Parliamentarians call for fracking review to be based on science

Posted: June 26, 2022 by oldbrew in Energy, Politics, government, Shale gas, fracking
Tags: ,

Fracking: note the deep shaft

Any decision shouldn’t be based on the preferences of a minority of evidence-light climate squealers or other campaigners seeking to exaggerate minor issues. If the verdict is ‘no’ it should explain why it’s OK to import gas from overseas fracking operations.
– – –
London, 25 June – Net Zero Watch is today launching a campaign to ensure science is put at the heart of the British Geological Survey’s review into shale gas extraction, demanding the Government uses this opportunity to unlock national and local benefits, and enhance Britain’s energy security.

24 prominent parliamentarians including Sir Iain Duncan Smith MP, Esther McVey MP, and the former Minister of State at the Cabinet Office, Lord Frost, have already signed up to the campaign. This is along with the leadership team of the parliamentary Net Zero Scrutiny Group, Craig Mackinlay MP and Steve Baker MP.

The campaign cites evidence produced by the Royal Society, the UK Unconventional Hydrocarbons project, and the UK’s independent regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority – all of which state that fracking can be conducted safely and with minimal disruption.

In light of the conflict in Ukraine, the Secretary of State for BEIS announced in April that a review would be conducted by the British Geological Survey (BGS) into the moratorium that currently prohibits shale gas fracking: Review of the geological science of shale gas fracturing – GOV.UK (

According to a speech given by the BEIS Secretary on Thursday 23rd June, the results of this review are due “next week”, but there is growing concern amongst MPs that the fracking review is not taking account of key pieces of evidence.

It is feared that the report will ignore the significant scientific strides which have been taken since 2019 that show that fracking can be done safely and without disruption.

Continued here.

  1. Philip Mulholland says:

    That diagram says it all, there is a mile deep (1.6km) shaft? The actual depth of the resource in the Fylde is more like 3 km.
    And then there is the issue of earth tremors. There should be a level playing field for all. The seismic limit for quarrying should apply to fracking, as indeed should the seismic limit for geothermal drilling. Take your pick – geothermal drilling tremors are good, quarry blasts are acceptable but hydrocarbon exploitation tremors are bad?

  2. […] Parliamentarians call for fracking review to be based on science […]

  3. Saighdear says:

    You don’t say! … Hello-oh! do we need to be paying these idiots £60k ++ to not do as their Constituents ask when it is only reasonable and for the good of Mankind ( = the nation). We told the Media et al, quite a long time ago about the entire issue. Aren’t there any real scientist in the House. ( Haha – wasn’t Maggie a real Scientist, then – or just a Chemist ? ). and of course we’ll all have to DIG deeper into out pockets once again, and again and again… will we / DO we ever learn. Why do we have to put up with Lunatic Parties putting up folk for election – and which the sheepl vote for. When there’s the next e lection, will you all be voting Liberal to help teh Davy comedian ? Should hope not – but no one wants to talk about ALternative parties – like in the same manner , simply reducing our consumption wisely by consuming less: NOT throwing away material goods for the Tip and replacing with Eco rubbish ….

  4. cognog2 says:

    Here we are sitting on the energy solution beneath our feet at our wits end , and all because of a few lousy greeny idiots bending the ear of our equally lousy Politicians. Fracking is a well proven and safe technique for extracting gas; proved over many years in the USA.

    Boris should go, not on account of his character; but because of his utterly stupid Zero Emissions Policy which has ZERO scientific validity.

  5. oldbrew says:

    They say getting fracking going would take time, but how is it better to import fracked gas from the USA for a few decades at least?

  6. oldbrew says:

    Meanwhile France is getting nervous…

    French energy giants tell households to ration supplies ahead of looming winter shortage
    Households asked to ‘immediately’ limit energy consumption to preserve gas reserves

    26 June 2022
    – – –
    Big on climate chat, but not so big on finding energy when the going gets tough?

    According to the European Parliamentary Research Service (“EPRS”), France has the second largest shale reserves in Europe after Poland. The EIA estimates that France has 137 trillion-cubic feet (“tcf”) of technically recoverable shale gas resources. The country’s most prominent shale reserves are located in several regions including the Paris Basin and the South-East Basin. These reserves are unlikely to be developed in the near term, however, because hydraulic fracturing has been banned by the French Government since 2011. [bold added]

    Maybe their winters will warm up a bit 🙄

  7. oldbrew says:

    Dumb and Dumber agree…

    EU and UK will end investment protection for fossil fuels in 10 years
    Published on 24/06/2022

    Under a “flexibility mechanism” approved by members of the energy investment treaty, the EU and UK will end protection for new fossil fuel investments from August 2023. However, most existing fossil fuel investments will continue to be protected for 10 years from the date the modernised treaty is officially ratified.

  8. stpaulchuck says:

    Jim Rose says:
    June 26, 2022 at 10:00 am

    And then there is the issue of earth tremors.

    pretty much ALL tremors related to or blamed on fracking are nothing to do with fracking. It is waste water and drilling mud injection in old wells. It is lubricating small slip faults causing them to move, thus tremors. In addition just about all the tremors are below the subjective sensory threshold.

  9. EDMH says:

    There is a fundamental question to be asked and fully answered before any further commitment should be made to respond to Climate Change / Global Warming / Net Zero / ESG (Environment Social and Governance)”, etc.

    Simply put: are Man-made CO2 emissions a future problem for Global temperature at all ??

    Compared to water vapour and clouds in the atmosphere, CO2 is a minor Greenhouse gas, contributing ~5-10% of the warming of the overall Greenhouse Effect. For cogent technical reasons, as CO2 concentration increases, its warming capability diminishes. At its current concentration of CO2 of ~410parts / million in the atmosphere, the warming effectiveness of CO2’s is saturated. Whatever the scale of future Man-made CO2 emissions, those CO2 emissions can have very little warming effect in future.

    On the other hand, higher levels of atmospheric CO2 have already brought massive positive effects for plant growth and agricultural production Worldwide.

    Methane is a more powerful Greenhouse gas than CO2, but Methane reacts with Oxygen in the atmosphere and dissipates rapidly on its release whether from the much larger natural sources or from Man-made release. Methane is currently ~1900 ppb, (parts / billion) so it has an insignificant warming effect, that like CO2 also diminishes with increasing concentration.

    Beyond the “developed” Western world, all other Nations, including China, India and in Africa, dismiss the fallacy that CO2 is pollution at all. They have no interest in restraining their advancing well-being to control what they know is a non-problem. Whatever self-harm the West indulges itself in, “setting an example”, they will continue their growth and development based on the use of their indigenous fossil fuels. The developing World is unconcerned about emitting whatever CO2 may result.

  10. BLACK PEARL says:

    Wouldn’t the availability of cheaper affordable fracked Gas in volume, undermine all of the wind & solar contracts at high guaranteed pricing that have been established with land owners like Crown Estates (which also include off shore sea bed I believe) plus investor, “friends” of high up politicians be the sole root of the problem / reason that there has been no movement on this ?
    Follow he money I guess.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s