SHALE GAS AND FRACKING

[marchesarosa]

Wonderful photograph here showing an area near Barenburg, Saxony in which there are both wind turbines and gas wells.


bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2013/7/21/energy-impact.html


Click on the photo to get an enlargement which shows the relative physical impact of oil wells and windmills in landscape.

There are 11 gas wells in the photo, but they are extremely difficult to spot due to their small size relative to the wind turbines (they can be located by the things that look like mobile phone masts). In fact the gas is from sandstone, rather than shale rock, but I understand that they were hydrofractured in the 1970s to improve recovery (like the Wytch Farm wells in Poole Harbour). - Mark

Setting aside the point that a shale well generates less visual impact and less noise than a 100m tall industrial wind turbine, I also feel it's an unfair comparison since a single shale well generates much more energy than a single windmill ( not to mention that the gas can easily be stored for use when needed unlike the wind ). - Chilli

...They (frackers) also need to tackle the wind lobby directly by telling the public eg. "This shale pad generates as much energy as 50 wind turbines" so would you rather have this small, low level industrial unit nearby, or a massive windfarm stretching as far as the eye can see? - chilli

[principled]

On Wednesday, my son treated me to a day at the Science museum as a birthday present for becoming an OAP! It was my first visit in 25 years.
Inside the main hall there stood the majestic steam engines, first introduced some 300 years ago by Thomas Newcomen and later improved by engineers like James Watt. These were the bedrock of the Industrial Revolution and took the UK to the head of developed nations. It was all made possible, of course, by the mining of coal.

As I arrived home and switched on the TV I viewed a news report about anti-fracking protestors at Cuadrillo's pilot drilling site at Balcombe. I couldn't help wondering where we would all be now if 300 years ago people successfully protested against the extraction of coal.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we may have been little better off than this account of the poverty in the countryside in early 19th century.

The first feature that attracts the attention of a stranger on entering the village is the total lack of cleanliness. A stream composed of matter which constantly escapes from pigsties and other receptacles of filth meanders down each street and into standing pools, which lie festering and rotting in the sun so as to create wonder that the place is not the continual abode of pestilence

P

[marchesarosa]

Examples of the full horror of shale gas wellheads in the USA.

[marchesarosa]

IT SHALE BE DONE: GREEN LIGHT FOR FRACKING

Date: 15/12/13 Jack Grimston and Danny Fortson , The Sunday Times

THE government is to open up thousands of square miles to drilling for shale gas reserves, potentially leading to hundreds of rigs dotting the countryside.






The process will begin on Tuesday when Michael Fallon, the energy minister, unveils a report detailing the environmental and social impact of fracking, the controversial process that frees gas by blasting rock formations with jets of water and chemicals.

The government is also considering changes to fast-track the creation of hundreds of fracking sites by changing the system for awarding licences to companies that want to drill for gas and oil.

Shale regions would be divided into boxes as small as a few hundred acres, each with its own licence giving companies the right to prospect.

Fallon is also expected to spell out some of the disruption likely to be experienced by residents, including up to 48 lorries a day arriving at fracking sites — known as gas pads — for up to two years while they are being built. Often the traffic will have to travel along winding lanes; in some cases new roads could be required.

The government is expected to conclude that the risks of despoiling the countryside and polluting water supplies are not enough to outweigh the benefits of fracking. Supporters of shale gas believe it has the potential to supply Britain’s energy needs for decades and bring down household bills.

Ministers have already said communities can expect to receive £100,000 in compensation for each well dug in their area in addition to 10% of the turnover they generate.

Fallon, who has warned that residents “right across the south” should be ready for possible fracking, is expected to say that the area of the country covered by licences could be increased substantially from the current 7,300 square miles. About 32,000 square miles are believed to have potential for shale development, with the biggest concentrations of wells expected to be in Lancashire and the Sussex Weald. [...]

The fast-track process under consideration to replace this would mean that the maximum block of land covered by one licence could be as small as 10 sq km, according to Whitehall sources. The change is designed to prevent a single company from scooping up too many of the most attractive areas and to speed up development.

When companies are awarded licences they commit themselves to drilling a certain number of wells within six years. If they fail to comply, the licences are surrendered back to the government.

By increasing the number of licensed zones — with drilling obligations — the companies will be forced to drill or lose their rights.

George Osborne, the chancellor, has said shale gas could bring “thousands of jobs, billions of pounds of business investment, and lower energy bills”. However, Amec is understood to have played down the potential for large-scale job creation. Rather than the 74,000 jobs initially hoped for, it is expected to estimate that between 15,900 and 24,300 will be created.

www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Environment/article1352770.ece

[marchesarosa]

Date: 15/12/13 Tim Ross, The Sunday Telegraph
David Cameron’s plan for a new fossil fuel bonanza from “fracking” underground gas reserves is under threat from draconian environmental laws being drafted in Brussels.
The European Commission has been drawing up proposals for a new framework directive, which could take years to negotiate, in order to regulate the pollution risks of “unconventional” fuels, including shale gas.

