That would be a topic for a different thread.
1 Like
A different thread would suit that topic.
1 Like
I did try but got confusedâŚEasily done these days.
Iâll have another go Omah.
The first drilling licences in nearly three years are expected to be issued as early as next week, sources said, in a move that will reignite claims of another broken 2019 Conservative manifesto pledge.
A long-awaited report by the British Geological Survey (BGS) was promised to be published, but it has been held up owing to the Queenâs death. The report, seen by the Guardian, admits that forecasting fracking-induced earthquakes and their magnitude âremains a scientific challengeâ.
It says there are still âsignificant existing knowledge gapsâ and that problems remain with identifying potential new fracking sites that may be able to handle earthquakes with a magnitude of 3.0.
In its report, the BGS offers little evidence that there has been enough progress since the fracking ban to meet a 2019 manifesto promise that it would only be resumed if âthe science shows categorically that it can be done safelyâ.
Making estimates of maximum magnitudes before and during drilling also âremains challengingâ, according to the BGS. Attempts made at Preston New Road, where drilling was abandoned, âshow some promiseâ but âprovide estimates that are lower than the maximum observed magnitudeâ, the report adds.
The government claims gas could start flowing in less than six months, but experts say it would take years, is far less accessible than once thought and would do little to reduce energy bills.
There are 93 exploratory drilling licenses already granted for 159 areas of the country, 75% of which are related to fracking, which will be automatically reactivated once the moratorium on fracking is lifted. Areas that could see drilling stretch from Sussex, Surrey and Dorset, to the Midlands, Yorkshire, Cheshire and Lancashire.
Companies have to seek planning permission to start drilling. However, the Guardian revealed this year that only a handful of MPs would support fracking in their area.
MsTruss may encounter significant opposition in the House as well as in the highways and byways ⌠
I hope there is significant opposition to it.
Iâve already emailed my MP to protest - but itâs Rishi Sunak and he had already said he supported fracking âif people want itâ, which is what Truss also said, I think.
I am going to email Truss as well now, just to let her know I donât want it.
I hope that everyone who doesnât want fracking will email or write to Truss and to their own MP to say they do not want it.
If the MPs wonât call her out on it, itâs left to the general public who donât want it to stand up and say so.
1 Like
Since WWII, the county has been subjected to many oil and gas exploration licences, involving extensive seismic investigations. The potential for onshore hydrocarbons such as oil and gas has been explored in the past in Gloucestershire, reports the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
Six deep boreholes have been drilled in the Cotswolds and Forest of Dean council areas between 1974 and 1990 to investigate promising rock structures at a depth that might contain hydrocarbons.
Mr Hodgkinson, Liberal Democrat county councillor for Bourton-on-the-Water and Northleach, said the Cotswolds had been identified as a place that had reserves of shale gas eight years ago, which caused concern locally that it would become a fracking location.
He said: âIâm quite alarmed to see the new PM is talking about and promoting fracking now. It is a concern. The Cotswolds is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and so there will be some protections, but if the Government decides to railroad this through, what will we be left with? Will it be a free-for-all for companies to just apply for licences? The risks of fracking have not gone away. We should be promoting renewable energy even more so.â
Heâs right to be alarmed ⌠
1 Like
She is railroading through everything, its very worrying 
1 Like
The government plans to officially lift a ban on fracking for shale gas by reviewing the level of seismic activity - earthquakes - allowed at sites. Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg told BBC the current level was âtoo lowâ and would prevent fracking from being commercially viable. But he said it was too early to confirm what the new level would be.
A review of fracking by the British Geological Survey (BGS) and ordered by Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng when he was business secretary will be published on Thursday.
In April, the then-business secretary, Mr Kwarteng, asked the BGS to look at whether there were new fracking techniques that could reduce the risk and magnitude of seismic events - earthquakes. He also asked how such fracking-linked events compare to those caused by other forms of underground energy production, such as geothermal energy or coal mining. In a letter, he asked the BGS to look at whether what are considered the âsafe thresholdsâ for fracking remain âthe correct onesâ.
In the past, the government applied a âseismic thresholdâ for what they considered acceptable. It was breached so the government introduced a ban. In 2019, the company Cuadrilla Resources caused a magnitude-2.9 earthquake at its Preston New Road site in Lancashire. Existing rules require fracking to be halted if a tremor measuring 0.5 magnitude or above is caused.
Iâm hoping that the BGS report will be deeply pessimistic.
