Fracking ban lifted

Malced said:
We talk about earthquakes as if they’re disastrous. Fracking may cause slight tremors. Not worried at all.

Ideally we wouldn’t frack for a variety of reasons. But it’s an avenue to explore to help give us fuel security for the next few decades perhaps.

We wouldn’t be revisiting this if it weren’t for the current crisis. But needs must. We can moan about missed opportunities from past or current governments but that’s not gonna solve anything.

If we want fuel security, lower inflation, lower cost of living, warm homes and energy for businesses then we should revisit fracking whilst managing any risks. I’m for it.
Click to expand...
I have a house on mythop road ,if you lived there you would not want fracking😡.
 
Malced said:
We talk about earthquakes as if they’re disastrous. Fracking may cause slight tremors. Not worried at all.

Ideally we wouldn’t frack for a variety of reasons. But it’s an avenue to explore to help give us fuel security for the next few decades perhaps.

We wouldn’t be revisiting this if it weren’t for the current crisis. But needs must. We can moan about missed opportunities from past or current governments but that’s not gonna solve anything.

If we want fuel security, lower inflation, lower cost of living, warm homes and energy for businesses then we should revisit fracking whilst managing any risks. I’m for it.
Click to expand...
My preference is to look at Labour's ideas for supporting the development of all types of green energy, as set out in their conference this week. These are not small add-ons to our sources of energy. They can make a revolutionary contribution both to making the UK self-reliant for our energy needs whilst making a significant contribution to reducing global warming. This has to be the future. We can't look backwards to a reliance on carbon-based fuels.
 
Malced said:
We talk about earthquakes as if they’re disastrous. Fracking may cause slight tremors. Not worried at all.

Ideally we wouldn’t frack for a variety of reasons. But it’s an avenue to explore to help give us fuel security for the next few decades perhaps.

We wouldn’t be revisiting this if it weren’t for the current crisis. But needs must. We can moan about missed opportunities from past or current governments but that’s not gonna solve anything.

If we want fuel security, lower inflation, lower cost of living, warm homes and energy for businesses then we should revisit fracking whilst managing any risks. I’m for it.
Click to expand...
How do you know tremors will be slight?

The last set of tremors were much bigger than was ever designed and they had barely started.

That says to me the science is uncertain. Who knows what would happen if they were drilling constantly across several wells concurrently.

I would want to a clear damage compensation scheme which didn't rely on a high bar of burden of proof on the residents. I'm aware that Cuadrilla did pay some compensation to residents miles from the site even the tremor was 'insignificant'.

I'd rather pursue the Labour GBE plan.
 
Delfino said:
How do you know tremors will be slight?

The last set of tremors were much bigger than was ever designed and they had barely started.

That says to me the science is uncertain. Who knows what would happen if they were drilling constantly across several wells concurrently.

I would want to a clear damage compensation scheme which didn't rely on a high bar of burden of proof on the residents. I'm aware that Cuadrilla did pay some compensation to residents miles from the site even the tremor was 'insignificant'.

I'd rather pursue the Labour GBE plan.
Click to expand...
Even the previous 'minor' tremors caused by fracking reduced local house prices by 5%.
 
Surely the massive amount of shale gas found directly under Preston Bus station must be allowed to be extracted?😜🤣
 
Some good points. I’d rather there was no need at all for anyone in the world to cause any pollution or planetary damage of any type.

But back in the real world, we all pollute. We all consume. We’ve tons of products in our homes that have generated harm and pollution. We all buy products which are unnecessary but we forgive ourselves that, or more likely don’t even give it a passing thought, and carry on buying myriad ‘stuff’ which has needed tons of energy and resources to create. We don’t give any thought to the communities blighted by the manufacture of these products. But that’s ok - we’re not talking about that - let’s just talk about fracking and forgive us these contradictions.

We’re not yet in a position to have fuel security purely from wind and solar. We’re a long way off that. Yes of course we need to expedite this and do more, but it could be decades away. And there’s the issue of energy needs when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining.

