“Fracking is not compatible with tackling climate change, and carries
serious risks to the local environment and people’s health - that’s why
the Scottish and Welsh Governments have both called moratoriums". FOE.
And perhaps something that the current government should consider in the final run-in to the General Election. Ed.
The penny drops, slowly but surely. In early 2011 not one UK national daily newspaper wanted to know when we contacted editors until The Guardian took things on board. Now there are over 250 - anti frack groups across the UK
In his most recent
newsletter/bulletin Ardeche députe Pascale Terrasse, who
spear-headed the campaign for an anti-fracking law in France ( later to become
the much watered-down loi jacob ) has raised concerns that the UMP opposition
party have recently tabled a motion in the upper house of the French parliament
seeking to amend the law. The senators failed in their attempt,
but we have not the slightest doubt that they will try again. It is worth noting perhaps that
only the current government are opposed to fracking. All
opposition parties ( UMP, Front National ++ ) who will seek election in 2017
have declared that they are in favour of exploration en France. Read the newsletter/report ( here in
French, but easily translated via Google translate - at least sufficiently (!)
to gain an insight)............................ http://www.pascalterrasse.com/accueil/48-articles/1590-gaz-de-schiste-notre-mobilisation-continue
Fossil fuel industry protests over 'risky' assets warning from energy secretary
Oil and gas industry expresses concern in a letter to Ed Davey about
his comments on fossil fuel assets becoming unburnable to stop dangerous
climate change
Le
Centre hydrocarbures non conventionnels (CHNC) a été présenté mardi par
Jean-Louis Schilansky, l'ancien président de l'Union française des
industries pétrolières (Ufip). Cette structure entend dépassionner le
domaine des gaz et pétroles de schistes grâce à des informations
précises et argumentées.
In French for a change, but very simple to translate. Basically, French Oil and Gas CEOs have united to establish so called information centre claiming to dispassionately present the facts about the extraction of shale gas by means of hydraulic fracturation.
Just one problem guys and that is that the 'facts' are widely known already. Evidence of the harm done in the US and the nonsense of a bonanza in Poland is there for all to see. In short, these are the facts.
a. This is yet another fossil fuel extracted in a harmful manner and at a time when all investment should be directed towards the development of renewable sources with maximum haste.
b. Employment statistics are phoney and the jobs that are created are extremely unhealthy and short term.
c. The damage to infrastructure and the landscape is permanent.
d. Estimates of realisable resources are wildly exaggerated in order to escalate share price.
e. Often deemed 'clean' or 'natural' gas, shale gas is nothing of the sort and when all aspects are factored in such as the amount of diesel fuel used in logistics it is actually dirtier than coal.
f. Notions of a 'transitional' or 'interim' fuel are nonsense. There should be no interim stage. Investment in renewable sources is long overdue and ever more urgent.
g. The reduction in property values, effects on human health ( in particular cancers ) and livestock are well documented.
NO FURTHER INFORMATION IS REQUIRED AT THIS POINT THANK YOU.
It's as though all the evidence relating to cancers, groundwater pollution, damage to infrastructure and landscape in the US in particular did not exist. What is it with the UK?
REUTERSNEWS: The decision of theUS oil companyChevronto stopshale gasexplorationin Polandshowsan uncertain future forthis energy sourcein Europe, whereit facesmany obstacles.
The future ofshale gasin Europeis uncertain, as evidenced bythe decision of theUS oil companyChevronto stopexplorationin Poland.Unlike theUS,where the explosionof shale gashas reducedthe energy dependence oftheworld's largest economy, Europeis still in itsinfancyin this area.
No commercial usehas yet begunon a continentthat has, however, according toUS governmentinformationon energy,several thousandbillion cubic metersof recoverableshale gas.However,US officialstempertheir estimateson the basis thatthe depositshave notyet beenlocated orvaluedand that their profitabilityis not known.
"TOO MANYOBSTACLES"
Another obstacle toshale gasin Europe, the collapse ofoil pricesdue tooversupplyin particular fromthe explosion ofgas productionand shaleoil to the UnitedStates."I know of noserious personwho thinks thatEurope will experiencea revolutionof shale gasfor at least15 years,"said PaulStevens ofthe British Institutethink tankChatham Houseenergy."That will not happenbecause there aretoo many obstacles."
These barriersinclude thereluctance of manyEuropean governmentsfacehydraulic fracturing,which involves injectingsandinto the rockand waterbut alsochemicalsto extractshale gas.This technique isbanned in Franceand is the subjectof a moratoriumin Germany becauseof the damage itcould causeto the environment.
Themost 'promising' regions
In this context,Chevrondecidedto stop looking forshale gasin Poland tofocus onother morepromising regions.Firstinconclusivetrials,the difficult terrainand possibleregulatorymattersbarriershave led othercompanies, includingTotal,to turn his backto Poland.
Totalhas announcedFebruary 2reporterseveral monthshis first testin Denmarkdue todelays inthe construction of adrillingplatform.However,some European governmentsbelieve inshale gas.Thisis the caseof GreatBritain, whichintends to reduceits energy dependenceandoffset the decline inoil productionin the North Sea.
CuadrillaandIGASthusdrilleda number ofwells.Butin Britainalso,commercial productionhas not begunbecause, again, there is agrowing opposition tohydraulic fracturing.Scotland,whose resourcescould coverthe Britishgas needsfor more than 30years,andlast week announceda moratoriumon the development ofall unconventionaloil and gas resources
But still Cameron, Osborne & Co bang on about it. But of course they would wouldn't they having invested so much of themselves in it. Of course, the potential for damage to infrastructure and human health is still huge and fossil fuel extraction in direct opposition to declared government policy on climate change. Ed.
