Fracking opponents have warned of a “huge backlash” if the government agrees to industry demands for new rules to make shale gas production quicker and easier.
Frack Free Lancashire, which opposed Cuadrilla’s operations in the county, said this evening the industry could not operate within the current regulations and now needed to “rewrite the rules”.
It also accused shale gas companies of “disrespecting” local communities and “disregarding” the environment.
The government announced last Thursday that it was lifting the moratorium on fracking in England, that has been in place since 2019.
Now the industry is repeating previous calls for ministers to go further and relax the regulations controlling fracking-induced earthquakes and change the planning system for shale gas.
Charles McAllister, director of policy at the industry lobbying group, UKOOG, has warned that if the industry did “not get the comprehensive policy support required, then some of the companies may not progress.”
His organisation is calling for the fracking industry to be subject to the same rules on earthquakes as construction, geothermal, quarrying and coal mining.
The earthquake regulations, known as the traffic light system (TLS), require fracking to pause if it causes tremors measuring more than 0.5 on the local magnitude (ML) scale.
The industry agreed to the 0.5ML limit after fracking by Cuadrilla caused earthquakes at Preese Hall in Lancashire in 2011 and led to the first moratorium.
But in the past four years, the industry has repeatedly called for a relaxation of the TLS.
In October 2018, Cuadrilla’s chief executive, Francis Egan, told the FT the traffic light system risked “strangling” the shale gas industry. He called for the 0.5ML threshold to be raised and referred to limits of up to 4.5ML used in other countries.
Cuadrilla’s fracking operations at Preston New Road, also in Lancashire, in 2018 and 2019 led to a series of small earthquakes, some of which breached the 0.5ML limit. The largest, in August 2019, measured 2.9ML and was felt across the Fylde region.
Barbara Richardson, of Frack Free Lancashire said:
“This just proves what this industry is capable of. When things don’t go their way they want to change the rules to suit their own ends. They know they cannot operate within the current regulations, which they themselves helped write after the 2012 moratorium, so they now need to rewrite the rules.
“The traffic light system thresholds were set to protect communities and the environment. No-one can predict what impact or damage will be caused especially below ground. One must remember that fracking involves thousands of wells not just one or two. Imagine the impact of multiple wells being fracked at the same time in the same area.”
Before becoming prime minister, Liz Truss, said “fracking will take place only in areas with a clear public consensus behind it”.
But in recent days, the industry has restated earlier calls to declare shale gas projects as nationally-significant infrastructure. This means decisions would be made by a government-appointed planning inspector or minister, rather than local authorities.
Barbara Richardson said:
“PM Truss said they will only agree to fracking with community support, yet already the industry is trying to circumvent this by changing the planning rules because they know they will never get local support especially once people realise what fracking really entails and all the adverse impacts it has on those very communities.
“This does not even take account of the cumulative impact of methane emissions and our ability to reach our net zero.
“This is the wrong place, wrong time and wrong direction and the industry is trying to take us for fools. Don’t forget they are in it for profit not for the people.
“The government can expect a huge backlash should they even consider such moves.”
In April 2022, the Johnson government commissioned a review of the science of fracking from the British Geological Survey.
The report was submitted to government in early July but has not been published.
Nick Danby, of Frack Free Lancashire, said:
“It is hard to know which is more astonishing: the utter disrespect for local communities or the reckless disregard for the environment.
“Either way, the Truss administration is very clearly and actively pursuing a fracking agenda despite there being no evidence that it can be done safely, and absolutely no evidence that fracking can in any way alleviate the present economic crisis.
“How many more times do we need to say that it would take years and many hundreds of wells to make any meaningful contribution to the UK energy mix and, furthermore, the fact that it is produced domestically does not give us cheaper gas as the price is set on the international markets?
“We have fought this for many years and will continue to do so. Fracking will never have any social licence and it is clear that a moratorium was an insufficient restraint. We now need a permanent and immediate ban before the environmental crisis grows any deeper.”
DrillOrDrop’s review of a decade of shale gas in the UK
Categories: Opposition, slider
DRILL OR DROP? 
