Showing posts with label fracking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fracking. Show all posts

Thursday, 16 July 2020

UK minerals industry once had great hopes for frac sand

The UK minerals industry had looked forward to fracking. It had great hopes for the profits that would come from frac sand; the huge amounts that would be needed to be quarried from greenfield sites across the country. As we posted some years ago in Fracking and sand:
Some companies in the minerals industry will be rubbing their hands at the prospect of fracking in the UK, if the US is anything to go by. Much has been said about the environmental damage of fracking, its impact on groundwater, its impact on the climate; less has been said about the silica sand - frac sand - suspended in the toxic concoction of chemicals pumped underground, needed to prop the fractures open - "a single fracked well can require 10,000 tons of industrial silica sand”. This BGS presentation maps the UK silica sand deposits.
If the UK is to embrace fracking, it must be ready to embrace an increase in silica sand quarrying, and the carcinogenic silica dust that goes with it.
Fortunately, "fracking is over...", if the UK energy minister is to be believed. But it wasn’t a change of heart from government. Economics is destroying the frackers’ dreams, as indicated recently when US shale gas pioneer Chesapeake Energy filed for bankruptcy. Frac sand producers and their investors are also paying the price:





The UK’s Mineral Products Association will have read the news too, and – realising the game’s up for frac sand – has had a recent push to highlight the mineral’s other uses:

Posted by
Labels: ,

Sunday, 28 June 2020

‘For now, fracking is over... we've moved on’, says UK energy minister


Mr Kwarteng made the comments while speaking about a new 50-megawatt cryogenic battery facility outside Manchester that will store renewable energy:
We had a moratorium on fracking last year and frankly the debate’s moved on. It is not something that we’re looking to do.


Perhaps this has something to do with why the debate has moved on. In the US:


Posted by
Labels: ,

Monday, 4 November 2019

Fracking halt announcement: bad news for the UK minerals industry

We have previously posted about fracking, how it's deeply unpopular and has no social licence. 

This didn’t stop Aggregate Industries, however, from being one of the first to jump on the bandwagon, profiting from our country's attempt to uncover yet another source of fossil fuels, and having one of its quarries targeted by protesters in the process.


The government – in preparing the ground for the election – has now called for a temporary halt to shale gas extraction, to be imposed "until and unless" extraction is proved safe.

The government had previously been in favour of covering our country with fracking rigs. Boris Johnson had referred to fracking as "glorious news for humanity" and that we should "leave no stone unturned, or unfracked" in pursuit of such riches.

Whilst this suspension is great news for communities under threat from fracking – and the associated earthquakes, groundwater pollution, HGVs etc – it is less great news for the UK minerals industry, salivating at the thought of delivering load after load of aggregates, particularly frac sand:
Each fracking site would require over 7,500 tons of frac sand (from Cheshire and/or Norfolk)
That source of revenue – to Aggregate Industries and friends – now looks a good deal less certain.
Posted by
Labels:

Friday, 30 November 2018

Controlling the fracking narrative

Readers will know by now that we’re not the biggest fans of fracking. It’s one of the most unpopular forms of development, surpassed only by quarrying.

Despite the UN's stark warning that we must increase our efforts fivefold to avoid a climate catastrophe, some companies have no qualms about profiting from this controversial fossil fuel source – including Aggregate Industries:


For those wanting to know more about fracking, the wikipedia page on Cuadrilla – the company behind 37 quakes in three weeks at its Preston New Road site in Lancashire, the company now seeking to move the seismic goalposts – was helpfully hacked this week:


I have control of Cuadrilla’s Wikipedia page. As made clear under Wikipedia’s Creative Commons licence, anyone who feels they can improve this Wiki page is welcome to update and improve it. I can provide citations/references for every statement that has been made. This update has been made with transparency in mind, so that investors in Cuadrilla and fracking can make their own minds up whether or not they want to pour away their money on this toxic industry.
It’s important we control the narrative and tell the truth.
Here’s a screenshot of that reworked page, before changes were later removed.

