UK government's fracking 'ban' has a convenient loophole

Keith Baker, Glasgow Caledonian University and Peter Styles, Keele University
 
With a general election underway, Boris Johnson, the UK prime minister, recently announced that fracking has been halted in the UK – but a closer look at this moratorium covers reveals a loophole. The suspension applies in the north of England, but the smallprint reveals that similar fossil fuel exploration in many traditionally safe Conservative constituencies in south-east England will be just as open for business as before.

The term fracking (from “hydraulic fracturing”) has come to describe a range of methods of drilling for oil and gas that are more correctly known as unconventional extraction. These are techniques reserved for oil and gas that is hard to access. Fracking – the injection of sand, water and toxic chemicals at high pressure to widen small fractures in shale rock, releasing trapped gas or oil – is just one of them.

The government’s moratorium makes clear that fracking in Lancashire is a no-go. After government agency the Oil and Gas Authority reported that it was not possible to predict the probability or size of tremors from fracking, Cuadrilla’s operations at the now infamous Preston New Road site – which caused a magnitude 2.9 earthquake – are no longer lawful. The same is true for other fracking sites in earlier stages of development in Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.

How fracking works. jaddingt/Shutterstock

But the north of England is not the only region in the UK that unconventional exploration for oil and gas is afoot. In the rolling hills south-west of London, work is also underway to extract gas and oil using similar methods. At numerous sites in Surrey and Sussex, companies are in the process of – or are planning to – inject acid in boreholes to widen fractures in the rock below.

This may be at a low pressure (a technique termed acidisation) or a higher pressure (acid fracking). But, crucially, both of these techniques tend to use pressures lower than the threshold at which the government’s moratorium outlaws fossil fuel extraction. So, fossil fuel exploration in south-east England usually encompassed under the term “fracking” is in fact exempt from this “ban”.

Similar to the opposition to fracking in Lancashire, many local residents in Surrey have expressed serious concern at earthquakes as strong as magnitude 3.2 in the area. Researchers at the British Geological Survey and Imperial and Bristol universities ruled out a link to oil and gas exploration, but the earthquakes alone indicate that there are faults, or cracks, underground that could potentially be further destabilised by fossil fuel extraction. As such, there is strong local opposition to the operations.

Interestingly, the constituencies surrounding these sites are largely safe Conservative seats that are expected to be held relatively comfortably. In contrast, Leave-voting seats in the North are key targets for the Conservatives this election.

Dinner at the gates of Preston New Road, where fracking is no longer allowed. Reclaim the Power, CC BY

The party may struggle to reverse its distant second to Labour in the constituency of Preston itself, which houses the epicentre of local resistance to fracking in the Preston New Road protest camps. But in a region largely opposed to fracking, the ban may well be a boost to efforts to win over the so-called “Workington Man” – older, white, Leave voters who could be tempted to deviate from their usual Labour leanings.

---

Read more: Can the Conservative Party win in the North of England?

---

Consistent with the notion that government policy on domestic fossil fuel production is aimed at winning votes rather than coming from a desire to cut emissions, it has just approved the opening of the Woodhouse Colliery coal mine. The mine sits in the Cumbrian constituency of Copeland, where the Conservatives hold a marginal lead over Labour and the Liberal Democrat vote barely registers. Importantly, unlike the broad opposition or ambivalence to fracking, the promise of new jobs from the coal mine has helped build local support.

Deliberately or not, the current party of government’s “ban” on fracking hears local opposition in seats it is targeting in the north of England, but ignores similar opposition to unconventional extraction in its southern strongholds. Whether this will help the government to remain in their position come election day remains to be seen.

---

Click here to subscribe to our climate action newsletter. Climate change is inevitable. Our response to it isn’t.
Keith Baker, Researcher in Fuel Poverty and Energy Policy, Glasgow Caledonian University and Peter Styles, Professor Emeritus in Geophysics, Keele University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Greens hail jailed Frack Free 4 as heroes

VIDEO Jailed anti-frackers speak out HERE


Responding to the news that four environmental campaigners have been jailed for peacefully resisting fracking in Lancashire, Keith Taylor, Green Party MEP and a vocal critic of the policing of fracking protests, said:

The frack free four are heroes. These people put their lives on hold to defend our environment and climate from the destruction imposed on it by a government blindly committed to fracking at any costs. The latest cost being the liberty of three peaceful protesters whose only crime is resorting to peaceful direct action to resist an industry after every democratic route of opposition was ignored and overturned by the government. The people of Lancashire and their democratically elected representatives repeatedly said no to fracking.