1 Like
Youâll be shaking in your boots quite literally if they get the go ahead 
1 Like
Fracking can go ahead in England, the government announced on Thursday, lifting a moratorium on the controversial process.
âIn light of (Russian President Vladimir) Putinâs illegal invasion of Ukraine and weaponisation of energy, strengthening our energy security is an absolute priorityâ, Business and Energy Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg said in a statement announcing the end of the ban.
Alongside the announcement on Thursday the government published a new review, commissioned in April, from the British Geological Survey (BGS) which considers any changes to the science around the practice.
On the risk of larger tremors from fracking the report concludes: âForecasting the occurrence of large earthquakes⌠remains a scientific challenge for the geoscience community.â
Friends of the Earth energy campaigner Danny Gross said âThis announcement suggests that the government is planning to throw communities under the bus by forcing them to accept 'a higher degree of risk and disturbance.â
But Rees-Mogg said in his statement that: âtolerating a higher degree of risk and disturbance appears to us (the government) to be in the national interest given the circumstances.â
Even with the reversal of the ban, permit arrangements still remain very strict. Currently if there is any seismic activity at fracking sites companies have to proceed with caution. And they have to pause activity altogether if there is a tremor over 0.5 magnitude. The BGS says that earthquakes can only be felt at a measurement of 2.0 - which is thirty times stronger than this.
Chris Hopkinson, chief executive officer for UK gas and oil exploration company IGas Energy, told BBCâs Newsnight programme earlier this week that this was a lot stricter than the requirements for other sectors, saying: âWe just want to play on a level playing field.â
Rees-Mogg told Newsnight on Wednesday night that the level of seismic activity would be reviewed, but said it was too early to confirm what that new level would be.
The Scottish and Welsh governments continue to oppose fracking, and say they will not use their powers to grant drilling licences.
There will be other earthquakes ⌠and I predict there will be fatalities âŚ
This decision obviously had nothing whatsoever to do with three pieces of silver & the grubby exchange of those three pieces of silver. As starting fracking again makes so much sense & has so much support from those not making money from it.
Still donât understand how this benefits any of us. The fuel will be sold at the going rate, which is high. So itâs not like weâre getting a discount based on home grown energy supplies.
2 Likes
On the plus side, at least future generations will have a new nursery rhyme to singâŚ
Blackpool Tower is falling down,
Falling down, falling down,
Blackpool Tower is falling down,
My non-binary partner.
Build It Up With Sticks and Stones,
Sticks and Stones,
Sticks and Stones.
Build It Up With Sticks and Stones,
My non-binary partner.
Sticks and Stones Will All Fall Down,
All Fall Down All Fall Down,
Sticks and Stones Will All Fall Down,
My non-binary partner.
etc etc etc
There is no benefit to the UK.
Fracking, for some odd reason, has remained a Tory pipe-dream, despite massive local and extensive national opposition to the process. Since 2011, the Tories have spent at least ÂŁ32.7m supporting fracking and it has cost local police forces ÂŁ12m to support the governmentâs policy.
A 2019 report by the National Audit Office (NAO) found no evidence that prices would be lowered, uncertainty as to whether it could viably produce gas in meaningful quantities, no plan for clean-up if a fracking firm were to go bust, serial breaches of agreed limits on earth tremors, strains on local authorities in fracking areas, and plummeting public support.
⌠and nothingâs changed since then.
1 Like
Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg promised local people would be consulted before fracking gets under way in their area. He declined to say how they would be asked, but claimed that fracking would become popular if drilling firms paid residents for the âinconvenienceâ. He told MPs: âWe should not be ashamed of paying people who are going to be the ones who donât get the immediate benefit of the gas but have the disruption.â
Pressed further on whether consent would be obtained through local referendums or the planning process, Mr Rees-Mogg said: âIt will be a matter that is dealt with in a governmental way.â
What is the âgovernmental wayâ - imposition ⌠
A string of Tory, Labour and Lib Dem MPs with potential fracking sites in their constituencies joined in with the criticism, in the House of Commons.
Mr Rees-Mogg said fracking was in the national interest and would make the country richer - and he accused Mr Miliband and others who spoke out against it of being âludditesâ.
Where does the Tory government get its logic from?