Fracking was off the table for the UK because it wasn’t essential. But the world has changed. Energy security has never been so at risk. Just look at the events of this week where the gas pipes were damaged. If we had self sufficiency of energy it would be a huge boon economically (rather than the huge boom of pipes being sabotaged). In the circumstances it would be remiss of us to fail to explore fracking further. Europe, including the UK, are currently shipping in LPG in vast quantiles from the USA. Of course that itself means gas will still be burned and there’s the environmental impact of shipping it plus the cost pressures as LPG is in high demand across the world.

Many of us will turn on our gas boiler or gas fire and gas cooker and think perhaps it’s magic as to where the gas comes from. Well guys, the gas flow will cease sooner than you think, and much sooner than we could get other alternatives, and other alternative domestic appliances implemented widely across the UK.

The cost to our economy and way of life is potentially a very high one if we don’t explore fracking. We will continue to have high energy costs and high inflation. We need to act.

When it comes down to local fracking specifically, there of course needs careful exploration of this. Local impacts must be manageable. That includes a host of things, including tremors. The size of the tremors from fracking are small on the Richter scale. You can take the alarmist position and say ‘yeah but how do you know we won’t get huge earthquakes’, and of course that’s difficult to answer categorically. We can’t ever rule out anything. But based on what’s been seen in other countries and in the UK so far, the tremors are relatively very small. There was a chap on tv explaining that they measure maybe 1.2 to 1.5 generally, and to put it into perspective there is a pipe being installed in the UK somewhere and the explosions used to excavate it measure about 2.5.

So we’re not talking about significantly sized earthquakes. But we need to keep an eye on that, region but region, if and when exploration recommences.

I’m not a fan of the ‘not in my back yard’ mentality. The gas is where the gas is. So it’s going to be near someone and something.

If we were to all adopt the not in my back yard position we wouldn’t currently have electric pylons and internet masts. Nor would we have local prisons or places for asylum seekers to reside whilst awaiting processing. Unfortunately it’s not a perfect world and so not everyone will always be happy.
HS2 will affect some UK residents adversely. But if we tried to find a route where no-one was impacted it wouldn’t be built. Nor would an airport have been built or other infrastructure such as bridges.
Imagine the folk living in a lovely peaceful dwelling by the side of a river or Estuary. Life is idyllic. But then there’s a decision to build a bridge across the river and it suddenly means they’re going to either have to see their house demolished or they’re going to be living near a building site and once the bridge is open there’s gonna be all these selfish commuters and business vehicles saving time on their daily journeys.
But perhaps they could see the bigger picture. Perhaps they thought about the needs of the country. Perhaps they were compensated. But let’s be clear, we wouldn’t be the country we are if we’d stood in the way of developments.

Fracking is controversial for various reasons. I wouldn’t want it on mythop road or anywhere on the fylde coast. But as I say, things have changed.

Do I want energy securing for the next few decades whilst we build more nuclear power stations etc? Damn right. Cos my kids are gonna be the ones needing energy security. Oh hang on - we won’t get a nuclear power station approved cos there’s gonna be the angry objectors. Hmm.
 
Malced said:
Some good points. I’d rather there was no need at all for anyone in the world to cause any pollution or planetary damage of any type.

But back in the real world, we all pollute. We all consume. We’ve tons of products in our homes that have generated harm and pollution. We all buy products which are unnecessary but we forgive ourselves that, or more likely don’t even give it a passing thought, and carry on buying myriad ‘stuff’ which has needed tons of energy and resources to create. We don’t give any thought to the communities blighted by the manufacture of these products. But that’s ok - we’re not talking about that - let’s just talk about fracking and forgive us these contradictions.

We’re not yet in a position to have fuel security purely from wind and solar. We’re a long way off that. Yes of course we need to expedite this and do more, but it could be decades away. And there’s the issue of energy needs when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining.

Fracking was off the table for the UK because it wasn’t essential. But the world has changed. Energy security has never been so at risk. Just look at the events of this week where the gas pipes were damaged. If we had self sufficiency of energy it would be a huge boon economically (rather than the huge boom of pipes being sabotaged). In the circumstances it would be remiss of us to fail to explore fracking further. Europe, including the UK, are currently shipping in LPG in vast quantiles from the USA. Of course that itself means gas will still be burned and there’s the environmental impact of shipping it plus the cost pressures as LPG is in high demand across the world.

