FRACKING

[bonnyclark]

My husband and I are very much against fracking, we have been down to Balcombe a few times to support the protest. My husband is a published songwriter and has donated a power protest song, called 'We Will Never Surrender', (Published by World Domination Music Ltd), all profits going towards the fight against fracking. You can download this song at www.nelsonking.bandcamp.com/track/we-will-nver-surrender
If you go into 'Fracking at Balcomber', you will see just how serious the situation is, and how much damage is being done to the planet. If we dont stop this 'assault', our children will never forgive us.
Thankyou.

I would add that the 5% figure as discussed is merely for the drilling sites. If you added in infrastructure, which is inferred but not costed or detailed in my post you'll rather quickly be looking at several times this figure once roads and pipelines are taken into account.

Currently our domestic gas production occurs in the North sea, there is little or no infrastructure on land, or rather infrastructure that hasn't rotted away over the decades. Certainly storage is currently offshore along with various pipelines that we import gas from..

Hence producing the gas is one thing, transporting it to power stations quite another. You can either do this by road or by pipeline - if exports to Europe are envisaged then add in rather a large pipeline running almost the length of the country and a very large gas liquefaction plant. You can see how this adds up in terms of land use... Does anyone really think they're going to route a pipeline through Chipping Norton? Where would the liquefaction plant go that would be needed for exports further afield than Europe?

The liblabcon men cannot open coal or gas power stations, hence the forthcoming energy crisis. Merely seeing the prospective resources figures however does not translate into a solution.

Frankly other solutions exist so fracking should not be discussed in isolation.

Our infrastructure and national grid are designed around coal fired power stations. We still possess billions of tonnes worth of coal beneath our feet yet this industry was destroyed in the internecine warfare between new labour and the unions on the one hand and the tories under Thatcher on the other. Labour indeed closed down more mines than the tories.

The infrastructure is in place in the shape of closed down railway lines to the plants, housing and amenities in the likely mining areas and coal fired plants themselves ( which are about to shut) . Also technology has improved considerably since they were build in the 50s and 60s, modern supercritical boilers are 50% more efficient.

Exxon CEO revealed as a NIMBY! After pushing fracking on others he's objected to a well being sunk in his 'hood.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26271662 - this is the story so far in Lancs.

Wales too. - www.llantrithyd.com

Flawed air monitoring in the US - would it be any different over here? How would the EA effectively be able to monitor 1000s of wells in the UK. They have not been able to manage flood protection systems effectively - how good is their track record?

www.bellinghamherald.com/2014/02/25/3497241/fracking-boom-spews-toxic-air.html

This is why i'm anti fracking
www.dangersoffracking.com

After the scary climate change influenced Winter we've just experienced, we seriously shouldn't piss about exacerbating the situation.

Chrissie Hynde's daughters summarises the problems here:

"In the UK we are told that it will bring energy prices down. Most people do not understand that the exploration wells that we are seeing at the moment are just the start. Unconventional gas will require tens of thousands of wells over huge areas of the country. Production will require pipelines, compressor stations and waste disposal on a massive scale. The tiny exploration companies will be replaced by massive firms when they sell the information and licences they have gathered."

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/26/natalie-hynde-ban-fracking-uk-protest-balcombe

Sadly Jellykat that website contains just the sort of dodgy scaremongering that gives the anti-fracking brigade a bad name. The water table does not extend 10,000 feet down, all of the figures quoted are way off ( by an order of magnitude or two ) and the language betrays uncertainty.

Nice graphics though...

Overall fracking is a relatively clean process as viewed from ground level. I can't help but feel that the focus of opposition is flawed and ineffective.

Natalie Hynde has a better take.

Fracking is not 'relatively clean' by any stretch of the imagination. Each well requires between 27 and 36 million litres of water which they then poison with chemicals we're not allowed to know about because of commercial confidentiality. It releases methane into the atmosphere and into the groundwater. Each well decreases in production by 40% per annum and will not therefore lead to any reduction in gas prices.

Methane into the water?

I farted in the bath earlier, though I appear to still be alive....

Spinflight - this type of incident could also leave one to believe that fracking is not "relatively clean":

"By the time the team arrived more than 13 hours later, brine water and hydraulic fracturing fluids from the well had spewed across nearby fields and into a creek."

www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/27/fracking-spill-response-pa_n_854465.html

I don't know how often this type of thing happens but the greater the number of wells the higher the risk.

