorite food are bananas, which is lost upon some!

            Take care yourself. Must get back to cultivating my veggies, and by so doing, cut back on those transport emissions. Sunny here! 😎

      • By the way KatT, if £160B is added to the less, it does become a lot more! Shame about the arithmetic having to add up, but it does.

      • KatT – Rough storage is irrelevant. The EU storage has made zero difference. I expect you know that Europe is importing US shale gas through UK LNG terminals and the connecting pipelines to Europe. As much as the infrastructure will take. UK has some of the lowest wholesale natural gas prices in Europe. We then get into Government Policy re tax (VAT), privatisation etc. Germany is (and no doubt other European Countries with coasts also are) building an LNG import terminal as fast as they can – to import US shale gas. IUreland is an interesting example. They import nearly all their gas from the UK, imported as LNG to UK terminals. Before this current crisis the Greens made the Government cancel their plans for their own LNG terminal. Now there is a lot of back peddling to resurrect this project. Infill drilling is being incentivised at Corrib where natural decline in production has commenced (see data for Irelands gas via the link below):

        http://ireland2050.ie/questions/will-the-corrib-gas-field-reduce-prices/

        You can see the dependency on imports via Moffat increasing significantly – hence there plan to have their own LNG terminal.

        For electricity we have the same issues re Government Policy re tax (VAT), privatisation etc. France have the significantly higher wholesale prices for electricity due to the problems with their whole nuclear fleet. The French Government choose to subsidise their consumers at higher rates than our Government does. But EDF is owned by the French Government. If that is what you want you need to look at EDF’s state run performance. Why are all their nukes failing? Why are our new builds zillions of pounds over budget and infinitely behind schedule? Where is France getting electricity from when it is windy over here? Who makes huge amounts of money from high electricity prices and exports to France? Who doesn’t pay windfall taxes? Even though wind is free? And who wants to pay French taxes and hope that their pension bomb doesn’t explode before they start receiving a pension?

        For May data for business electricity prices see:

        https://www.businesselectricityprices.org.uk/europe/

        “If you thought that prices for industrial use electricity and gas in the United Kingdom were expensive, then think again.

        Recent research using real company data across Europe suggests otherwise. The data shows that the UK’s prices are either comparable to other countries or some of the cheapest available!”

        Or check:
        https://euenergy.live/
        https://marketwatch.zenergi.co.uk/price/31-05-2022/
        It appears that UK prices are lower than many European countries.
        However I agree with you on UK shale gas, whilst I disagree re the number of wells required, the timeframe needed for any development and production would not have any impact on the current crisis. We are much better to explore for more gas reserves in the North Sea and increase existing production by infill drilling, increased compression and tax incentives.
        We should also impose a windfall tax on Renewable Energy companies, particularly those with offshore wind farms. They are laughing all the way to the bank, and most of the obscene profits are going to overseas shareholders and Governments. Check out SSE,s latest profit figures.

  3. What would it take to relax fracking rules ???? – Tory backbencher asks minister.

    THAT’S AN EASY ONE TO ANSWER.

    A ” LOBOTOMY ” of the entire UK population.

  4. In Jacob Rees-Mogg’s list of Brexit opportunitues, suggested by Daily Express readers, re-starting fracking comes out top.

    Presumably, leaving the EU means there will be no earthquakes.

  5. Seems they coped pretty well in Cornwall with them, David. Maybe just rebrand as geothermal indigestion and all’s “well”?

    I seem to remember there are a number of countries where building houses on top of regular seismic activity presents few problems. Maybe not in Germany where they have experience of houses sinking into the ground where their super engineering reputation was a little lacking when same geothermal energy was sought.

  6. KatT – I know Rough having been involved in some engineering work there when I worked for Amoco. The field was a gas field which was depleted (30%) then converted for storage:

    “The Rough Field was discovered by Gulf in 1968, and was operated by Amoco on a conventional depletion basis with 6 development wells from 1975 until the early 1980s. In 1980 British Gas secured 100% ownership of the Field and its facilities, and converted it to storage mode. Excess summer supplies were injected into the reservoir, to be produced during the winter to meet the peak demand. Conversion to storage mode necessitated the installation of substantial new facilities, and the drilling of 23 further wells. First injection of gas was achieved in 1985.”

    “Early in 2017, Centrica decided to cease operations at its ageing Rough gas storage facility due to operational issues. The company intends to permanently end Rough’s status as a storage facility, and to produce all recoverable cushion gas from the field, which is estimated at 183 bcf.”

    The technical issues with the wells were the wellheads and casing which were de-rated due to condition and age. The lower pressure rating meant that less gas could be injected / stored / produced. Centrica asked the Government to cover the costs to remediate the issues; the Government rightly refused. So Centrica started de-commissioning the field. This was supposed to take 4 years but based on the news today, which you provided links to, they must be behind schedule.

    “Centrica ‘in talks’ with government over putting back in North Sea facility back into use to store reserves

    1 June 2022 10:49 GMT UPDATED 1 June 2022 12:54 GMT
    By Rob Watts in London
    The UK is considering “as many options as possible” to ensure the security of gas supplies this winter, including the expansion of gas storage facilities, amid reports that Centrica’s Rough site in the southern North Sea could reopen for storage.

    The government has reportedly been been in talks with Rough operator Centrica to repurpose he depleted offshore field for gas storage for a second time in its life span.

    The renewed interest in storage has been driven by concerns that the energy crisis affecting the country could get worse this winter in the wake of a tightening market following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”

    Perhaps the taxpayer will pick up the tab this time?

    But it won’t make a lot of difference to the current global supply problems, or ours at home. We are not awash with gas, everything is flat out, producing at maximum safe rates possible. LNG import terminals are also flat out. The UK is being used as a transit point to Europe, for LNG and Norwegian gas.

    • It is a shame that Centrica abandoned plans for a gas storage facility at Caythorpe after spending £70m. Very much a missed opportunity.

  7. I wonder if Shell have some humorous financial guy working on how much tax they could save if they invested in Cambo?!

    That would not only give the Government a bit to think about, but also those others who were pushing for a windfall tax.

    Actions and consequences again.

  8. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61666693

    “Development of a major North Sea gas field has been approved by regulators.

    The Jackdaw field, east of Aberdeen, has the potential to produce 6.5% of Britain’s gas output.

    The regulatory approval comes as the UK government seeks to boost domestic energy output following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Shell’s proposals were initially rejected on environmental grounds in October.

    UK Business Minister Kwasi Kwarteng welcomed the decision.”

    “It said the Jackdaw field should be able to provide gas to 1.4m British homes, and its carbon emissions should eventually be captured for storage, if a large project in Peterhead secures funding.”

    That’s 1.4million homes 100% of the time not 1.4 million homes 30% time as in offshore wind…..

    Common sense and a project that will make a significant contribution. Cambo next.

Add a comment

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s