Many of us will turn on our gas boiler or gas fire and gas cooker and think perhaps it’s magic as to where the gas comes from. Well guys, the gas flow will cease sooner than you think, and much sooner than we could get other alternatives, and other alternative domestic appliances implemented widely across the UK.

The cost to our economy and way of life is potentially a very high one if we don’t explore fracking. We will continue to have high energy costs and high inflation. We need to act.

When it comes down to local fracking specifically, there of course needs careful exploration of this. Local impacts must be manageable. That includes a host of things, including tremors. The size of the tremors from fracking are small on the Richter scale. You can take the alarmist position and say ‘yeah but how do you know we won’t get huge earthquakes’, and of course that’s difficult to answer categorically. We can’t ever rule out anything. But based on what’s been seen in other countries and in the UK so far, the tremors are relatively very small. There was a chap on tv explaining that they measure maybe 1.2 to 1.5 generally, and to put it into perspective there is a pipe being installed in the UK somewhere and the explosions used to excavate it measure about 2.5.

So we’re not talking about significantly sized earthquakes. But we need to keep an eye on that, region but region, if and when exploration recommences.

I’m not a fan of the ‘not in my back yard’ mentality. The gas is where the gas is. So it’s going to be near someone and something.

If we were to all adopt the not in my back yard position we wouldn’t currently have electric pylons and internet masts. Nor would we have local prisons or places for asylum seekers to reside whilst awaiting processing. Unfortunately it’s not a perfect world and so not everyone will always be happy.
HS2 will affect some UK residents adversely. But if we tried to find a route where no-one was impacted it wouldn’t be built. Nor would an airport have been built or other infrastructure such as bridges.
Imagine the folk living in a lovely peaceful dwelling by the side of a river or Estuary. Life is idyllic. But then there’s a decision to build a bridge across the river and it suddenly means they’re going to either have to see their house demolished or they’re going to be living near a building site and once the bridge is open there’s gonna be all these selfish commuters and business vehicles saving time on their daily journeys.
But perhaps they could see the bigger picture. Perhaps they thought about the needs of the country. Perhaps they were compensated. But let’s be clear, we wouldn’t be the country we are if we’d stood in the way of developments.

Fracking is controversial for various reasons. I wouldn’t want it on mythop road or anywhere on the fylde coast. But as I say, things have changed.

Do I want energy securing for the next few decades whilst we build more nuclear power stations etc? Damn right. Cos my kids are gonna be the ones needing energy security. Oh hang on - we won’t get a nuclear power station approved cos there’s gonna be the angry objectors. Hmm.
Click to expand...
Your argument rests on the case that fracking will have a tangible impact in the next few years, and the evidence is extremely flimsy at best on that. If you could present to me evidence that we can frack for maybe 5-7 years, get a load of gas out safely, secure our energy supply while we build renewables and nuclear, and then let them take over after this short term, emergency solution is done, then that would be a compelling argument, yes. However, as far as I can see, and as far as the prominent Tory cabinet members could see up until a couple of months ago, this will not achieve that. As for NIMBYism, I'm usually vehemently against it, but there is a big difference between being opposed to solar farms due to 'unsightliness' and being opposed to fracking because nobody is sure of the effect it will have and you can literally feel the tremors. That has a big psychological effect, even if, so far, they have been not dangerous.
 
foggy said:
Your argument rests on the case that fracking will have a tangible impact in the next few years, and the evidence is extremely flimsy at best on that. If you could present to me evidence that we can frack for maybe 5-7 years, get a load of gas out safely, secure our energy supply while we build renewables and nuclear, and then let them take over after this short term, emergency solution is done, then that would be a compelling argument, yes. However, as far as I can see, and as far as the prominent Tory cabinet members could see up until a couple of months ago, this will not achieve that. As for NIMBYism, I'm usually vehemently against it, but there is a big difference between being opposed to solar farms due to 'unsightliness' and being opposed to fracking because nobody is sure of the effect it will have and you can literally feel the tremors. That has a big psychological effect, even if, so far, they have been not dangerous.
Click to expand...
As you well know, you’re not gonna get a nice piece of paper with all those conditions clearly documented and met. Not right now anyway. That’s why I’ve said I’m all for it being further explored.
I can’t guarantee it’s all perfectly viable and worthwhile. But neither can you guarantee it isn’t. What it is right now is a potential solution.
 