You may have survived your windy bath but I'm not sure of the appeal of drinking methanated water. Gives an additional option to the conventional still/ sparkling variety I suppose.

Imagine the fun if you'd have had a match handy.

Quite...

My point is that people who are concerned about the environmental hazards write their oppositions in terms which would convince themselves.

As we have discussed there are bigger and more convincing issues for a wider audience. Frankly if you want to get anywhere, and as noted it is disappearing from the headlines, it is people like me that you have to convince.

Spinflight - are you aware of the Duke's university study into methane seepage? Not through faults but through faulty well construction.

Duke researchers sampled 60 private water wells in northeastern Pennsylvania and found no sign of fracking fluids. But they did find that methane levels were on average 17 times higher in wells near drilling sites and that some of the methane had the chemical signature of shale gas. It may have leaked into the shallow aquifers, they said, through faulty casings around the gas wells. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) also blamed faulty casings in 2009 when it fined Cabot Oil & Gas for contaminating the drinking supplies of 19 homes in Dimock Township, 60 miles east of the Vargson farm. In that case the methane came not from the shale but from shallow deposits traversed by the gas wells. DEP has also fined gas companies for mishandling fracking wastewater and allowing spills that polluted creeks and rivers.

nicholas.duke.edu/cgc/pnas2011.pdf

What do you make of this?

flipflop21 is there a website that says the towns and counties of the country where fracking is likely to be carried?

There's this map - the blue bits are potential oil/ gas extraction areas:

blog.decc.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SEA-and-licensed-areas-.jpg

This is from this website:

blog.decc.gov.uk/2013/12/17/preparing-for-the-14th-round-of-onshore-oil-and-gas-licences/

Is that helpful?

And this document has a list at the end of it I think.
www.parliament.uk/Templates/BriefingPapers/Pages/BPPdfDownload.aspx?bp-id=sn06073

Thanks, that is very useful

This is from The Lancet - it raises questions regarding long term health implications of fracking and how to influence policy and the development of the industry in the UK:

"In the USA, where more than 52 000 shale gas wells have been drilled, data
suggest that risks of environmental contamination occur at all stages in the development of shale gas extraction. Failure of the structural integrity of the well cement and casing, surface spills and leakage from above-ground
storage, emissions from gas-processing equipment, and the large numbers of heavy transport vehicles involved are the most important factors that contribute to environmental contamination and exposures in the USA.

Environmental exposures include outdoor air pollutants (ie, volatile organic compounds, tropospheric ozone, and diesel particulate matter) and pollutants (ie, benzene, hydrocarbons, endocrine-disrupting chemicals,
and heavy metals) in both ground and surfacewater. Known occupational hazards include airborne silica exposure at the well pad.11 Toxicological data for the chemicals injected into wells (so-called frac fluid) indicate that many of them have known adverse effects on health, with no toxicological data available for some."

www.psehealthyenergy.org/data/Lancet_Commentary.pdf

Sorry to interject here whilst debating health issues, but with Russia supplying most of Europe in gas, the price is shooting up whether Ukraine shots are fired or anyone’s gas taps are turned off – I’ll reiterate my point on the need for UK gas security of supply – when we’re sitting on so much of the stuff.

Thats me out of this debate again; until the Russian taps DO get turned off and/or the Cold War hots up again.

Dare I say Isitmebut but you seem to be misinformed - we don't get a lot of our gas from Russia. It comes mostly from Norway and Quatar. So events in Russia are not a threat to our gas supplies.

www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/04/decc-energy-statistics,-march-2013

Instead of wrecking our countryside why don't we increase our storage capacity and stop scaremongering about "energy independence".

Dare I say Isitmebut but you seem to be misinformed - we don't get a lot of our gas from Russia. It comes mostly from Norway and Quatar. So events in Russia are not a threat to our gas supplies.

www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/04/decc-energy-statistics,-march-2013

Instead of wrecking our countryside why don't we increase our storage capacity and stop scaremongering about "energy independence".

Hi flipflop21….I’m not going to bother looking into what growing percentage of gas we NEED to import, how many days supply we can store at any on time (and may I remind you of my quote “with Russia supplying most of Europe in gas”), but it’s a market ‘supply and demand’ fact – if Europe can not get ITS gas from Russia, the price will/is shooting up – and without the ability to store the stuff, our economy will be susceptible to volatile price swings, especially coming up to winter months.

