Tories, fracking and local opinion

The Conservative leadership challenger, Liz Truss, has suggested that the moratorium on fracking in England should be lifted and decisions left to local people.

Anti-fracking protest outside Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road site in Lancashire, 16 July 2022. Photo: Tina Rothery

In an interview with the Telegraph today, she said

“On the subject of fracking, I think it depends on the local area, and whether there is support in the local area for it. But I certainly think we need to be doing all we can to lower the cost of energy for consumers.”

Asked by the paper whether there was a strong case for lifting the ban and leaving local residents to decide whether fracking takes place, she replied:


The business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, who backs Ms Truss, is considering a scientific review of fracking by the British Geological Survey. The report, delivered 12 days ago, could be used to justify a lifting of the moratorium, in force in England since November 2019.

Ms Truss, who came third in the most recent round of voting, did not reveal in her interview how local residents would make the decision. She was also not challenged on whether fracking for shale gas would help reduce the current energy prices, something rejected by opponents.

Her suggestion that the moratorium should be lifted will please the shale gas industry. But giving decisions to local people probably won’t.

The industry’s lobbying organisation, UK Onshore Oil and Gas, called last month for shale gas developments to be defined as nationally-significant infrastructure.

This would take decisions away from local councils and give them to planning inspectors and ministers. Proposals would have to go through public inquiries and decisions would probably take longer than those made by councillors.

The Conservative Environment Network argued this weekend that there was “considerable opposition to fracking” and shale gas developments would not solve the cost of living crisis.

Its director, Sam Hall, speaking to Express.co.uk, said:

“If it’s possible to extract lots of gas through fracking in a way that local communities are willing to accept then I think it’s worth looking at.

“But I think the reality of its past experience of trying it in the UK is that our geology is just not suited to fracking, which creates seismic events.

“Local communities don’t like the disruption, we’re a densely populated island and I think there would be significant opposition if fracking applications are made.”

Mr Hall said he believed the amount of gas and benefits gained from reintroducing fracking would be “pretty small”. He advised the leadership candidates that fracking was “not a fix to the energy crunch and it’s not a cost of living measure either”.

A lifting of the moratorium could cost the Conservatives votes in red wall and traditional Tory seats, he said:

“It is likely instead to be very politically controversial instead in some of the marginal seats that the conservatives need to win in 2024.”

Even the leading company in UK onshore shale gas appeared to have softened its stand on forcing the industry on local communities.

Speaking this weekend to the Telegraph, Brian Gilvary, chair of Ineos Energy, said:

“I think there are communities in the UK that would support it. But equally, if a local community doesn’t want it, I’m not sure there is a huge amount of upside in trying to pursue a project”.

Ineos has the largest number of onshore shale gas licences in the UK.

In 2015, Ineos executive Tom Pickering told DrillOrDrop the company would seek planning permission for shale gas schemes, even if local people objected.

Asked how the company would judge whether it had a social licence, Mr Pickering said:

“You would take stock, having done a couple of wells, if you got permission to, and then say to people judge us on our performance and what’s been done.”

Asked what he would do if the answer from people was still ‘we don’t want it’, he said:

“I would take that to Jim [Ratcliffe, the major Ineos shareholder] and see what he had to say about it.”

Ineos made three applications for shale gas exploration in villages in Derbyshire and south Yorkshire. Two got planning permission (Marsh Lane, Derbyshire and Harthill, south Yorkshire). But the consents expired last year before any work was carried out (details here and here).

Under current planning rules, Ineos would have to make new planning applications if it wanted to revive these schemes.

The third application, at Woodsetts, in South Yorkshire, was refused last month by the housing minister, Stuart Andrew. The deadline for Ineos to appeal against the decision is this week.

53 replies »

  1. The only ones to benefit from lifting the moratorium will be the bosses in the industry and a little bit for the investors. Maybe the Tory party can buy some more Bolly with the donations they got. They have no interest in giving the public lower prices or a better environment. As for climate and net zero, well you can kiss that and our kids’ futures goodbye.

  2. Please call for the assistance of the men-in-white-coats and a sturdy straight-jacket:
    In the middle of the clear & present global warming emergency, the Tory party spokesman states that “If it’s possible to extract lots of gas … it’s worth looking at ”
    Deluded ?.
    To these proponents of Oil & Gas extraction We are now fighting for survival. Please leave Oil & Gas in the ground.

  3. That’s all okay then. Energy bills are really not sky high and are not going to go higher due to a shortage of said gas?

    The old ratio of supply versus demand does no longer equate to price?

    Well, sorry folks it does, and it will continue to do so. The interesting thing will be whether there are enough people who feel that impacting upon their lives and want something done about it, compared to others who are well off or ideologically opposed enough to prevent their wishes. Perhaps if the latter insist on their position, they will give the financial support to the former group? No? Didn’t think so. Not even agreed to remove current green levies (TAXES) from the energy bills for those struggling which will have £160B added for new nuclear and £54B for up-grade of the electricity grid to carry electricity from that “cheap” off shore wind! And, there are more bills to come yet, that were not even in the small print.