The UK needs energy security and fracking will help to achieve this. Gas in 2020 provided 96% of the energy used in the UK. Is better for the planet to import LNG from the Middle East, fracked gas from the USA, wood chips from the USA & Canada with all the CO2 produced by these imports.?The anti fracking groups should start supporting the UK and ensure we can become self sufficient in these troubled times.
You do realise that any gas produced ( if any) will be sold on the open market for top dollar, it will not be a cheap deal to the UK. Cuadrilla are basically an Australian company backed by US cash and Ineos wants it to use in its plastics business.
Maybe have a read of this article for more reasons why fracking will never happen in the UK
https://priceofoil.org/2022/09/13/experts-warn-fracking-in-uk-is-neither-safe-viable-nor-popular-and-amounts-to-climate-suicide/?fbclid=IwAR2_8MLAQXwoIEefyMokjwZDO1OBiI1Ur-Ns4aAZV10rV5HcUFVMRi74qOw
Jono, gas is difficult and expensive to transport over large distances. Any additional gas produced in the UK would be sold on the UK’s gas trading hub NBP and simply displace some of the more expensive imported gas that supplies 55-60% of our demand.
Ineos plastic manufacturing relies on ethane which it mainly ships across the Atlantic from the USA. According to the analysis of the gas produced by fracking at Cuadrilla’s PNR site, the ethane content of UK shale gas is 5%.
There is considerable doubt, Vincent, that fracking in the UK could help achieve energy security. There are concerns that frackable gas, note the word ‘frackable’, is not present in sufficient quantity in the U.K.. There is doubt about gas production being viable within the achievable time frame given the overriding need for net zero, given also the green light that fracking would give other equally unscrupulous countries. Fracking could only ever be successful here were there to be a huge proliferation of sites and wells with concomitant pollution of the local, national and international atmosphere and environment. To embark upon fracking would result in the watering down of regulations which protect us all, as well as a rewrite of the planning system designed to protect those communities from whom Truss is hopeful of a mandate to frack. Fracking would slow down the quest for alternative sources of energy tentatively embarked upon by FF companies who are just beginning to see the writing on the wall.Fracking in short is a retrograde step which will only be initiated by a government seeking to keep the FF industry sweet with a view to lining its own pockets at the same time and at the expense of the planet. Fracking would signify a decision to abandon the U.K. and the planet, and would be indicative of despair – despair for our country and our fellow citizens, despair for the planet, despair for ethical and humanitarian considerations, despair for integrity.
It would signify abandonment of the common good principle in favour of the exaltation of the individual at whatever cost, – truly a counsel of despair!
Sink the millions earmarked for fracking into the development of alternatives which will benefit all.
Alternatives cannot achieve energy security either. Interesting how the red herring is dragged out as desperation sets in. Fracking for gas in UK has never been seriously suggested as the sole solution and isn’t being suggested now that it would be. Vincent stated, “help to achieve.” No doubt about it, it could.
Recent announcements of £160B to be spent on new nuclear and £54B on electricity distribution to connect wind generation, shows that many other parts of the energy mix are also being expanded to do exactly the same.
There is absolutely no indication that fracking in UK would slow down other investment. INEOS for example has already announced increases in hydrogen production. What it may slow down is such companies having to spend huge chunks of their money to build ships to transport across the Atlantic, which they have had to do. Money that may have been available to develop alternatives.
As for Jono, well! This am Jono I watched on BBC a review of the monies that will be coming to the householder/energy bill payer over coming months. Guess where much of that is coming from? Oh yes, a windfall tax! Sorry Jono, the antis were gleefully calling for one as they wanted to damage the fossil fuel companies, now there is one you cannot claim that UK production of oil and gas does not help the consumer. Well, you can, and you do, but incorrectly. More UK production with a tax levied upon it does indeed help UK consumers from having to pick up so much of the tab. No such help from importation.
Well said, laith1720.