Malced said:
As you well know, you’re not gonna get a nice piece of paper with all those conditions clearly documented and met. Not right now anyway. That’s why I’ve said I’m all for it being further explored.
I can’t guarantee it’s all perfectly viable and worthwhile. But neither can you guarantee it isn’t. What it is right now is a potential solution.
Click to expand...
Why not? We know the benefits and dangers of every other major energy source?
 
foggy said:
Why not? We know the benefits and dangers of every other major energy source?
Click to expand...

That should be quite obvious. The answer literally lies in geology which differs from place to place.

With regards to NIMBY and nuclear power stations, I'm sure we all benefit from such power being provided to the national grid. But we wouldn't have nuclear power if we'd sided with those who were perhaps irrationally concerned about a radioactive disastrous event. What if there's a huge radioactive meltdown? What if there's a massive earthquake? What if it triggers a huge tidal wave?

Nuclear power is one of the solutions we need to exploit going forward. There's plans to build a number of smaller nuclear power stations. But NIMBY thank you! Though I'll gladly take the electric they produce cos I need to charge my phone up so I can type garbage on AVFTT!! :)
 
Malced said:
That should be quite obvious. The answer literally lies in geology which differs from place to place.

With regards to NIMBY and nuclear power stations, I'm sure we all benefit from such power being provided to the national grid. But we wouldn't have nuclear power if we'd sided with those who were perhaps irrationally concerned about a radioactive disastrous event. What if there's a huge radioactive meltdown? What if there's a massive earthquake? What if it triggers a huge tidal wave?

Nuclear power is one of the solutions we need to exploit going forward. There's plans to build a number of smaller nuclear power stations. But NIMBY thank you! Though I'll gladly take the electric they produce cos I need to charge my phone up so I can type garbage on AVFTT!! :)
Click to expand...
No I know literally why not, I meant we normally expect such detail so why shouldnt we with fracking. I think I misread your point a bit there.

Nuclear NIMBYism is a good point to bring up and it's certainly something I'm against. But in that case a) the technology is proven and b) I'm pretty sure the stations are a certain distance away from 'civilisation' with only the workers living near it. Not so for fracking. And c) fear of nuclear meltdown is irrational. Fear of earthquakes is based on the fact they cause earthquakes.

Anyway, without going around the houses on it, I do see obvious appeal, it just doesn't seem there is evidence it will actually help.
 
Yes and I’d agree we need to get required evidence before commencing fracking in earnest. I’m no fan of fossil fuels. My position is to carefully explore the fracking further only if essential, whilst in parallel expediting cleaner energy production.
 
Y
Malced said:
Yes and I’d agree we need to get required evidence before commencing fracking in earnest. I’m no fan of fossil fuels. My position is to carefully explore the fracking further only if essential, whilst in parallel expediting cleaner energy production.
Click to expand...
You put lots of effort into saying that you think pursuing the extraction a fossil fuel is a good thing. And yet, we know what coal reserves we've got and where it is, so why not just go for that. It would employ a lot more people too.

The answer, of course, is that we should be moving away from using fossil fuels and towards the full exploitation of renewables.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Y

You put lots of effort into saying that you think pursuing the extraction a fossil fuel is a good thing. And yet, we know what coal reserves we've got and where it is, so why not just go for that. It would employ a lot more people too.

The answer, of course, is that we should be moving away from using fossil fuels and towards the full exploitation of renewables.
Click to expand...

I don’t remember saying shale gas was a good thing. It said it might be needed. I also said we should be pursuing greener energy exploitation in parallel to expedite it and build on what we already have.

If you wanna set up a thread on extracting coal then fine - knock yourself out. I’m not bothering to get into a whole coal vs shale debate.