    Those who think oil and gas is being left in the ground are simply mistaken. It may be left in the ground in one place but is being extracted in larger volumes elsewhere to compensate, in many cases with lower environmental standards, then shipped thousands of miles. If that stops, then Europe is really going to have a very difficult winter, and already energy rationing is being suggested as a strong possibility. Even some antis recognize that with quotes about “fortunes” being made, that others then have to counter with nonsense claims about the fortunes are not distributed. Except, in the UK the windfall tax upon N.Sea oil and gas is arriving for the very households who are struggling with energy bills, so reality over dogma is shown by the money actually starting to show in millions of households.

    • MARTIN ,

      Let’s look at what I said again,

      Fortunes are being made in the Oil and Gas industry at the current time , any company that isn’t making money , is beyond stupid and shouldn’t be in the business .

      BUT when considering such things like Fracking in local communities , you also have to factor in the depreciation in the value of your home , the increased risk of Cancer , Asthma and other deadly diseases , noise , pollution and an increase in heavy vehicle movement which will also cause more damage to local roads and infustructre.

      Taking note of the above , the paultry 25% Gas price reduction for people living within the 10km fall out zone , certainly WON’T outweigh the negative health and financial impacts for local people unlucky enough to live within the Fracking fall out zone .

      Unless of course you are one of the very lucky few at the top these Fracking companies, who will rake in eye watering salaries, whilst keeping themselves and their families far , FAR AWAY from any Fracking activities.

      It’s a WIN , WIN for them ONLY .

      Let’s set the record straight , FRACKING is an energy intensive process. You could say it’s a process that’s really ” scraping “the bottom of the fossil fuel barrel …… LikeI’ve said before , in this current situation , the costly toxic process known as Fracking , can hold its head above the waterline…….Although you could at this moment in time , if you want a more greener alternative , go to the laborious task of extracting Oil from discarded toe nail clippings and make a fortune.

  4. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/biggest-renewables-auction-accelerates-move-away-from-fossil-fuels

    Business and Energy Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said:

    Eye-watering gas prices are hitting consumers across Europe. The more cheap, clean power we generate within our own borders, the better protected we will be from volatile gas prices that are pushing up bills.

    Thanks to today’s record renewable energy auction, we have secured almost 11GW of clean, home-grown electricity – which would provide as much power as around 6 gas fired power stations.

    These energy projects already have planning permission, now they have a funding contract in place. We’re going to these projects built as soon as possible to better protect millions of British families from rising costs.

    More cheap renewable energy projects will mean our own home grown North sea gas will last longer if we need it. No market for dirty expensive UK shale gas. Maybe Liz Truss doesn’t understand how the energy market operates or how much things cost.

    • That’s strange, John, I already have a large surcharge on my energy bill to pay for renewables. And, that is before the £214B bill is divided up to try and make unreliable renewables a bit more reliable. Where was that within the contract? You know what a big part of that is? Oh yes, more nuclear to try and make the equation balance-but expensively. More of something that is unreliable just becomes more unreliability, not more reliable.

      As for Jack, sorry Jack your repeated problem with “could” becoming “have to factor in” is just the standard technique for the activist, has been overused and now is fully exposed. If I factored in every “could” I would not try and cross the road. As for eye watering salaries, then who is the world’s wealthiest man? You are so desperate to try and build a false platform and appeal to the anti capitalist you seem to miss the large profits being made elsewhere. Ermm, where is their windfall tax even after Government(s) policy has given them a windfall?

      You, and one or two others on this site, appear more like competitors just trying to slag off the competition. Meanwhile, the rig count in USA has risen again. They are the experts, and I think as advised, I will take notice of the experts, as even those slagging them off now admit they are being pretty successful.

    • Hopefully it’s not additional wind. Today wind is producing 1.5GW or 4% of very low demand. Not bad for installed capacity of just below 30GW? If the 11GW of new stuff is wind, and was installed, it would be producing way less than 1GW.

      Solar doing very well today at 7.5GW or 20% of today’s demand.

      If you think the mix works, check back tonight when it’s dark – and still not windy….

      • For those who can only see the fact that when it’s not windy turbines don’t turn and solar does not work at night.

        Click to access Energy_Trends_June_2022.pdf

        Page 12 shows the comparison between fossil fuels and renewable energy for electrical generation over a lengthy period. A better representation of performance.

        Maybe I should find times when gas generators are offline from break downs and maintenance and suggest that they are therefore pointless. But that would be silly.

    • MARTIN ,

      Thanks for your reply.