It has been almost a hundred years since Britain jailed its last environmental campaigners. Since then, the theory goes, we have developed into a mature liberal democracy that can accommodate dissent. Today's decision blows that myth wide-open; authoritarianism has become a favourite tool of a minority government that lacks the public's support to force through its environmentally destructive agenda by any other means. Any government that conspires with the dirty fossil fuel industry against its own people is rotten to the core.

Dissent is not a crime in any country with a political system fit to be called a democracy. Consequently, the sentences handed to the frack-free four are chilling.

-->

Sadiq Khan incorporates opposition to fracking into draft London Plan

Anti-fracking protest outside Willesden Green station in 2013

London Local Energy LINK has gone quiet since the summer when it launched a public relations offensive to persuade residents that it was in their interests to support drilling in  Harlesden. LINK

The plans were opposed by local environment groups and Brent Council.

Now Sadiq Khan, the London Mayor, has incorporated opposition to fracking in the draft London Plan which is a broad plan to shape the way London develops over the next 20-25 years. The policy comes in the wake of energy companie, including London Local Energy, identifying potential fracking sites in the capital.

Khan said:

There is absolutely no place for fracking in London and I remain firm in my belief that any such application must be refused.

It is my duty to protect the health and wellbeing of Londoners, and it is well documented that the fracking process itself can cause chronic damage to public health, worsen toxic air quality and contaminate water supplies.

The harmful, negative impact of the use of fossil fuels on the environment and on the air we breathe is well known. We must instead focus our resources on developing technologies for the efficient extraction of clean, renewable forms of energy, rather than coming up with more ever innovative ways to keeping burning fossil fuels.

The UK’s Health and Safety Executive estimates that hundreds of people across the country develop lung cancer associated with silica dust exposure, which can occur during fracking. Pollutants such as VOCs and hydrogen sulphide, meanwhile, can worsen neurological problems ranging from dizziness to seizures.There are also fears that the volume of water required in fracking could lead to public water restrictions in areas prone to shortages. 

Rose Dickinson, a Friends of the Earth campaigner  said:

It’s a positive move that the Mayor is stating on principle that London should not be fracked,Though the focus has been in the North of England where most licences have been obtained, wherever fracking rears its ugly head it is opposed - and rightly so because of the known risks from the process.

Petition launched to ban fracking in Brent and Dawn Butler MP gets behind campaign

Cllr Lia Colacicco (Labour, Mapesbury) has started a petition to Parliament to prevent exploration for gas in Artesian Close, Hrlesden.

The petition LINK states:

The people of Brent do not want Fracking because it poses unacceptable risks to people, the climate and the environment.

We the residents refuse to put up with seismic testing and the contamination of our drinking water in order for large corporations to make profits at our expense. This is not about house prices. Our children’s health is not for sale.

The proposal was revealed on Wembley Matters on June 26th LINK

Dawn Butler MP for Brent Central told the Kilburn Times LINK

They [London Local Energy] will need more than PR and spin to get this round me and the residents of Brent. These proposals would place the facilities right next to hundreds of homes in Harlesden and just a stone’s throw away from a local primary school. “I won’t let any company put the health of my residents and students at risk, not on my watch. I am urging Brent Council to throw this laughable proposal out immediately.

Brent Council reiterates opposition to fracking as company plans to drill for gas in Harlesden

--> Brent Council has reiterated its opposition to fracking in the borough following my recent story LINK about the PR offensive by London Local Energy seeking support for its plans to drill for gas in Artesian Close, Harlesden.
London Local Energy LINK claim to concentrate on the 'product not the process' and so do not mention the word 'fracking' anywhere in their publicity. It is unlikely to be so easy to avoid controversy.