Posted by
Labels:

Wednesday, 14 November 2018

Another unorthodox geological experiment

Fracking has been in the news again. At Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road site in Lancashire, fracking has triggered 37 minor quakes in three weeks:
Two of those have been powerful enough to exceed a regulatory threshold that requires fracking to stop, and on a third occasion the company voluntarily ceased operations when it neared the limit.
Cuadrilla didn't expect this level of seismicity:
During a tour of the site in June, Matthew Lambert, the government and public affairs director at Cuadrilla, said: "Because we are managing that risk I don’t really accept that we are likely to cause seismicity above that level [an apparent reference to 0.5-magnitude] and we will not be causing seismicity which will damage property."
Quakes over twice that level have since been measured. It therefore beggars belief that:
Francis Egan, the chief executive of Cuadrilla, last week urged the government to relax the regulatory threshold or risk stifling shale gas exploration.
Thankfully:
The energy minister, Claire Perry, rejected such calls, saying only a "very foolish politician" would do so at this point.
But so much for all the investigations and assurances from Cuadrilla and consultants Arup:
Francis Egan referred to the EIAs for Roseacre Wood and Preston New Road as "the most detailed that have ever been undertaken" with consultancies from Arup spending a year and half on them.
Shale gas exploration is an emerging area in the UK and Arup understands the full range of environmental issues.
Which is plainly over-egging it somewhat, based on the 37 quakes in three weeks.

It's another example of the fallibility of consultants, about which we know all too well with Straitgate – a site incidentally which has had consultants struggling with Environmental Impact Assessments far longer than "a year and a half", with still no end in sight.

Anyway, you can understand why the Green Party says Cuadrilla is "obviously in way over their heads".

In the meantime, for those with an interest in this subject, the Government has launched a consultation on community involvement in shale gas proposals:
Shale gas developers could be required to consult local communities, even before submitting a planning application, following the launch of the latest government consultation.
Those with an interest have until Monday 7 January 2019 to respond.
Posted by
Labels:

Monday, 10 September 2018

DCC pension fund has £107 million invested in fracking

... according to new data, and this article from DevonLive:
Devon County Council are among those in the UK that have invested £9 billion of their workers’ pensions into companies that frack, despite some fierce local opposition. 
Peter Scott, from Frack Free Totnes, said:
It’s shocking to see that Devon County Council are directly investing public money into the global fracking industry. Fracking threatens communities, destroys local landscapes, and fuels climate change across the globe. As this industry tries to get a foothold in the UK, it's crucial that our councils take a clear stand against fracking and divest from the companies responsible.
A DCC spokesman commented:
The Committee's primary duty is to seek to obtain the best financial return for its members, but the Committee does consider environmental and social issues in all of its investment decisions.
Friends of the Earth warned:
UK councils should know better than to invest in fracking companies. These companies are inflicting their fracking operations on communities around the world, and this can have significant impacts. Many UK councils have rightly opposed fracking in their own area – however it is shocking that they still support the global fracking industry. We should remember too that the climate change caused by fracking will affect us all, no matter where the fracking is conducted.
Posted by
Labels: , ,

Friday, 17 August 2018

‘UK Government buried fracking pollution warning’



A UK government report concluding that shale gas extraction increases air pollution was left unpublished for three years and only released four days after ministers approved fracking in Lancashire, it has emerged.
Professor Paul Monks, chairman of the [Air Quality Expert Group], said: "The thing that surprised me was you think the main sources of air pollution are going to be coming from the actual process of fracking, but it is as much all the industry – diesel generators, lorries running up and down roads, and all the stuff used to support it. If you have any industrial process at a local level you are going to get an impact on air quality." It is estimated the UK could eventually have 12,500 fracking wells.
Two doctors have used an open letter to question Energy Minister Claire Perry's ethics and ask whether local people were being "used as guinea pigs".

Posted by
Labels: ,

Monday, 10 April 2017

AI targeted by protesters

In a fortnight of action against the fracking supply chain, protestors have targeted Aggregate Industries' Carnforth quarry in Lancashire:


"We’re up here today because fracking isn’t a playground game. We need to give Aggregate Industries a reason to rethink its position, which is at odds with local democracy."
"Lancashire said no to fracking. We’re asking Aggregate Industries to do the decent thing. Follow the example of other companies in the area. Step away from fracking your neighbours and we’ll gladly come down."
Posted by
Labels: ,

Wednesday, 1 March 2017

When there’s no social licence for development everything is scrutinised



Posted by
Labels:

Wednesday, 8 February 2017

Miscellaneous


2. Whilst China's solar power capacity doubled in 2016, the UK backed a new source of fossil fuels. Fracking is highly controversial and supported by just 17% of people in a government survey. Aggregate Industries was one of the first in line to profit from fracking. This week, one aggregates company did the decent thing after a quarry protest in Bolton. A second supplier has followed suit.