      As usual it says nothing.
      It answers nothing .
      It means nothing
      And is backed up with nothing.

      It’s business as usual then MARTIN.

      I say Fracking is a highly toxic , dangerous to human and animal health, environmentally damaging, climate changing industry that leaves future generations a toxic financial burden maintaining abandoned wells.

      It devalues homes and makes buildings insurance difficult to obtain in Fracking areas . If you can’t get adequate buildings insurance your home becomes very difficult to sell , simply because it makes it un-mortgeable.

      If it wasn’t for the current situation at this moment in time , the highly expensive process known as Fracking would of continued to be nothing more than a debt ridden ponzi scheme.

      Like I said at this moment in time I could extract Oil from discarded Greenfly Toenail Clippings and make money in the Oil industry…… BUT as we move to a more sustainable, greener future as we will rapidly have to , if we still want a habitable planet . Fracking will then leave its toxic debt ridden legacy for Banks , Financial institutions and the Good Old Tax Payer to shoulder..

      If you disagree with anything I’ve said , please say MARTIN as I will be delighted to show you the evidence.

  5. All of it Jack. There are numerous factually incorrect bits within it. I would have thought Pigeongate would have kept you away from the natural world, perhaps do some research on the greenfly also?

    Fracking has been going on for some time, for instance, outside of the “current situation”, and has been referred to as “transforming the US economy”. Now, Jack, you think for the worse, but this was an expert who stated that it was for the better, so sorry but your attempts to show different by referencing what occurred in 2020 are not expert, and just a clumsy amateur attempt, that you eventually tried to back away from-but too late. One would just have to consider, why was it posted? What was the message intended? Were readers not expected to have the intelligence to look at the situation themselves? Easy to find the REAL evidence, Jack. One would start to think there were not valid, factual arguments to support your case.

    Not sure John has done any better. So, when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow then trends should keep us warm! Nope, John, £160B new investment required for nuclear to back up the unreliability of wind and sun ie. support an INSECURE energy supply, and at the same time, destroy the myth of wind and sun generation being cheap. Well, I suspect security of energy supply and cost of it will be two aspects that do get greater attention as people realise they have been told they have both covered in UK only to find out they haven’t. Inflation not being a problem also came from the same sources. Doing well, aren’t they, these “experts”?!

      • MARTIN ,

        In the midst of all that cryptic waffle , are you saying YOU agree with my statement on the dangers of Fracking or not ???????.

        Sadly , just like the forum member CJR , I’m having difficulty in deciphering what you are trying to say .

        If you disagree, please say, as I will be delighted to fill the page with evidence from ” experts “

        • Well Jack if you can not understand “all of it” when you asked the question, I am unable to assist. Sadly you should be able to understand, but perhaps you spend too much time on “interpretation” rather than understanding. It seems to be a common problem amongst the antis and shared by yourself. “Coulds” suddenly are interpreted as gospel, except that is another example of misunderstanding.

          I have been instructed numerous times on DoD that antis are more intelligent, are the teachers, morally superior etc. etc., yet they seem to have issues understanding extremely concise statements, and even have to incorrectly interpret the meaning of a “fact” then supplying a lecture on reasoning! I know there is no known cure for the God Syndrome, but to find it afflicts so many is rather worrying.

          All an interesting insight into something, but I do not have a problem understanding.

          Jack, do you really feel you will gain any converts to your views when you plonk them out but then admit you have issues understanding pretty straightforward statements? Especially, after Chesapeake Energy Gate.

          • MARTIN ,

            I’m sorry , in the midst of all your mega waffle, I seem to have missed your answer .

            I will therefore ask you again .

            I say Fracking is a highly toxic , dangerous to human and animal health, environmentally damaging, climate changing industry that leaves future generations a toxic financial burden maintaining abandoned wells.

            It devalues homes and makes buildings insurance difficult to obtain in Fracking areas . If you can’t get adequate buildings insurance your home becomes very difficult to sell , simply because it makes it un-mortgeable.

            Do you agree with what I have said , or not ???????

            [Typo corrected at poster’s request]

            • I again have to repeat, no, I do not.

              How many times do you need to be told something Jack? Have you issues with reading very simple text? Do you really expect me to help you with such an issue?

              Three examples to show why I don’t:

              “Could” has now been removed, and speculation turns into fact. But, it doesn’t Jack, even though you attempt that. It is too contrived and too obvious to those who don’t have a mist, or do not miss such lame “interpretation”. The more accurate term is “manipulation”.

              “A toxic financial burden”?? You mean to those who invested in Chesapeake Energy and made that “fortune” are suddenly going to have it taken away?

              “Animal health”? You mean those animals who get heating from said output from fracing in USA, that would not survive without? After your issues regarding pigeons and now greenfly, I certainly would not regard anything you state around animal health as worthy of consideration.

              However, just focus on-

              No, I do not.