Cllr Eleanor Southwood, Lead Member for Environment, said today that the council is absolutely opposed to fracking:

We made our position clear in 2013 and this remains unchanged. Any approach by would-be-frackers is not welcome.

In November 2013 Brent Council announced it was seeking to make Brent a 'no-fracking' zone LINK and Cllr Butt, leader of the council, said:

While there may be advantages to fracking in some parts of the country it would be dangerous and reckless for companies to start drilling in Brent. I will do everything legally within my power to address the concerns of residents and keep Brent a frack-free zone.
Councils have significant and widespread powers which allow us to stand up for the rights of residents. I am determined to use these powers to help reassure people that fracking in Brent will always be a non-starter.

While fracking may not be planned for Brent yet, the rapid pace and scale of fracking technology means that we need to act now if we are to ensure we have the necessary examination of the powers we have to potentially prevent it from happening in the future.

Brent Friends of the Earth have made the following statement:

Friends of the Earth has called for fracking to be banned in the UK. In the US and in Australia fracking has contaminated drinking water.  New York State, France and a number of other countries and American States have banned it. Scotland and Wales have also stopped all fracking while they further examine the risks We know that any process which involves extracting and burning more fossil fuels will make climate change worse. That is a huge danger. So let’s not do it. The plans suggested may be better than importing gas as we are currently doing but not better than renewables. We should be concentrating on developing renewable energy. 

PR blitz to enable drilling for gas in Harlesden

Eschewing the use of the word 'fracking' London Local Energy LINK have launched a public relations blitz to persuade people that it will be fine to look for oil and gas in the Harlesden NW10 area. They claim to focus on the product, not the process, thereby ignoring issues around fracking or other extraction methods.

They state, without giving any evidence for the claim:

We start by correcting two key errors: Gas development is not surface intensive, and nor is local natural gas best left in the ground to fight carbon emissions and climate change.

We don’t want public acceptance or acquiescence. We want to create public enthusiasm. We ask for the media and the public to abandon outdated concepts and join us in an informed debate involving the many, not the few.

They outline their plan:

The White Heather Laundry at  what is now Artesian Close London NW10 8RW (see map),  was an extremely successful commercial laundry business that drilled a well for water in 1910.

According to contemporary records in the public and private domain, the White Heather Laundry found over 250 feet of oil shows below 1500 feet. That is a very significant amount, and there are many discoveries which produce from 50 feet thick shows -or less.  Equally, there are wells which tried to prove up oil fields from far thinner strata and were unsuccessful. LLE may fail too. But why should we not look?

From the laundry’s perspective, it wasn’t the water they needed, or at least it was too salty, bubbly and oily to be of any us to a laundry. 

The Willesden well didn’t find oil, but it did show indications of gas. LLE’s geological analysis is the intellectual property of London Local Energy Limited and we will not release this publicly at this time.

Returning to today,  London Local Energy wants to drill and analyse the cores from the NW10 area to a greater depth, with an eye on using today’s non-intrusive yet potentially highly productive methods. We can drill under the old wells from any number of locations from up to five miles away, although a gas fired power station* sounds a reasonable enough location and the owners of the power station are aware of our efforts.

*The power station behind the Leopold Primary School Annex in Brentfield Road (Previously the Brent Teachers' Centre)

LLE  conclude: 

We don’t see LLE’s resources as being game changers. We’re the wildcatters of Willesden, but we don’t look good in cowboy hats. This may not be an especially productive  gas field on a global scale, but it will be one that could make a significant contribution to both London’s energy security and carbon footprint. Let’s look!

After any license approval, we anticipate a two to three year process of exploration and analysis to assess if the geology supports a movement toward the next phase. That would be the appropriate time to have a debate over production.
 

London Local Energy’s 3 Step Plan:

1.     Oil and Gas Authority to open 15^th Onshore Licensing Round as soon as possible

2.     On license award,  revisit proven hydrocarbon discoveries in London NW10

3.     If resources allow produce local onshore natural gas with minimal surface impact  and maximum CO2 reductions.