Conservative ministers fear the move could severely damage the UK’s shale exploration industry and are now plotting a fight-back against the Commission.

Owen Paterson, the Environment Secretary, has hosted a series of private dinners in Brussels in an attempt to persuade ministers from other EU countries to back Britain’s case.

The dispute emerged as ministers prepare to announce next week that large swathes of Britain will be made available for shale gas drilling in the years ahead.

A new round of licences for fracking is due to be issued to drilling companies next year and the government expects “massive interest” from oil and gas exploration firms.

Mr Cameron has urged communities in every part of the country to embrace hydraulic fracturing, the technology known as “fracking”.

This involves blasting pressurised water, sand and chemicals into shale beds deep underground, which then fractures, to release the gas and oil within.

Opponents of the technology have linked it to pollution of water supplies, gas leaks, small earthquakes, and even flames bursting from domestic kitchen taps.

Earlier this year, anti-fracking protesters in the West Sussex village of Balcombe, disrupted testing by Cuadrilla, the firm owning the licence to explore the shale potential at the site.

A number of Tory MPs fear their seats may be at risk from a local backlash if fracking is approved in their constituencies.

The Prime Minister has insisted that method is safe and has minimal impact on the landscape, while offering “massive” economic opportunities. Communities will be promised £100,000 in benefits for every new well where fracking takes place, under the government’s new drive for shale gas.

Mr Cameron and the Chancellor, George Osborne, believe that Britain’s shale reserves could provide enough gas to meet the country’s needs for forty or fifty years. They also hope the technology will create tens of thousands of jobs and reduce household energy bills, benefits which have been seen as a result of recent shale gas discoveries in America.

However, ministers fear that a new EU framework directive, driven by environmental groups, would put these plans in jeopardy.

Conservatives want to persuade the EU to allow Britain to “take the risk” of exploring whether shale gas reserves buried underground can be safely and viably extracted through fracking.

Mr Paterson returned from his latest dinner meeting of pro-fracking ministers on Friday. He was in Brussels attending a summit of environment ministers and hosted the talks on Thursday evening after the formal business of the day had concluded.

He is understood to have won the support of countries including the Netherlands, Romania and Poland.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10518120/New-EU-fracking-law-plan-threatens-Britains-shale-gas-boom.html


Another good reason to get out of the EU.

[principled]

Marchesa, while I am in favour of fracking certainly for the next 20 years at least, we have to accept that -as in any extraction industry- major contamination problems can arise. We need to ensure comprehensive and robust policies hold companies to account should any contamination accidents occur.
The link below is about groundwater contamination that has occurred recently in Alberta, Canada.
www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/CNRL+bitumen+leak+likely+contaminated+groundwater+report+says/9069113/story.html

P

[rsmith7]

Mr P,
Your linked report refers to bitumen extraction not gas.
In any case, the ridiculously stringent environmental regulations we suffer in this country will ensure that no worm, insect or single celled organism is harmed, displaced or mildly upset by shale gas extraction.

[marchesarosa]

From Bishop Hill
bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2013/12/21/eu-backs-down-on-fracking.html

EU backs down on fracking
Dec 21, 2013


For a couple of days I've been meaning to mention Richard North's article www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84557 about attempts within the EU to crush the onshore gas industry before it even gets off the ground. However, before I got round to doing so, the Commission seems to have backed down:

Fracking for cheap gas moved a step closer today after EU officials dropped proposals for new industry regulations.

The Prime Minister had written to EU president José Manuel Barroso warning him the move would hamper investment and cost jobs.

And after the rethink, David Cameron said: “I was just very worried that while we are already behind on fracking and unconventional gas compared to America, we would fall even further behind if we had more legal processes to go through.

“So it’s a good step forward. It could mean 70,000 jobs or more for people in the UK as well as helping to keep the bills of individuals down, but also helping to make us more competitive as a location for investment.

“We’ve got to follow through on that and now make sure that this industry can really go ahead.” www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/eu-shelves-plans-introduce-stricter-2947638

Whether this is the end of his particular road for the greens in the Environment Directorate of the EU remains to be seen.

[principled]

RS

Your linked report refers to bitumen extraction not gas.

Yes I am aware of that, but the point I am making is encapsulated in this:

“A decade after that process started, Alberta still has no rules on using it — such as how much pressure is safe, and under what geological conditions should it be used,”

I am certainly NOT saying that we should not frack for gas. After the cock-up successive governments have made with energy policy fracking may be their (and our) saviour. After all it has reduced the US price of gas from around 13 dollars/million BTUs to around 4. Indeed, I would go as far as to say that fracking has probably put back the US's eventual economic decline by 50 years. If it is handled properly, it should have the same effect in the UK.

However, this does not detract from the fact that we must learn from the regulatory failures in countries where fracking has been going on for the past decade.
P

[rsmith7]

Mr P
I agree. Although the regulatory burden the poor frackers have to deal with in the UK will probably ensure that any price advantage will be lost. Indeed our old friend Ed Davey has set out this approach in black and white and is working with lobbyists to ensure this madness comes to pass.
Any idea the availability and price of a Yurt?
Wibble...