Bolton News

[Marine sources] were responsible for supplying 25% of the sand and gravel needs in England and 49% of the equivalent needs in Wales.
The vessels will be the first new aggregate dredgers to be commissioned by the company in the UK for more than 25 years.

... results in significant disturbance through removal of substrate and the generation of sediment plumes through processing of the aggregate. The latter can lead to local burial of habitats and smothering of animals.
4. Let's put Aggregate Industries' plans to destroy 2km of ancient hedgerows and dormouse habitat at just one site in East Devon into context; not all farms are like Straitgate.

Posted by
Labels: , , ,

Friday, 20 January 2017

Big Issue

In its rush to profit from fracking, Aggregate Industries makes the front cover of Big Issue North.

Posted by
Labels: ,

Wednesday, 11 January 2017

Guess who's already profiting from fracking?

We should be weaning ourselves off fossil fuels, not developing new sources. Only last month, Nick Hurd MP, Minister of State for Climate Change and Industry, confirmed:
Known fossil fuels - not new ones.

Fracking is deeply unpopular. It has no social licence. Clearly that hasn’t stopped Aggregate Industries, however, from being one of the first to profit:



Posted by
Labels: ,

Monday, 22 August 2016

Households could get fracking payments under government plans

Quarrying is 'worse' than fracking, according to a recent survey, but it was fracking that was in the news again this month after the government launched a consultation on the 'Shale Wealth Fund'.


Articles from the construction press commented that: "PM’s fracking payments set to have wider implications" and from the planning press that "May revives plan to pay residents to support development":
The statement said: "The government will also be looking at whether this approach to the Shale Wealth Fund (SWF) can be a model for other community benefit schemes with the aim of putting more control and more resource in the hands of local households.
"Examples of where the principle could be extended include the Community Infrastructure Levy, which is currently being reviewed."
May said: "The government I need will always be driven by the interests of the many - ordinary families for whom life is harder than many people in politics realise. As I said on my first night as Prime Minister, when we take the big calls, we’ll think not of the powerful, but of you.
"This announcement is an example of putting those principles into action. It’s about making sure people personally benefit from economic decisions that are taken - not just councils - and putting them back in control over their lives.
"We’ll be looking at applying this approach to other government programmes in the future too, as we press on with the work of building a country that works for everyone."
The announcement comes a year after the government quietly ditched a plan to pilot proposals for paying residents to support new homes in their areas.
As The Engineer wrote:
Time will tell if money paid directly to households will effectively kill off widespread opposition to fracking, but it must now be asked whether people living alongside arguably more complex projects – such as Hinkley Point C (if it does proceed) or HS2 – will be similarly compensated, and if that is a scenario that should be welcomed.
Posted by
Labels:

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

And on the subject of fracking... and groundwater

Fracking may be geologically improbable in East Devon - Cllr Claire Wright’s blog gives more details - but this helpful map from Friends of the Earth shows the areas being offered up for licensing, including parts of Devon. What it also shows are the groundwater Source Protection Zones imposed by the Environment Agency - including those to protect private water supplies around Straitgate.


AI’s Scoping Request now has SLR claiming that because "...the intention is only to extract mineral from a “dry working option” (above the water table) at Straitgate Farm. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not result in any significant effects on the water environment".

It’s a big claim, and it will be interesting to see if the Environment Agency agrees. Because removing soil, overburden and 1.2 million tonnes of unsaturated sand and gravel above the saturated zone would certainly appear to have the capacity to change the hydrological regime in some way - be it recharge characteristics, surface run-off, or response to pollution events.

