Cuadrilla’s fracked shale gas wells in Lancashire should be decommissioned in six months. But the company’s deadline depends on the availability of a rig.
Opponents of fracking at the site at Preston New Road, near Blackpool, have said they are concerned about the potential for delay and have pledged to monitor activity closely.
The timetable emerged in correspondence between local people and planners at Lancashire County Council.
This follows an order in August 2023 from the industry regulator, North Sea Transition Authority. It instructed Cuadrilla to plug and abandon the UK’s only fracked horizontal shale gas wells.
A Lancashire County Council spokesman confirmed the decommissioning timetable:
“For guidance, we understand that Cuadrilla is aiming to complete work on plugging and abandoning the two bore holes at Preston New Road by March 31, 2024, subject to the availability of a rig.
“However, as part of the process, it will be necessary for the sealed wells to be monitored over a period of time following this. Similarly, restoration of the land will also take some time but is aimed to be complete by June 30, 2025.”
“For guidance, all planning authorities in England can serve an enforcement notice where there is reason to believe conditions have been breached, on the proviso that further action such as court proceedings could potentially follow in any cases where the requirements of an enforcement notice are not complied with.”
Miranda Cox, spokesperson for Frack Free Lancashire, said:
“Recent communication with Lancashire County Council has indicated that the timetable would be subject to the availability of a rig.
“This is a cause for concern, as it introduces the potential for flexibility and delay.
“We would like reassurances that Lancashire County Council will definitely take enforcement action if required.
“Sadly our faith in regulators has been damaged over the past decade and until Cuadrilla finally clear up and leave we will be monitoring activity closely.”
Fracking the Preston New Road wells in 2018 and 2019 caused earthquakes, some of which were felt across the local area. The site has been largely mothballed since August 2019. A moratorium on fracking in England was introduced in November 2019 and remains in place.
DRILL OR DROP? 
Ahh, some more from the Guardian that our “leader” has decided he/she/it can understand. Well 1720, I can understand you have to drive demand in order to pontificate that others shouldn’t. I also can understand that many a cult is based upon such, where the leader is exempt but I still don’t wish to sign up.
I am afraid 1720, I can understand what the problem was in 1720 whereas it was yourself who had the difficulty of understanding what a FACT was in 2021/2, or that the guy who predicted what was required to get anywhere near Net Zero ie. new nuclear, has instead of needing a post death conversion been shown to be correct. Not too good for the Guardian lot who think they now have the answer that so avoided their detection previously, but then that is not my problem. When I was a student I did need to be told what to understand by such as the Guardian, then as I became older I found their understanding was somewhat limited.
It was not the parallel that was stupid. That was the original desperate attempt to change the history. Which you have attempted before in order to make some sort of argument, but I will stick with the facts, thank you.
Where I am 1720, earth is NOT outside a safe operating space. There are plenty of bits of the earth that have been in that situation for thousands of years. Now, “we” have managed to bring much of the earth that is not safe for humans to be able to accommodate humans-if they make use of resources. As I have stated many times before, and others who know their physics much better, oil and gas are not the problem if the emissions are moderated/eliminated. Absolutely no different to many other resources used by humanity. “Strangely”, I have yet to see you quote such scientific experts. Maybe they are not featured in the Guardian? (Although the late Chief Scientific Officer was-and even then you tried to completely change his viewpoint, after having admitted you knew little about the subject and he had been the Chief Scientific Officer.)
I would just point out it is yourself 1720 who attempts to post on behalf of “humanity” rather than yourself, with your constant school yard reference to the “we’s”. I don’t suspect my views will change what humanity does, but I will not have “humanity” deciding they control my views, especially when they have difficulty dealing with facts, and leave out a big chunk of the human race to start with. Especially when they also have so much difficulty actually coming up with a something that must be done that is coherent, adds up and is costed. I seem to remember it was yourself who also wanted to decide on behalf of those in Mozambique whether they were accepted into your bit of humanity. Your bit of humanity is your bit, my friend, and you have used this site repeatedly to exclude those you feel are not worthy.
Not unique. There are also IMF forecasts on BBC News that within an hour are not forecasts but fact, on BBC News. It doesn’t change the FACT that IMF record of forecasting for UK has long been rubbish, and in that case needed correcting very quickly, although yet to see any apology for that waste of the Licence Fee and the false excitement created in the part of humanity that gets easily excited by speculation and fabrication.