Everyone knows we ‘should’ ideally move away from using gas. But we don’t live in a perfect world. So maybe we should explore shale gas due to the circumstances surrounding energy security.

We shouldn’t be having to import gas. But we are. We shouldn’t be putting on the gas boiler. But we do. We should be able to flick a magic switch and not need gas. I should have been a contender.
 
Malced said:
I don’t remember saying shale gas was a good thing. It said it might be needed. I also said we should be pursuing greener energy exploitation in parallel to expedite it and build on what we already have.

If you wanna set up a thread on extracting coal then fine - knock yourself out. I’m not bothering to get into a whole coal vs shale debate.

Everyone knows we ‘should’ ideally move away from using gas. But we don’t live in a perfect world. So maybe we should explore shale gas due to the circumstances surrounding energy security.

We shouldn’t be having to import gas. But we are. We shouldn’t be putting on the gas boiler. But we do. We should be able to flick a magic switch and not need gas. I should have been a contender.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately we're tied to gas more than we should be because the Tories have spent 12 years removing subsidies from people trying to develop renewable energy alternatives. Onshore wind farms were banned by the Tories for 9 years. Never mind exploring new fossil fuel options, let's go full on for renewables.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Unfortunately we're tied to gas more than we should be because the Tories have spent 12 years removing subsidies from people trying to develop renewable energy alternatives. Onshore wind farms were banned by the Tories for 9 years. Never mind exploring new fossil fuel options, let's go full on for renewables.
Click to expand...

Regrets about the past are not going to keep us warm over the next twenty years. Agree we can go further with renewables BUT on their own they aren’t enough in the short/medium term.
 
Malced said:
Regrets about the past are not going to keep us warm over the next twenty years. Agree we can go further with renewables BUT on their own they aren’t enough in the short/medium term.
Click to expand...
But it might be a pointer as to who we can't 'trusst' to protect the environment going forward.
 
Lifting the ban on fracking just shows how completely out of touch with public opinion Truss is.
Poll after poll have showed that the British public do not want Fracking .
 
Kurtan said:
Lifting the ban on fracking just shows how completely out of touch with public opinion Truss is.
Poll after poll have showed that the British public do not want Fracking .
Click to expand...

Well that demonstrates it’s not being done for popularity. Sometimes those in government have to make unpopular decisions for the greater good.

With regards to ‘polls’ I don’t give them much credibility. They’re more often than not being conducted by someone with an agenda and they’re not independent.

Nor do I have any faith in the great British public to have any clue about the energy challenges going forward. But the same great British public will be the first to cry foul if say we face energy rationing like we’ve seen before in the 70’s.

If I did a poll of the British public and asked them if they wanted to pay more tax, less tax, or the same tax, I can guarantee there’d be an overwhelming response for the latter. That’s despite what it would mean for the country and public services etc. So forgive me for not giving a rats ass about polls. I’d rather we can heat out homes in the years ahead.

We have been doing well in our transition away from fossil fuels. To read the comments on here you would think this government hasn’t made any advances.

Our yearly electric production now comprises around 42% of renewable energy. And there’s already plans to expand this. But it takes time. Industry and domestic households are still very reliant on gas and will be for many years. If we don’t explore fracking we will have to keep sourcing gas from overseas and paying the price for that - with all the consequences that brings. As we have an ongoing need for gas in the short to medium term, it makes complete sense to try and source this internal to the UK.
 
Malced said:
Well that demonstrates it’s not being done for popularity. Sometimes those in government have to make unpopular decisions for the greater good.

With regards to ‘polls’ I don’t give them much credibility. They’re more often than not being conducted by someone with an agenda and they’re not independent.

Nor do I have any faith in the great British public to have any clue about the energy challenges going forward. But the same great British public will be the first to cry foul if say we face energy rationing like we’ve seen before in the 70’s.

If I did a poll of the British public and asked them if they wanted to pay more tax, less tax, or the same tax, I can guarantee there’d be an overwhelming response for the latter. That’s despite what it would mean for the country and public services etc. So forgive me for not giving a rats ass about polls. I’d rather we can heat out homes in the years ahead.

We have been doing well in our transition away from fossil fuels. To read the comments on here you would think this government hasn’t made any advances.