              • MARTIN ,

                Here is a PEER REVIEWED STUDY linking Fracking to CANCER .

                Myself and ALL the forum members would like to know why you don’t agree with the results of this in depth study.

                PS ……… Don’t forget to supply supporting evidence with your return comments , or else we will all have to accept that what you say is just your own, wild Off-The-Cuff , uninformed OPINION .


              • MARTIN ,

                More CANCER and Fracking , why don’t you agree with this report ???????


                NOW this is just the Tip Of The Iceberg . We have plenty more to discuss, including the environmental impacts and climate impacts of FRACKING …… We also have to discuss how living near a Fracking site de-values your home and makes it more difficult to sell due to the restrictions on buildings insurance…..

                I’m waiting and very much looking forward to your answers MARTIN .

                • Better to do it here, then, Jack, where the standards are higher! (Another convert from the dark side.)

                  As with many things UK imports. As the world is finding out reference Russian products, such as Russian diesel for the UK.

                  Perhaps your concern for children outside the UK exposed to cancer causing issues due to lower standards could also consider those children in the DRC? But it doesn’t, does it Jack? You have discarded them and CJR has also advocated exporting responsibility.

                  Your attempts to display your morality simply display that yours are no better than anyone else’s.

                  Meanwhile, life expectancy has risen around the world dramatically since the development and use of fossil fuel. That is the reality, Jack, and that can be maintained if standards for development and use are good. You are just making the chlorinated chicken argument. It doesn’t lead to not eating chicken, it leads to how the chicken is produced/processed, and maybe where that is done.

                  You should really ask for your script to be up-dated, Jack, is my answer.

              • JACK calling MARTIN , JACK calling MARTIN …… come in MARTIN

                What about these investors , that have lost the shirt of their backs and what about the Good Old American Tax Payer who will also have to shoulder the burden of some of the biggest bankruptcies in American history.

                Due to Fracking

                Do you think these people are putting up the bunting and celebrating ??????


                • Yes, Jack, they are making a fortune currently. I seem to recall someone admitting that, when they had to defend their nonsense about Chesapeake Energy. Certainly not an expert, but who could disagree?

                  Jack, let me explain to you once again. I have worked for several US companies. When they were successful it did not dictate that their competitors would be successful. Some were not, and it worked the other way round too. USA is notorious for that commercially, some companies thrive whilst others do not. It does not determine that business sector is unprofitable and plonking the term Ponzi Scheme upon some of the largest, and most successful companies in the world, does not change it.

                  Rice production produces huge outputs of methane! Is it those parts of humanity that rely upon rice that you would also like to exclude, Jack? There seem to be large numbers of the worlds population your morality would allow to die, Jack. Possibly beneficial towards climate change, but another “something must be done” that is no real solution.

                  As I stated previously Jack, your script is in need of change, and just by stating 2018 is “New” doesn’t make it new.

                • MARTIN ,

                  Chesapeake Energy

                  Oh dear , here we go again.

                  It seems that you do enjoy Jack , endlessly repeating the same things to you .

                  OK , just for you MARTIN

                  Regarding Chesapeake Energy , I said , quote,

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


                  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 toenail clippings and become an overnight success during these uncertain times. Anybody who can’t make money at this moment in time in the Oil and Gas industry is beyond stupid and shouldn’t be in the business.

                  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 .


                  And you think this is a good thing , do you ???????

                • Except what you stated was incorrect Jack. There were no “normal” oil prices in 2020! You really are pretty slapdash. Surely, your memory is not that bad?

                  You just reinforce your errors by repeating them. But, thanks for doing so. I am sure some might have missed out previously.

                  Time for a new script, Jack.

                  At the bottom of my screen Jack there is an indication of rain about to start! That “wave” broke pretty quickly.

                • OH DEAR MARTIN ,

                  Let Jack refresh your memory regarding what was said concerning our debate on Oil prices .

                  Let’s look at your post 15th July 11:47am ( News article Minister avoids questions on Fracking tax relief )

                  You said , quote , ” Oil (Brent) was over $100/barrel prior to Putin invading Ukraine, Jack. It is now, what? Oh yes, $100/barrel. ”

                  AND I SAID , 15th July , 1:20pm

                  Your WRONG AGAIN MARTIN , let JACK help you understand.

                  Just take a quick peak at the Brent Crude Oil , historical price data …. Check out the average closing price .


                  Just take a look at the average Oil price trends , now you with your classic diversionary tactics may try and twist and turn and avoid answering IMPORTANT ISSUES raised above and I could give the readers a good laugh and allow you to endlessly split hairs as we debate the benchmark for ” normal ” Oil prices …… But let’s face it old chap , you were wrong in that previous debate and you are wrong now.

                  OIL and GAS prices are only at these silly inflated prices due to the war in Ukraine .