Please direct me towards anyone who will now accept responsibility for E10 petrol or Cash for Ash! Maybe a niche group within the “we’s” now rinsing and repeating elsewhere? Good luck to them, but if they come up with something as stupid I will not be convinced. Perhaps the French paying for new UK nuclear? Surely not? Oh yes! Why? Because that is the only way that “cheap” renewables can be argued, but the facts still remain unchanged. Try arguing those facts and see what bit of humanity agrees and you will find it excludes most who will be expected to pay what has been hidden from them. The “we’s” are few and far between when the facts are made known. Excuse me for being aware of the con trick that has been attempted throughout history.
MARTIN , let’s cut the Collywaffle and get straight to the FACTS .
NASA also agree with the points made in the Guardian Newspaper …. They clearly spell out the devastation caused by human activity on the planet.
I’m sure you’ll have an OPINION on the matter , but that’s all it is, an OPINION
Here are the FACTS as supplied by NASA .
https://climate.nasa.gov/
MARTIN
The cost of CLIMATE CHANGE as a result of CO2 emissions.
Rising seal levels could cost the global economy $14.2 TRILLION by the end of this century ALONE .
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/30/weather/coastal-flooding-sea-level-rise-study-intl-hnk/index.html
Ahh, humans consume! Yes, they do, Jack. Can always reduce the numbers of humans, which pandemics do-but you are an anti- vaccer, so you have played that card, or reduce their consumption-but you and 1720 are unwilling to give up your plastic keyboards-so that card is a Joker.
Not to worry, Jack, your OPINION that France will make things right for the UK should solve everything. LOL.
I know those seals can eat a lot of fish Jack, but $14.2Trillion worth may be your Codswallop.
Took a long walk this am Jack, and observed that the barley on the Estate that was uncut two weeks ago has now EVENTUALLY been harvested. Just about the latest harvesting of barley I can remember in the area, and due to a summer of rain and low temperatures. (At least the pub where I had breakfast should be okay for beer-unless some idiots decide to divert it to replace oil! ) There’s a FACT for 1720 and the Guardian. Hedgerows full of a great autumn mass of berries. Now, if I wanted to visit folklore, a harsh winter on the way. Maybe, maybe not, but I trust my gas supplies will be secured, either way.
What was your other OPINION Jack?
Oh yes, once the war is over we will be friends again! How’s that shaping up, Jack?
MARTIN
Don’t worry about JACK and his plastic keyboard , mines made out of wicker .
SERIOUSLY though , there’s so much fossil fuel derived junk plastic in the the world , we could recycle from here to eternity . Without the help of additional fossil fuels .
HEY MARTIN , talking about the planet sinking under the weight of fossil fuel derived junk plastic , didn’t you know we even have plastic in out BLOOD .
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/microplastics-found-in-human-blood-for-first-time
SERIOUSLY though, “we” can avoid pollution with what “we” produce. “We” produce a lot of sh**, doesn’t mean it can not be controlled. I do so-why can you not do the same, Jack? Surely Jack, you would not be ONCE AGAIN blaming others for what you are unwilling to do yourself? (Tried one of those new fangled electric vehicles, yet? Questioned for the umpteenth time, answer zero. Could at least magnify your “concern” regarding risk of cancer and give that as a reason to avoid!)
(When Jack states “SERIOUSLY” one knows what will follow will be a hoot!)
Just another of the crowd with six cats and a bird box, claiming to be a bird lover.
Jack, I have IRON in my blood!
Shock/horror.
Might surprise you Jack that surgeons also IMPLANT plastic in human blood vessels!
Shock/horror.
You can always chose to reject (oops) if you are told that is what you need, and the artificial rubber within the ventilators, and the plastic syringes etc. etc. As you don’t care to give up your plastic keyboard I suspect you would just say your demand is different-but, it isn’t.
Don’t worry MARTIN about the plastic shortage for syringes and JACKS plastic keyboard
We have enough fossil fuel plastic junk floating in the ocean to recycle without the need to produce more.
1.6 MILLION Square Kilometers of PLASTIC JUNK
https://theoceancleanup.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch/#:~:text=The%20GPGP%20covers%20an%20estimated,times%20the%20size%20of%20France.&text=To%20formulate%20this%20number%2C%20the,elaborate%20sampling%20method%20ever%20coordinated.
MARTIN , jumps in feet first with his evidence void ” OPINION ” once again .
Remember ladies and gentlemen, MARTIN offers” NOTHING ” but wild Off-The-Cuff comments.
Backs up ” NOTHING ” he / she says with any evidence .
Does ” NOTHING ” but try and divert the conversation away from the main topics .
Has ” NOTHING ” good to say about green energy.
Show MARTIN evidence that proves Fracking is highly toxic and dangerous and he / she has ” NOTHING ” to say …. He/ she just pretends they’ve not seen your post
MARTIN , on behalf of JACK and the readers
THANKS FOR ” NOTHING “
Thank you for your OPINION , MARTIN .