- Cutting taxes is going to encourage investment
- Cutting stamp duty is going to encourage moving house
- Fracking is going to make the country richer
But Conservative former minister Sir Greg Knight told MPs the risks of shale gas exploration were an âunknown quantityâ and âthe occurrence of seismic events as a result of fracking remains a challenge to the experts. The safety of the public is not a currency in which some of us choose to speculate.â
Well said, Sir Greg âŚ
1 Like
Thereâs gotta be an economics book somewhere that validates this topsy turvy thinking?!
Energy Secretary Michael Matheson reiterated his governmentâs opposition to new fracking licences.
Mr Matheson tweeted shortly after the announcement in Westminster: âTo be clear - this policy change does not apply in Scotland. Fracking can only happen here if licences are issued by the Scottish government and we do not intend to issue any licences.â
I am delighted to hear that, Mr Matheson - Scotland shows sense âŚ
2 Likes
I sometimes wonder that if they had state of the art monitoring equipment then, would we have never mined coal.
Hereâs a govt paper on that
Executive summary
Abandoned mines are one of the most significant pollution threats in Britain. Our legacy
of mining for coal, metal ores and other minerals dates back to the Bronze Age. Many
thousands of mines have been abandoned and now discharge minewater containing
heavy metals and other pollutants into our watercourses. Other more recently closed
mines are still filling up with groundwater and will start discharging in the future.
Nine percent of rivers in England and Wales, and two percent in Scotland are at risk of
failing to meet their Water Framework Directive targets of good chemical and
ecological status because of abandoned mines. These rivers carry some of the biggest
discharges of metals such as cadmium, iron, copper and zinc to the seas around
Britain. Seventy-two per cent of failures to achieve the cadmium quality standard in
freshwater are in mined areas. In some areas, important drinking water supply aquifers
are polluted or threatened by plumes of sulphate and chloride.
The legal position in the UK is such that no-one can be held liable for the pollution from
the majority of mines. It is only since 1999 that the operator of a mine has had any
obligation to deal with the consequences of abandonment.
The Environment Agency, Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and Coal
Authority are leading efforts to deal with the problem. Between us we have made
significant advances, mostly dealing with the problem from coal mines. We have built
54 minewater treatment plants, which prevent 2,500 tonnes of iron and other metals
from entering our rivers every year, protecting over 200 km of rivers and drinking water
aquifers. Most of these plants are owned and operated by the Coal Authority, which
works with the environment agencies to prioritise the worst discharges from closed
deep coal mines and identify future problems.
Priority non-coal mines are metal mines in the ore fields of Wales, the South West and
northern England which continue to cause pollution despite being closed for over a
hundred years. No single body has the responsibility for dealing with them and we do
not yet have a national strategy to tackle them.
The Metal Mines Strategy for Wales has identified the most polluting sites in Wales and
is working to identify sustainable treatment methods for them. In Cornwall, we have
built the largest minewater treatment plant in Britain to deal with pollution from the
Wheal Jane tin mine. This plant prevents 670 tonnes of iron and 150 tonnes of zinc
from entering the Restronguet Creek each year.
Our strategic approach to identifying and prioritising non-coal mines across England
and Wales is set out in a joint project between the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Environment Agency. This project, along with a
similar assessment carried out in Scotland by SEPA, will identify the water bodies most
impacted by abandoned non-coal mines and the sites within them which are the source
of pollution. The results of these projects will help to develop a national strategy.
Sustainable technology for treating coal minewater discharges is well developed, but is
not directly applicable to most metal mine discharges. Some advances, including pilotscale treatment plants, have been made but we need to develop passive treatment
methods which do not rely on costly technology or substantial raw materials and power.
Abandoned metal mines are not only a source of pollution, they are a part of our
national heritage and an important reserve of biodiversity. Many sites are designated
as Sites of Special Scientific Interest or Scheduled Ancient Monuments. > The tin and
copper mining areas of Cornwall and West Devon have been declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site. This means that certain treatment methods cannot be employed;
however, a collaborative approach may help to deal with the pollution threat.
Further work is needed in many areas, including:
⢠sustainable treatment methods for metal mines;
⢠a national strategy for cleaning up pollution from abandoned non-coal mines;
⢠new technologies to recover energy and other resources from minewater and
treatment residues;
⢠monitoring of minewater flow and quality at the catchment scale;
⢠understanding the impacts of past discharges on sediment quality and
ecosystem health;
⢠developing remedial methods which are sensitive to industrial heritage and
other protected sites.
Perhaps not ⌠and these men would have lived:
1 Like