                  MARTIN , just take a peak at the link .

                  PS……….. MARTIN , I’m still waiting for your response to my other posts on this page , are you going to respond to them or pretend you’ve not seen them ?????????

                • Oh dear, Jack. Another diversionary attempt.

                  Back to the subject.

                  What were oil prices in 2020? Was that normal? You have stated it was. Was it? If so, why were there antis on DoD crowing about it?

                  Come on Jack, have another go, and I challenge you to do so without exposing the way you clumsily try and create fake news.

                  If you can’t then you certainly need a new script. This one is like a moth eaten vest-just full of holes, and unfortunately your modus operandi can be observed through those holes. Not a pretty sight, but I suspect another flash is coming..

                  Possibly a further diversion to crows and moths, Jack with some nonsense about the natural world, but please try and avoid that.

                  Were 2020 oil prices normal? Come on Jack, the position you have suggested is that Chesapeake Energy failed during a period of normal prices. Was that true? It was you who posted the “news” for readers to consider. Yes or no, were 2020 oil prices normal?.

                • MARTIN

                  Ladies and Gentlemen, now sit down for this one and brace yourself for a fit of laughter…….. The KING of diversionary tactics has actually accused JACK of avoiding the issues in question…..

                  I’ve asked MARTIN a number of times today , to comment on the posts I’ve put forward on this very page …. So far he has pretended he hasn’t seen them and on a number of occasions switched to his primary default setting of wildly Off-The-Cuff diversionary tactics .. I think somewhere today it’s even stretched as far as Pigeons and not eating Chickens ….. Move over J.K.Rowling there’s a new player on the block.

                  He implys that he wants to get back to the topic in question, so let’s get back to talking about Fracking then.

                  MARTIN , WILL YOU respond to the posts I’ve put forward on this page today, concerning Fracking and its link to CANCER and other deadly diseases….. The effects living close to
                  a Fracking site has on the health of children .

                  Also , considering here in the UK we’ve had the hottest day on record today . Will you respond to the links I put forward showing indisputable evidence of the appalling destructive effects , Fracking has on the environment and climate change .

                  Let’s see if MARTIN responds.

                • MARTIN ,

                  Let Jack help you again.

                  You said , quote , ” Oil (Brent) was over $100/barrel prior to Putin invading Ukraine, Jack. It is now, what? Oh yes, $100/barrel. ”

                  My response was to show you this link , proving that the general historical trend for Brent Oil was well below $100 a barrel .

                  Just take a quick peak at the Brent Crude Oil , historical price data .


                  If we discard the year 2020 then , as you wish . The previous average, 5 year price for Brent Oil was .
                  2019 ………..$ 64.28
                  2018 ………..$ 71.34
                  2017…………$ 54.71
                  2016…………$ 45.13
                  2015…………$ 53.03

                  Should we now say , for arguments sake , a ” normal ” Oil price would be about $ 60.00 a barrel ??????????

                  Which when looking at the historical Brent Oil price is , far , FAR lower than your $ 100.00 a barrel.

                  Whilst I have your attention, have you thought anymore about responding to the detailed , indisputable evidence that I put forward, showing the dangers of Fracking on human health and the devastating effects it has fueling climate change ?????????

                  There are many questions on this page , that we are all still waiting to hear your response to.

                  Whilst your here , what are your thoughts on this from FRACKLAND AMERICA .

                  Just look how the evidence points out that homes in Fracking areas loose considerable value and become almost uninsurable and un-mortgeable ….

                  Why do you want to expose British homeowners to such losses and stress ?????????


                  We need your answer on this one MARTIN

                • Okay, as I thought Jack.

                  Usual tactic from you. You post some nonsense and when it is shown to be nonsense you go off into a fit of deflection.

                  The question was a simple yes or no.

                  What was produced? Just silly attempts at deflection, which show exactly how you operate.

                  Now, I know your memory is shocking Jack, even regarding your own activities, but to expect any one else to forget what was happening in 2020 is hilarious, but in a pretty dark way. It was normal?

                  What an insult to those who had real problems in 2020 and can remember it vividly.

                  And what further silliness to attempt to define what is normal for Brent crude by selecting out a period.

                  Jack, Brent Crude has been at or over $100/barrel AVERAGE for a significant period and many would suggest that is the more “normal” price for it. In recent years it then declined. Perhaps ask the question, why? Could it be related to USA going from the major importer to becoming self sufficient and then a major exporter? Eroding the control of the traditional cartel? That some are still very sore about, but the reality persists, and will do so in spite of their soreness and their futile attempts to turn back time. Well, shiver me timbers Jack, what a benefit to the rest of the world those fracers have been! $300B over 15 years looks small change, their sacrifice to the benefit of the wider world. Perhaps a Nobel Prize would be fitting, especially apt regarding that family connection to the oil industry. Then, you speculate when the war is over prices will return to “normal”. Well, Jack, why? They were not heading that way before the war, unless Brent at $100/barrel is the real normal. The price was reflecting economies starting to open up after the worst of the pandemic, and will continue to do so-there is a lot more of that still to happen. I recall a debate with an “expert” who was unaware of Brent passing $70/barrel as it started to reflect that, but it had and was always going to do that.