Now I have no idea where, how, or the cost (and who would pay for it) of significantly increasing our gas storage capacity - and how long it would take to clear all the pressure groups who’d worry about their views, the danger of explosions, nesting Greebs(?) and haven knows what else – but it is not scare mongering if western Europe has to rely on Russia and Iran’s proven reserves and pipelines for its energy, it’s a geopolitical FACT.

Furthermore, there is no way anyone in government or the private sector will consider the prospects of boosting storage, IF we can harvest our own shale gas, so the sooner we find our IF it is viable and IF it is safe to extract, the better it will be for all the people that rely on gas and are concerned about price spikes, as detailed below. Hoping political/energy risk crisis only happen after a winter during low demand, is not a realistic policy.

www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-03/natural-gas-rises-second-day-on-winter-storm-ukraine-escalation.html

“Natural gas for April delivery fell 11.7 cents to $4.492 per million British thermal units on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the lowest settlement since Jan. 21. Volume for all futures traded was 27 percent below the 100-day average at 2:55 p.m.. Prices are up 6.2 percent this year”.

“The futures tumbled 25 percent last week, capping the biggest one-week drop since 1996 and the first monthly decline since September. Prices reached $6.493 on Feb. 24, the highest intraday price since Dec. 2, 2008.”

Those are real price moves, not "scaremongering".

Tug your forlock and be humble flipflop.

CCHQ takes a dim view of plebs trying to meddle with their righteous plans.

Come on Spin…check with your glorious leader for the one domestic policy he would agree with, as if an ex City Oil dealer doesn’t understand trending higher energy prices and that political risks provides high oil price volatility THAT DRIVES UP PEOPLES BILLS, no UK political leader will.

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/10673777/Household-energy-costs-leap-55pc-in-a-decade-despite-falling-usage.html

“Household spending on energy rose 55pc over a decade, excluding the impact of inflation, as soaring prices more than offset a 17pc drop in consumption, new data show.”

“Electricity, gas and other household fuels such as heating oil cost a typical household £106 a month in 2012, up from £69 a month in 2002, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said - with both figures expressed in 2012 money.”

“Energy costs increased from 3.3pc of a household's annual income to 5.1pc as a result.”

History over the past 35-years, never mind last week, shows us that the more we have to rely on dodgy regimes, often in dodgy regions, usually with dodgy expansion plans of their own – the less energy source and price security we have.

Nothing to do with CCHQ, just common bleedin’ sense as an energy consumer since the 1970's.

Isitmebut -Russia is the "largest supplier" of gas in Europe but it supplies less than 30% of Europe's gas - 70% of the gas is from elsewhere.

Fracking is not an immediate solution - it has the potential to meet 10% of our needs in about ten years time and at it's peak ( not in the near future but longer term) it could produce less than 50% of our needs). The UK consumes approx 70bcm of gas per year and fracking could at it's peak produce 32bcm but from the words of Ed Davey himself:

"The US has a closed gas market – massive increases in supply naturally affect prices. We are part of the European market.We source energy from far and wide. And we compete against others for the supply. And gas produced in the UK is sold into this market. When UK gas production in the North Sea was at its highest earlier this decade, UK and continental gas prices were still closely linked and fairly similar.Don't forget that whilst we may extract it here it will actually be sold on the European market. As you say supply and demand - if Europe loses 30% of our gas"

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-myths-and-realities-of-shale-gas-exploration

And from the Guardian an alternative perspective about current price rises:

"The gas price is currently influenced by temperatures and storage levels, and both don't favour demand right now." Prices of gas for delivery next month have risen around 10%, but that reflects insecurities in the market about a possible military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine rather than worries about fundamental shortages of supply were Gazprom to turn off the taps, the analyst told the agency.

Europe accounts for around a third of Gazprom's total gas sales, and around half of Russia's total budget revenue comes from oil and gas. Moscow needs that source of revenue, and whatever Vladimir Putin's geo-political ambitions, most energy analysts seem to agree he will think twice about jeopardising it. Short of an actual war, the consensus appears to be, Europe's gas supplies are unlikely to be seriously threatened."

www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/europes-gas-supply-ukraine-crisis-russsia-pipelines

Storage is the key issue - and improving this is a lot less damaging and a more immediate solution than fracking.

So when I say scaremongering I am referring to your reference that Russia supplies most of the gas to Europe (not true) and that the fear of them "switching the tap off" is causing the price rise (not true) and that they would switch the tap off readily (not likely as they need the boost to their GDP).