Our yearly electric production now comprises around 42% of renewable energy. And there’s already plans to expand this. But it takes time. Industry and domestic households are still very reliant on gas and will be for many years. If we don’t explore fracking we will have to keep sourcing gas from overseas and paying the price for that - with all the consequences that brings. As we have an ongoing need for gas in the short to medium term, it makes complete sense to try and source this internal to the UK.
Click to expand...
With regards to ‘polls’ I don’t give them much credibility. They’re more often than not being conducted by someone with an agenda and they’re not independent.



You Gov , set up by the last chancellor.
Hardly greenpeace

People want clean energy.
There is zero chance of shale gas extraction happening on this small Island.
It was tried, it failed.
If they try to force it through the protests would be 10 times the size of the last ones.

yougov.co.uk

Fracking polls & surveys | YouGov

Explore the latest YouGov polling, survey results and articles about Fracking.
yougov.co.uk yougov.co.uk
 
Kurtan said:
With regards to ‘polls’ I don’t give them much credibility. They’re more often than not being conducted by someone with an agenda and they’re not independent.



You Gov , set up by the last chancellor.
Hardly greenpeace

People want clean energy.
There is zero chance of shale gas extraction happening on this small Island.
It was tried, it failed.
If they try to force it through the protests would be 10 times the size of the last ones.

yougov.co.uk

Fracking polls & surveys | YouGov

Explore the latest YouGov polling, survey results and articles about Fracking.
yougov.co.uk yougov.co.uk
Click to expand...

So you are happy with higher inflation and crippling domestic and business gas prices? That’s the choice. We will be reliant on gas for years to come as we transition to renewables. Until then we need to keep buying expensive gas from abroad. How does that make any sense?

I’m not as pessimistic about the likelihood fracking will happen. Maybe it’s only when the lights go out some will wake up and realise there’s a need to explore fracking. By then it will be too late. So if the unpopular has to be pursued then so be it.
 
Just a reminder that the Government said last time that the decision would be with local people. When local people voted against it, they promptly changed the rules and said the decision would be taken by central government instead as it was in the national interest.

Truss is just repeating the same lie again a decade later knowing they will just override any decision by local people if they need to.
 
Malced said:
So you are happy with higher inflation and crippling domestic and business gas prices? That’s the choice. We will be reliant on gas for years to come as we transition to renewables. Until then we need to keep buying expensive gas from abroad. How does that make any sense?

I’m not as pessimistic about the likelihood fracking will happen. Maybe it’s only when the lights go out some will wake up and realise there’s a need to explore fracking. By then it will be too late. So if the unpopular has to be pursued then so be it.
Click to expand...
The price of natural gas has dropped from the high of 340 eur/mwh to 194 over the last two months. It's coming down sharply. It's still above where it was pre-Ukraine and it could go back up again, I'm no expert at all in this just following the charts here, but maybe the worst of it is over? We import very little gas from Russia, we import from Norway mostly Germany has recovered their gas storage apparently which is having a big effect. Puting has cut everyone off, does he have any more levers to pull in terms of gas? Maybe, after all, we can import for the next few years
 
Malced said:
So you are happy with higher inflation and crippling domestic and business gas prices? That’s the choice. We will be reliant on gas for years to come as we transition to renewables. Until then we need to keep buying expensive gas from abroad. How does that make any sense?

I’m not as pessimistic about the likelihood fracking will happen. Maybe it’s only when the lights go out some will wake up and realise there’s a need to explore fracking. By then it will be too late. So if the unpopular has to be pursued then so be it.
Click to expand...
Frack off (or do you work for quadrilla )you are getting boring now 😡
 
A lot of talk about the ‘size’ of earthquakes on here, but the reality is that it’s the cumulative effect of many tiny tremors which is the real issue. Just take a look at the daily list of National earthquakes when fracking is underway, and it’s crazy.