Members of KELFF, Pendle Green Party and Pendle XR have signed the FoE Petition to our MPs urging them to oppose Fracking. I have personally opposed Fracking with the following Statement:
“Liz Truss has also indicated that the Government would resume Fracking subject to agreement by local communities. She needs to be reminded that 64% are against Fracking so it should not proceed along with a number of Local Authorities, like Pendle, which voted against. However, The Government will try and bribe communities to accept Fracking by offering them cheaper gas bills or for Fracking companies, like Cuadrilla, giving grants to local organizations, such as schools and sports clubs. However, all gas has to be traded on the European Market so Governments cannot buy gas cheaper than the market price. If the Government and Companies can persuade a majority to accept Fracking, it is not good news as such a process emits Methane, which is 86 times more powerful than CO2 as a global warming gas over a 20-year period. Apart from the risks of Earthquakes, there is the issue of the waste and contamination of Water. Fracking consumes a massive amount of water. In the United States, the average can run between 1.5 million and 9.7 million gallons of water to frack a single well, according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS). But this amount can vary according to the geological conditions. Horn River Basin in Canada, for example, used almost 16 million gallons of water per well. This would be mixed with a cocktail of chemicals. Up to 50% of this polluted water would flow back to surface and have to be treated but never safe enough to drink. There would also be the real risk of contaminating aquifers and rivers as has happened in US, Canada and Australia from Fracking. As a result, precious water supplies would be diminished as the parts of the world as well as the UK faces increasing periods of drought. “
Bribing with cheaper gas bills. Bad? No, good.
Absolutely no different to on shore wind developers doing the same with cheaper electricity bills.
New housing estates, that provide a toddler’s playground, open to locals.
Etc.,etc.
Perhaps the 53% who find cheaper gas bills appealing will be convinced otherwise? Not by the above. An average, between 1.5 and 9.7! Come on, that is a fail in primary school. One or the other, an average or a range. Would appear that companies interested in fracking could achieve a lot of good by helping out local education!
These protestors = generally middle class /upper class ‘uni educated’ (i am being generous with the word educated) twits who dont mind open door immigration as long as houses not near them and relying on la la land green energy turbines as long as not near them
We need homegrown onshore /offshore fossil fuels now – and then replaced by Hydrogen /Geothermal and nuclear . Wind turbines and solar energy is very unreliable)
I support fracking near me near dorchester and in dorset and convention oil and drilling in dorset and offshore in same region
“Wind turbines and solar energy is very unreliable”
Maybe wise to check the facts first.
‘Renewable generation increased by 9.3 per cent on the same period last year due to increased capacity and more favourable weather conditions, particularly for wind and solar PV. Generation reached 38.2 TWh, second only to the first quarter of 2020 when the UK experienced exceptionally high wind speeds. Renewables’ share of electricity generation was 45.5 per cent, again, the second highest compared to the record in Quarter 1 2020’
You may find 45.5% of UK electricity generated by renewable energy as insignificant but the educated among us would find that figure very encouraging and hugely significant.
UK shale gas. Applications passed unopposed in2010. Amount of UK shale gas flowing into houses in Dorchester and anywhere else in the UK…………….Zero
ttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1086800/Energy_Trends_June_2022.pdf
I support maximising our massive renewable potential, maximising energy saving systems, and using our home grown North sea gas as we need to support renewables.
If you feel the need to protest against the export of our North sea gas I generously support your right to do so.
maybe u should check your facts – SCOTTISH POWER OWN BLOG – my supplier here in dorset
https://www.scottishpower.co.uk/blog/price-cap
‘Wind levels were lower in 2021 compared to previous years and therefore there was more gas demand to produce electricity.’
NO WIND NO SOLAR – wtf r u going to do then John Powney – u have no effing answer – I do – lets cut all all the climate change fanatics power first before every1 one else [edited by moderator]
We will be seeing a lot of this article.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/21/fracking-wont-work-uk-founder-chris-cornelius-cuadrilla
Cuadrilla becoming more and more isolated.
Time to boost our renewable electric generation.
45.5% is good but we can do so much better.
if u relyed on solar and wind alone – Some would freeze to death during winter & blackouts without imported energy
https://gridwatch.co.uk/ – Awkward
I find it quite amusing at your generalisation on protesters and alluding to the fact that only university students are educated/uneducated. Based on that statement alone, you seem to not be capable of understanding the gravitas of the situation we’re facing as a species and not to mention the countless other species that get washed up and thrown away and some never to be seen again on this incredible and fragile planet of ours.