                  There are few here in the UK Jack who are as isolated as yourself regarding UK or world events. I suggest that market sector is hardly worth the effort, but your choice. Or, maybe not. Either way, I suspect just more of the same. Sorry, I am not part of that few, however excited you become about your messaging. You can call upon the Ladies and Gentlemen but I suspect after your Chesapeake Energy nonsense you will find few who want to be taken seriously wish to associated.

                • MARTIN ,

                  You talk about how American Fracking has been of benefit to the world .

                  BUT YET it has run AMERICAN in to the ground with debts.


                  I’ve supplied you with this same link multiple times over the last few days , what’s the matter with you MARTIN ??????????

                  If you have difficulty understanding these links , just ask, JACK will be delighted to help you understand.

                  OH YES , so much for AMERICAN shale now … They currently have record fuel prices at the pump.

                  NOW THIS is becoming a JOKE , can you please address the MANY posts I have put on this page , concerning the toxic , health , environmental and financial dangers of Fracking. ???????

                  Let’s see if MARTIN once again pretends he’s not seen these posts on here .

                  We’re waiting

                • MARTIN

                  You say , quote , ” What an insult to those who had real problems in 2020 and can remember it vividly. ”

                  I think what an insult is to people , is those people who try a push a highly toxic, environmentally damaging, dangerous to human and animal health , climate changing process that also leaves a costly toxic legacy for future generations on people

                  That also devalues the value of people’s homes in Fracking areas .

                  That when challenged with indisputable evidence , PRETENDS they’ve not seen the evidence and still pushes on trying to promote the Fracking industry…..

                  That’s an ” INSULT ” to people

                  Now MARTIN , Are you going to address my other links , or continue to ramble on with your tactics of endless diversionary waffle ???????

                  We are waiting for answers

                • Nope, Jack, same old nonsense and deflection from you. Can’t support your own posts, so just standard deflection.

                  Some money was lost by some businesses for a period, a lot more was made during same and other periods. Good job they stuck with it, eh Jack. Helping to reduce Putin’s ability to fund armaments by decreasing Russian oil and gas revenues.

                  $300B in 15 years? The professional football outfits in UK come close! “Run America into the ground”!! Good one Jack, you really have no idea, do you?

                  Peanuts Jack.. Maybe compare 2014 prices of over $100/barrel to what followed as USA became self sufficient and the result showed in prices around the world-until recently. Many $trillions Jack. Certainly not to the liking of OPEC+, who have made their ire and actions pretty plain, but hey ho, I am a consumer not a producer so know where my support is. You are constantly supporting what was the supply status quo. Well, good luck with that but it will not return, and if you can make something out of supporting a lost cause then good luck with that.

                  Ironically, you would make more from supporting Chesapeake Energy! Or washing dishes and earning $60k/year.

                • LADIES and GENTLEMEN , can I have your attention please .

                  TAKE NOTE of the posts on this page and the totally laughable diversionary tactics MARTIN has used to not answer the questions I have asked him.

                  MARTIN , everyone can see how many times you’ve been asked to respond to LINKS I’ve put forward from ” experts ” highly qualified personnel that have all warned about the dangers of Fracking ………. They can ALL see how you have pretended not to notice these questions and have instead in a feeble and childish way , tried to divert away from these difficult topics .

                  This pro- Fracker who wants to expose you and your children to the PROVEN DANGERS of Fracking that I have highlighted on this very page ……. In not responding , has been shown not to care about the risks this industry will pose to you and your family .

                  MARTIN will never back up a single word of what he says with any evidence . What MARTIN says is his ” OPINION ” only

                • MARTIN ,

                  NOW THIS is becoming a JOKE , can you please address the MANY posts I have put forward on this forum page , concerning the toxic , health , environmental and financial dangers of Fracking. ???????

                  Remember MARTIN , there are many people who are reading these posts…… I’m going to keep on asking you this same question , because ignoring it beautifully highlightes what you have to offer on the subject.

                  Let’s see if MARTIN once again pretends he’s not seen MY posts.

                • Oh dear Jack!

                  Even now on to overtime, you are still not making sense.

                  So, I didn’t reply to your links? Nonsense is putting it politely. That is you all over Jack. You disappear for a while, then return and plonk some nonsense (a link) on DoD for whatever purpose you are believing it may fulfill, and when it is demolished you then try and claim, with increasing hysteria, no answer has been presented to avoid that the scrutiny took place and your nonsense was demolished! Then disappear, then return and rinse and repeat, with something like Chesapeake Energy in 2020, when it appears “normal” prices were active, and those Ladies and Gentlemen should swallow that.