Did you know, for example, that a bus hitting a pothole on a main road outside your house can cause structural damage and ground subsidence?
 
foggy said:
Your argument rests on the case that fracking will have a tangible impact in the next few years, and the evidence is extremely flimsy at best on that. If you could present to me evidence that we can frack for maybe 5-7 years, get a load of gas out safely, secure our energy supply while we build renewables and nuclear, and then let them take over after this short term, emergency solution is done, then that would be a compelling argument, yes. However, as far as I can see, and as far as the prominent Tory cabinet members could see up until a couple of months ago, this will not achieve that. As for NIMBYism, I'm usually vehemently against it, but there is a big difference between being opposed to solar farms due to 'unsightliness' and being opposed to fracking because nobody is sure of the effect it will have and you can literally feel the tremors. That has a big psychological effect, even if, so far, they have been not dangerous.
Click to expand...
The current estimate is that it will be a decade before fracking gets to economic levels. As such, it's not a stop gap for energy security at all.

Meanwhile we have the new Business Secretary who is an avowed climate sceptic in charge. Worrying times.
 
Thankfully I don't think it will come back. It failed pretty miserably when they did try it, was plagued with issues and it looks very much like Labour will win the next election. Would you put up loads of cash getting it going again for likely 2 years before getting banned? I wouldn't and hopefully Cuadrilla feel the same and just foxtrot oscar.
 
Intriguing, is BFCX3 an anti fracking nana?

Simples, have a locals referendum, see what support there is or not. Or rely on the Mail to tell the truth.
 
Last edited:
No one would want this disruption on their doorsteps. And there’s a general unease about fracking cos people hear the word earthquake and start catastrophising.

So what will happen is that Quadrialla will come up with a package of ‘bribes’ for want of a better word. These will effectively be compensation to the local communities.

There will potentially be one off payments, plus an ongoing significant reduction to energy bills or a profit share.

It will be interesting to see how the public reacts to the bribes. Not everyone is so financially comfortable that they can easily turn their nose up at potentially very significant financial boost.

Money talks. But let’s see how principled everyone stays when pound signs are dangled in front of their eyes.
 
Would Truss have pushed for fracking in her election campaign if there were shale gas under Henley, Eton or Royal Tunbridge Wells rather than Roseacre/Preston New Road ?......I don't think so.
 
Well at least we now know the PM isn’t averse to U turns if she’s put under sufficient pressure by the right people.

Fracking is vital for the good of the country. Fracking is vital for the good of the country.
Fracking is vital for the good of the country.

Errrrr….

We’ve listened to public opinion and have now concluded it isn’t.
 
I mentioned yesterday that we need to be wary of the risk to energy rationing. I added that we had to import gas from America. Some said they thought we were through the worst despite major gas pipelines being sabotaged only a mere few days ago.

Now today we see that America is increasing the cost of the much sought after liquid gas that we and Europe ship in.

We have also today seen the UK energy regulator warning of a risk to UK gas supply this winter.

The problems Europe’s facing are despite the storage being high ahead of this winter. The gas that had already been stored across Europe was largely from Russia. Next year we will have to start from scratch. There will be next to nothing from Russia.

We need to get real here. Energy prices will remain high. We could have to ration energy use for businesses and domestically.

I’m no huge fan of fracking. I’m no fan of fossil fuels. But we’re sat potentially on lots of gas, as we head into a significant period of energy insecurity. We would be crazy not to explore fracking further, given the current energy instability and the gloomy outlook.

We can be ideologically principled about this, but that’s not going to keep us warm over the next ten to twenty years.

Yes there’s local concerns about tremors and other impacts. Yes these need to be managed. Yes there should be financial incentives for those impacted the most. But ultimately the government has a responsibility to provide us with energy security. That can’t be achieved without gas being an essential part of the energy supply for quite some time.

We have to explore fracking further. Or we can face crippling costs to buy gas for years to come and face severe gas supply restrictions.

The government has committed to £60bn to keep energy prices down over the winter. But they can’t keep borrowing to pay for gas year after year. We need to find a real solution. Fracking could be that solution.
 
Malced said:
I mentioned yesterday that we need to be wary of the risk to energy rationing. I added that we had to import gas from America. Some said they thought we were through the worst despite major gas pipelines being sabotaged only a mere few days ago.

Now today we see that America is increasing the cost of the much sought after liquid gas that we and Europe ship in.