Once the last drop of oil has been taken all in the name of “we need oil to keep the lights on” metaphorically speaking. Then what? It’ll take decades before nuclear and hydrogen to give energy security, the othe factor is that whilst nuclear is at the moment the cleanest form of energy the two biggest issues are the waste and given that we now live in an increasingly unstable world with dictators almost running amok with their greed and power hungry ideas, it doesn’t take an Einstein or an in-educated uni student to work out how to hold a country to ransom does it now!!??
As for stopping the destruction of the rainforests , ok that’s a very good point! How do we get countries like Indonesia to stop deforestation??? It’s the equivalent of them telling our hypocritical right wing [edited by moderator] to stop burning fossil fuels.
When the world leading scientists and members of the IPCC say that it’s critical that we stop all forms of fossil fuel burning then J think I would be guided by their extensive knowledge rather than a few scientists who get funding from the giant oily companies to “find ways” to get round the bad press of the o&g industry.
Dare I mention the case of a certain Prof David Smythe etc!!??
I am very happy to see finally SALTSFEEBY GAS FIELD reopened and connecting to grid – WELL DONE ANGUS ENERGY
Local councils and anti fanatical campaigners have spreads lies about the impact of FRACKING and conventional drilling imho .
According to the guardian in 2014 – some anti fracking campaigns funded by Russia https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking
The only man made influence to climate change is by whole scale destruction of the RAIN FORESTS and JUNGLES throughout the world in the southern hemisphere by countris in asia and in south america – NOT the less then 1% UK impact has
Below is a link to an article about the health impacts of fossil fuel exploitation. There is evidence that fracking impacts on the health of unborn cihldren and also on that of local people and livestock. We need to start seeing this issue clearly rather than allowing these desperate money oriented companies to go ahead in our country.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/14/fossil-fuel-non-proliferation-treaty-who-environmental-vandilism?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR0m99gwf-ClnZA9_NEYaDbkY8Z8lXnmCYzD8b7e1ROsbI4gvzir7-VV4nM
Quote: The World Health Organization (WHO) and almost 200 other health associations have made an unprecedented call for a global fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty.
A call to action published on Wednesday, urges governments to agree a legally binding plan to phase out fossil fuel exploration and production, similar to the framework convention on tobacco, which was negotiated under the WHO’s auspices in 2003.
“The modern addiction to fossil fuels is not just an act of environmental vandalism. From the health perspective, it is an act of self-sabotage,” said the WHO president, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
u mean the WHO organisation under CHINA influence . I couldnt carealess what the BLOB aka World Economic Forum want led by Ming the Merciless..oops sorry i mean Klaus Schwab wants
One of that lot Bill Gates and co trying to buyup land and close down cattle agriculture and create insect farms – when BILLIONAIRE GATES eats insects for next 3 yrs and nothing else then i might consider it
“under CHINA influence”
Quick check and,
“Close ties have emerged between China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) and a backer of Cuadrilla Resources”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/oct/09/china-energy-resources-shale-uranium
I support your right to protest that the Guardian is incorrect.
the russian funding that supported anti fracking campains
And a total avoidance of the current position that the UK and the rest of Europe is in, by the antis. The Group Think continues, even when it is evident that the Group Think has produced the current situation.
Interesting. But millions in the UK will be facing a necessity to rethink how they will pay bills and are very unlikely to support the mess that has been created by ignoring the large place fossil fuels have in humanity, and will continue to have for decades to come.
Campaigners warn of a backlash. Okay. Energy bill payers warn of a backlash. Perhaps politicians need to do the arithmetic? Whilst doing that they will also find little support for the WHO following the pandemic.
and the climate change fanatics quite happy for the EUROPE wide mess that will be with use for(nothing to do with brexit re energy issue – including Germany who reliquished nuclear over Japan incident because they happened to have built their nuclear powerstation on a fault line ( which i assume the European ones are not) We would not have been in this position if oil and gas projects and nuclear had goahead over last 25 years in stead of delaying tactics time after time time
IMHO those digging holes under roads in protest should be forced out by the military if the police wont do it , and if found guilty property/finances confiscation including their pensions. These protestors are a clear and present danger to the running of this country
London Mayor would not allow protests against immigration or against climate change policies etc – So he is a bloody left wing hypocrite
G’day Bruce, so if your house suddenly develops cracks and parts of it fall off due to a oil company fracturing the land that will inevitably at some point go under or near your house because of the “need for oil” what will you do/say??