                  I can see the same most days of the week, Jack, on TV, from places like the UN. It really is an interesting technique, but takes most people back to the playground. It doesn’t work, Jack, it simply demonstrates “something” about the person(s) using it. You obviously have been convinced it does, and have even been silly enough in the past to suggest being a member of an organization signals obedience to that organization. Let alone denying what a written record shows you produced in the past. Perhaps you are showing your follower tendency we have chatted about previously, but it doesn’t change the reality, that:

                  Jack, you all need a new script. There really is not a significant audience for the existing one in the UK and you will simply end up with your assets frozen!

                • MARTIN

                  It’s truly laughable and ALL the readers on this page can see it with their very own eyes ……The topic regarding the toxic , white elephant Chesapeake Energy has been fully addressed on this very page and so has what would be considered ” normal ” Oil prices ………. Do you really want JACK to hold your hand and direct you to my answers with ” supporting evidence ” ( time and date of posts ) , or would you like JACK to cut and paste them again for you ???????? HAHA.

                  Please remember Ladies and Gentlemen, MARTIN ONLY ever gives an ” OPINION ” he never backs up anything he says with any evidence …. This is an important fact to remember .

                  MARTIN , will you be giving a response to this LINK ,or pretending like with the others , that you’ve not seen it ?????????

                  FRACKING , The price tag of dirty drilling.


                • Nope, you have not dealt with Chesapeake Energy, Jack. You posted the link that was nonsense. You then tried to defend it by attempting to fabricate that 2020 was normal for oil/gas prices. I asked you the question several times, a straight yes or no answer was required. You deflected and squirmed, but no answer.

                  You now wish to deflect into other links and want some sort of praise for posting links! Erm, Jack you have been exposed for posting a nonsense link. Own it.

                  Just like unreliable renewables, unreliable inks are not made reliable by just creating more. $300b over 15 years is your next attempt, and somehow that has decimated the USA! Except the reality is that USA became self sufficient, OPEC+ could not hold up prices to where they wanted, indeed they tried a price war, and the world gained many $trillions per year as a result. And, the less well off benefitted most from that. OPEC+ have given up that now, and just Jack is left, with links to “experts” whilst the “experts” in OPEC+ have come to their own conclusions. Sorry, Jack, more expertise there. I will go with them.

                  It does keep me amused Jack, but I should imagine some of the Ladies and Gentlemen will be less than amused with the image you are creating and they may be associated with. Or, maybe there is a Trojan Horse plonked in their midst?

                • LADIES and GENTLEMEN , I ask you all to take note ….

                  MARTIN , has said that he hasn’t replied to my LINKS because they are , quote , ” Nonsense is putting it politely. ”

                  So this is the best a fanatical PRO-Fracker can offer you when trying to push this toxic , dangerous industry into your communities.

                  In ignoring the LINKS , he is choosing to ignore the ” expert ” advice concerning the health impacts, environmental damage that this industry causes now and the toxic legacy it leaves for future generations.

                  In ignoring the LINKS , he is choosing to ignore the ” expert ” advice that warns how living in a Fracking area , devalues the value of your homes and also makes them difficult to insure or mortgage.

                  AGAIN I SAY , PLEASE………. Take a look at the LINKS that I’ve put forward on this page , all are from highly distinguished people and organizations , they all warn of the dangers of Fracking……. Please note how MARTIN has ignored every one of them ………. Now he finally says that he hasn’t responded because they are , quote , ” Nonsense is putting it politely. ”

                  As the evidence shows , MARTIN a fanatical PRO-Fracker has NOTHING , I repeat NOTHING to challenge ANY of the LINKS that I’ve put forward on this page ….The evidence I present is all there Ladies and Gentlemen , just take a look and make your own minds up.

                  I therfore warn you all , don’t be fooled by a word he says….

                  MARTIN only ever gives you his own wild , Off-The-Cuff ” OPINION ” his comments are NEVER backed up with any evidence .

                • MARTIN ,

                  Fracking Dangers

                  Are these people talking ” Nonsense ” ????????

                  From the British Medical Journal ( BMJ )

                  NONE of these think Fracking is safe , why should we ??????


                  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

            • OH DEAR MARTIN

              IS that the best you can say , ,” better to do it here where the standards will be higher ” …….. Good joke that MARTIN

              We are a much more densely populated island , the risks will be much greater on that point alone .

              • I’m sorry MARTIN , I’m not going to let you of the hook with that abysmal answer .

                You want to expose our children to Fracking , a proven toxic industry and you think that’s OK

                So toxic and dangerous to the environment, climate change, humans and animal health is Fracking …… In trying to support thistoxic industry , your going to have to put a lot , lot , LOT more effort in to your responses than that ….