We have also today seen the UK energy regulator warning of a risk to UK gas supply this winter.

The problems Europe’s facing are despite the storage being high ahead of this winter. The gas that had already been stored across Europe was largely from Russia. Next year we will have to start from scratch. There will be next to nothing from Russia.

We need to get real here. Energy prices will remain high. We could have to ration energy use for businesses and domestically.

I’m no huge fan of fracking. I’m no fan of fossil fuels. But we’re sat potentially on lots of gas, as we head into a significant period of energy insecurity. We would be crazy not to explore fracking further, given the current energy instability and the gloomy outlook.

We can be ideologically principled about this, but that’s not going to keep us warm over the next ten to twenty years.

Yes there’s local concerns about tremors and other impacts. Yes these need to be managed. Yes there should be financial incentives for those impacted the most. But ultimately the government has a responsibility to provide us with energy security. That can’t be achieved without gas being an essential part of the energy supply for quite some time.

We have to explore fracking further. Or we can face crippling costs to buy gas for years to come and face severe gas supply restrictions.

The government has committed to £60bn to keep energy prices down over the winter. But they can’t keep borrowing to pay for gas year after year. We need to find a real solution. Fracking could be that solution.
Click to expand...
Malced.... You're absolutely kidding yourself mate.... Fracking will have no impact whatsoever on the price you will pay for your gas here in the UK... It's utter bullshit!
 
Malced said:
I mentioned yesterday that we need to be wary of the risk to energy rationing. I added that we had to import gas from America. Some said they thought we were through the worst despite major gas pipelines being sabotaged only a mere few days ago.

Now today we see that America is increasing the cost of the much sought after liquid gas that we and Europe ship in.

We have also today seen the UK energy regulator warning of a risk to UK gas supply this winter.

The problems Europe’s facing are despite the storage being high ahead of this winter. The gas that had already been stored across Europe was largely from Russia. Next year we will have to start from scratch. There will be next to nothing from Russia.

We need to get real here. Energy prices will remain high. We could have to ration energy use for businesses and domestically.

I’m no huge fan of fracking. I’m no fan of fossil fuels. But we’re sat potentially on lots of gas, as we head into a significant period of energy insecurity. We would be crazy not to explore fracking further, given the current energy instability and the gloomy outlook.

We can be ideologically principled about this, but that’s not going to keep us warm over the next ten to twenty years.

Yes there’s local concerns about tremors and other impacts. Yes these need to be managed. Yes there should be financial incentives for those impacted the most. But ultimately the government has a responsibility to provide us with energy security. That can’t be achieved without gas being an essential part of the energy supply for quite some time.

We have to explore fracking further. Or we can face crippling costs to buy gas for years to come and face severe gas supply restrictions.

The government has committed to £60bn to keep energy prices down over the winter. But they can’t keep borrowing to pay for gas year after year. We need to find a real solution. Fracking could be that solution.
Click to expand...
It won't keep us warm for at least a decade. The fracking companies have said it will be that long before it reaches economical levels.
 
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/polit...-lettuces-cucumbers-tomatoes-dash-for-growth/

"Ministers are also drawing up plans to ramp up house building and encourage communities to get fracking with promises of new schools and GP surgeries."

What now??? You can have a GP surgery but only if you agree to fracking?!? I don't know how to describe that other than blackmail! I am sure this will go down well with the electorate! Hahahahahaha
 
Reason said:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/polit...-lettuces-cucumbers-tomatoes-dash-for-growth/

"Ministers are also drawing up plans to ramp up house building and encourage communities to get fracking with promises of new schools and GP surgeries."

What now??? You can have a GP surgery but only if you agree to fracking?!? I don't know how to describe that other than blackmail! I am sure this will go down well with the electorate! Hahahahahaha
Click to expand...
Makes sense - there’s no fracking on Newton Drive and I can’t get an appointment at the surgery!
 
SOME PEOPLE ON HERE THINK THIS IS A JOKE,WELL IT IS NOT ITS DEADLY SERIOUS,ITS ** DANGEROUS FULL STOP. AND YES I AM SHOUTING AGAIN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top