After all Mr Sanderson from UKOG said in order for this industry to be beneficial, you have to drill back to back wells.
yes syuts me CUCKOO – and btw u r talking bollocks – buses make more noise then that of fracking . We would have had everything in place re fracking in the last 15yrs and onshore oil and gas
WIND AND SOLAR IS UNRELIABLE in UK and has no storage capacity [Edited by moderator]
Now now foxy,[edited by moderator]
Sadly, we have to change the way we live and ultimately you will have to embrace it weather you like it or not. Renewables are getting more and more efficient and reliable, but you need to be more open minded to the possibilities, fracking and extraction of oil in this country can’t be done safely as it has been proven since 2013 by several companies who at best are fairly unscrupulous in my opinion, also, there has been very little to show in respect from all the financial borrowing that’s gone on.
Climate change is no myth, be assured on that sir.
Well…. Martin, you seem to have all the answers, so let’s hear your proposal for a greener world? How do we keep below the targeted 1.5 in order to prevent catastrophic climate change?
If you’re as smart as you make out to be then please please let us all know!!?
well for a start. End the cutting down of all the rain forests and jungles – how about that – What we cause in UK is peanuts in comparison
U may want to act like a medieval flagellant over climate change /BRITISH EMPIRE -, i wont be – I support fracking in dorset where i live right near me where once again council delayed again . I want to see gov to override protestors and councils for the energy crisis is a clear and present danger now not 200 or 500 yrs down the line
Time for conventional/unconventional oil and gas drilling and onshore/offshore around UK
UK shale gas. Applications passed unopposed in 2010. Amount of UK shale gas produced…… Zero.. Seismicity from fracking known about for decades but still no UK shale gas.
‘Time’ for unconventional oil and gas drilling in the UK……………Sorry,
‘280 million years to late’
https://theconversation.com/fracking-if-liz-truss-wants-a-major-shale-gas-industry-she-is-280-million-years-late-190421
I support your right to protest against these findings
I have never claimed to be smart, One. You perhaps have a friend 1719 who has confused you? I have noted a few antis on this site who do play that card, yet fail to demonstrate any aspect of being smart. As I was warned as a youngster, try and be a smart a**e and you end up only achieving half of what you set out to do.
I believe you are coming from the wrong end, One. You want everyone to change. Come up with some coherent plan and people may buy into it. Perhaps the reason there is so much need to cause others harm and inconvenience is that this has not been done. How is it going currently? Well, IMHO, the Group Think of going towards Net Zero with little idea how it will all work was the failure of having a coherent plan, not the objective of Net Zero. And, just more of what has failed will not suddenly make it work. Hydrogen can happen very quickly if the fossil fuel companies are encouraged enough but will not if they are discouraged. Nuclear can be accelerated, and that is happening for UK. When both are there in quantity then offshore wind and solar can slot in. Until then, they are unreliable and unreliable sources of energy are the current problem, so good old oil and gas will have to step in and help out. If I was a betting man, I suspect by the time that has all been rejigged, it will be realized that fossil fuel decarbonized would have been the straightforward approach.
However, what is obvious is that it is going to make UK energy very expensive, not cheap as Net Zero was promoted. For those who believe other much larger countries will follow UK down that road, then they will not. Politicians and protestors will claim they will, with absolutely no evidence to support it. They will not. So, One, little old UK will not make any impact on the 1.5 no matter what, so maybe you should find some other cause where the numbers add up? Or, protest in those countries where they actually have a real impact?
A greener world? Simple. Fertilizer! Guess where that comes from? Or doesn’t, when fossil fuel prices go through the roof.
On the 14th. I remarked that “FF companies (were) just beginning to see the writing on the wall.”, in the belief that they now were beginning to accept their responsibility in deliberately exacerbating climate change.
I seem to have been wrong.
I should like to withdraw this comment in the light of a report by Oliver Milman in today’s Guardian: ‘Criticism intensifies after big oil admits ‘gaslighting’ public over green aims’
If true as Milman believes, then clearly the industry has heard and understood little, and continues in good conscience to harm mankind in the pursuit of profit.