                WERE WAITING MARTIN ……. Why should the people of the UK gamble the health of their children , the environment and the climate supporting a proven dangerous industry ????????

    • A one-dimensional approach to reasoning which is based upon a computer anthropology by which we are these days more and more entranced but which has little to do with the system of values to which many of us subscribe. The real drivers of human life are, as Carmody Gray (qv) points out, values. Gray maintains that according to the quantitive or numerical reasoning of our computer anthropology, our current model of man and his drivers feeds the numerical or quantitive data into the information processor it imagines the human being to be and gets of course the desired result,a result many of us reject because it falls short on the values criteria. Billions here, barrels there, rig counts everywhere mean little to those of us who are increasingly aware of the toll which climate warming is levying, right now upon the poorest and the weakest, tomorrow, or today, upon us.
      In much the same way, we are inundated ( pun intended) with the stark data of climate change as a result of fossil fuel use, but these facts on their own mean nothing if the computer anthropology holds sway. We reject them as unimportant. This in turn leads to the denialism expressed openly or in inaction. As Raymond Aron said of the Holocaust “ I knew, but I didn’t believe it. And because I didn’t believe it, I didn’t know.” *
      Gray identifies and predicts massive displacement of peoples, shortage of material resources – food, water, clean air and safe living space. Increased political instability, violence, conflict within and between nations. In this situation we face a single future as a human family: the massive cooperation required in this situation we have to date shown ourselves incapable of, still denying, still inactive as we neglect the values we need to re-identify and nurture.
      Why do we continue to allow this false anthropology to hold sway. It is failing us. It is responsible for the support accorded to the polluters. It is telling us to strive for what we want now, immediately, not to identify what is important to humanity and pursue that single – mindedly as our goal.
      Gray points out that “Facts have no motivational power for us at all, by themselves. They gain motivational power when they relate to or connect to what is important to us. “ We do not lack knowledge of the facts. We know, for example that, “there is a 50:50 chance that at least one of the next 5 years will reach the Paris Agreement threshold of 1.5°C climate warming when 7 years ago the chances were zero” (WMO)*. We know that “It’s no longer a question of stopping climate change but of how we respond to what is now inevitable.” (Gray). We know that we have known the role of fossil fuel emissions leading to global warming since 1979. and that we have done more damage to the climate since then than in all the rest of human history.
      Jonathan Freedland * contends that humans are innately unable to believe in their own extinction, right up to the moment of death.
      This we know, just as we know what we should do, but for the reasons outlined above, have not done. We must act now if the worst effects of climate change, think 3, 4, and 5 degrees – not impossible – although there will be no human able to report on it, are to be avoided, if we are as a species to avoid extinction. Remember and recalibrate your values if necessary that at the moment we are on target for 2.4 degrees rise in temperature. Fossil fuel exploitation and pollution must stop.

      Carmody Gray ‘The Hook Lecture 2021’. Available on YouTube.

      WMO reference: –


      Aron quotation and Freedland below, cited in The Tablet June 25th.

      Jonathan Freedland reference: ‘The Escape Artist: The Man Who Broke Out of Auschwitz to Warn the World.’

      • Thanks for your posts Jack and Martin.

        I think this thread has run its course, and people can draw their own conclusions from the material posted so far.


  6. Interesting news: The Tory party must have lost the argument for O & G when HRH Prince of Wales has just spoken out ?

    • I suspect any party is going to lose any argument when the voters realize petrol was £1.31/litre when oil (Brent) was averaging $100+/barrel in 2014, Dr. Frank!! I suspect the sales pitch of the SNP may make some consider that period.

      What has changed? Oh yes, the sales pitch to accommodate “cheap” renewables. Inflate the cost of the comparison, and achieve? Inflation! Hmm. Looks like a vote winner? Nope. A lot of people with long memories make up a high proportion of voters.

      Blame it on the oil price? Nope, doesn’t add up.

      Blame it on the fuel retailers? Nope, doesn’t add up.

      Blame it on Government policy? Yes, it adds up.

      Blame it on the antis? Yes, it adds up.

      Boris is well out of it. Such nonsense will cost many more politicians their livelihood in the coming years. After costing others their livelihoods, but since when has that been a deterrent? Kings will still be sitting comfortably.

      • MARTIN ,

        Give the figures that count ,

        PRE-Covid Pandemic ……. the average price for previous 5 YEARS , Brent was averaging no more than $60 a barrel.

        I’ve already shown you once , on this very page , do you want JACK to cut and paste the LINK and show you the evidence again ???????

      • AND MARTIN

        Just fill in ALL the dots for you ,

        During the Covid pandemic the average price if Brent Oil was ,

        2021 …… $70.86 a barrel

        2020 …… $41.96 a barrel

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