As usual it means NOTHING , as you have not backed up your comments with a single shred of evidence.
Your OPINION has been duly noted.
Thanks for NOTHING.
Meanwhile Jack, you need to get your bid in by October 9th to take part in Sizewell C. Just remember it must be FOC to the British taxpayer, to match EDF.
Lord Haw-Haw had his moments of hilarity, too.
(I liked the £20B tag-now, wait and see what the cost ends up. I also liked the bit about how many households could be provided with the output, without one word regarding the price! I could provide loads of households with diamonds, whether they could afford them is another matter, except for Jack.)
As the late Chief Scientific Officer stated, it will be required and the maths. will need to add up. What they add up to, will be known eventually, even in spite of Jack’s best attempts to peddle his/her/it’s own propaganda in order to hide them. Hinkley Point already provides a template, but who knows there may be a BOGOFF offer on the table. LOL I await the Jill from the world of fantasy.)
MARTIN , in all that diversionary Collywaffle , you seem to of missed the elephant in the room .
AGAIN I will show you ,
Don’t worry MARTIN , about the plastic shortage for syringes and JACKS plastic keyboard .
We have enough fossil fuel plastic junk floating in the ocean to recycle without the need to produce more .
1.6 MILLION Square Kilometers of PLASTIC JUNK in the ocean
https://theoceancleanup.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch/#:~:text=The%20GPGP%20covers%20an%20estimated,times%20the%20size%20of%20France.&text=To%20formulate%20this%20number%2C%20the,elaborate%20sampling%20method%20ever%20coordinated.
The plastic in our oceans is there with a lot of other stuff, Jack-including the radioactive waste water released in Japan recently! You mean that elephant?
Looking at the way plastic use is so uncontrolled and used for such wasteful enterprises Jack, maybe less would be in the oceans if less was used for no good purpose??
Perhaps you should also look at the recycling of solar panels, wind turbines, EVs and nuclear reactors. On the latter, there is a fleet of UK nuclear subs. rusting away waiting recycling, Sellafield is filled to the brim and under ground nuclear waste storage will be coming shortly to communities to make up for that-at a cost of over £50B. Perhaps the French will do it all for the UK?
OH dear MARTIN ,
You’ve unknowingly given your FULL support for the GREEN industry.
Hey MARTIN didn’t you know , that you won’t need to scrap your solar panels for 25 – 30 years . That’s a LONG TIME .
Talking of great leaps forward…… The new generation of solar panels will be cheaper to produce and are more efficient , producing MORE ELECTRICITY …….. Great News eh
Some more Great News , what about the breakthrough in battery technology ……. ” Forever Batteries ” you’ll cut down on a LOT of waste with these batteries
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/forever-battery-promises-change-ev-122225224.html
Even Toyota have had major breakthrough in battery technology….
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/04/toyota-claims-battery-breakthrough-electric-cars
MARTIN , let’s celebrate together these great leaps forward . Should you or I put up the bunting ???????
MARTIN , ” HAPPY DAYS ”
In all that excitement, I forgot to put up my evidence regarding the NEW generation of Solar Panels.
Cheaper to produce and more efficient , generating MORE green electricity .
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/06/revolutionary-solar-power-cell-innovations-break-key-energy-threshold
I think I can leave others to react in their own way to your rather sad outburst, Martin, no doubt due either to your unwillingness or your inability to understand what the real issues are, and your compensatory preference for defamation, distraction, diversion and disinformation. Why not try in your maturity to actually read the scientific articles which deal with the real problem, a problem you avoid like the plague?
Hmm, 1720, like you did with reference to the late Chief Scientific Officer??? Was that because you were not mature, or wishing to distract, create a diversion-or, just not understanding?
So, please advise which of the groups of scientists I should believe regarding the carbon footprint of using cereals to produce fuel compared to fossil fuel?
You may take a look at 1720 where a scientist nearly achieved bankruptcy through what he described as “irrational exuberance”! Rather than being a way for you to remember your PIN number, perhaps you are indicating an excuse?
I really would suggest you take a closer look at scientists output. Some is accurate, some is not and some is inclined to lead to the destruction of humanity.
MARTIN , REMEMBER ” 1.6 MILLION ”
” 1.6 MILLION square kilometers ” of Fossil Fuel PLASTIC JUNK in the ocean …… Plenty of recycling to be done here , before more Fossil Fuel derived plastic is made .
https://theoceancleanup.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch/#:~:text=The%20GPGP%20covers%20an%20estimated,times%20the%20size%20of%20France.&text=To%20formulate%20this%20number%2C%20the,elaborate%20sampling%20method%20ever%20coordinated.