Of course, the corollary of SLR's claim is that the future “wet working option”, the improbable 'Stage 2' of AI's plans, would result in significant effects on the water environment.
Posted by
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Miscellaneous



Part of AI's undoing, according to The Secretary of State, was:
There is little evidence that thought has gone into alternative layouts and arrangements of structures to take account of the site’s environmental constraints or wider context. Indeed, there is little identification of these, or opportunities, unlike the analysis carried out for the Objectors... [12.36]
A warning that environmental constraints for any application must be properly addressed, even by AI.


In an article in Mineral Planning, on the effects of the NPPF, the director of planning for the Mineral Products Association admits:
Operators have been eking out reserves they already have. The last thing they have wanted is to go anywhere near a planning authority... [as a result] MPA survey figures suggest both producers and consumers have adapted by switching from sand and gravel to crushed rock.
On the subject of planning, he bemoans that:
Concern over vulnerability to legal challenge is leading to an ever more precautionary approach by regulators. This results in delay and unnecessary costs in providing superfluous information to support plan allocations and planning applications.
Superfluous information? Is that really the industry's thinking when responding to its impact on people, groundwater, ecology, history, endangered species, dust, noise, traffic, etc?


An article by Environmental Working Group claims that thousands in the US are exposed to potential health risks from silica sand mining:
Research has shown that these particles can degrade air quality as far as 750 meters away, leading to a variety of serious health problems, particularly in children and other vulnerable populations.
Dust, and its effects upon health, is a continuing concern around quarry sites in the UK; we have written a number of times in the past about Respirable Crystalline Silica.

4. Business and society: defining the 'social licence'

 An article by John Morrison in The Guardian argues that:
Social licence can never be self-awarded, it requires that an activity enjoys sufficient trust and legitimacy, and has the consent of those affected. Business cannot determine how much prevention or mitigation it should engage in to meet environmental or social risk – stakeholders and rights-holders have to be involved for thresholds of due diligence to be legitimate (sometimes even if these are clearly determined in law).

A blog on the impacts of mining across the world, by a PhD candidate at the University of Bristol, tackles the subject of corporate social responsibility or CSR:
Often, CSR in the mining industry is little more than a public relations exercise, with no tangible reality to support its elaborate rhetoric.
6. Prehistoric boundary

For anybody interested in learning about Prehistoric Boundaries - like the one thought to run through Straitgate Farm - this English Heritage document explains more.
Posted by
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, 29 August 2014

Miscellaneous


An article from Mineral Planning that local people may find of interest; it's written by Sue Penaluna, principal planning officer at DCC. The Council has issued two separate temporary mineral permissions for working dimension stone at Exeter cathedral.

This is not quarrying on the scale or impact of Straitgate: "Both permissions are personal to the cathedral for ten years and allow up to five cubic metres a year to be extracted using hand tools."

Andy Price, strategic health and safety manager for Sibelco Europe, gave an update on respirable crystalline silica (RCS) and the mounting problems of inhaling silica, the basic component of soil, sand and other minerals. He told the conference that "more than ever" the aggregates sector was being drawn into the debate on RCS because of diseases such as silicosis.
Evidence suggested people with silicosis could develop lung cancer: 16 deaths were caused by silicosis in 2011, while 40-50 cases were registered every year. But projections from the HSE suggested there could be 800 deaths a year due to past exposure. RCS was number two in the HSE priority list for occupational health behind only asbestos, he said.
Other areas picked up were quarry fencing, traffic management, risk assessments and dust from control of substances hazardous to health...
To hear that the issue of quarry fencing was being discussed at an industry conference, before the school holidays and before a number of tragic drownings, beggars belief.


For those with an interest in the subject, this industry article written by lawyers makes sobering reading:

Here’s just one part:
Fracking involves the injection of large volumes of water. This water is likely to pick up naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) from underground strata. This means that, upon returning to the surface, fracking fluid may contain sufficient NORM to be classed as radioactive waste and require an environmental permit for its storage and disposal.
Operators are unlikely to be granted a permit unless they show a clear strategy for disposing of radioactive flowback. This is significant because of the limited number of installations available nationally to treat waste containing NORM. The December 2013 DECC and AMEC Strategic Environmental Assessment report concluded that volumes of flowback waste water could range from 3,000 to 18,750 cubic metres per well.
Under a high-activity scenario, that could mean a potential wastewater treatment and transit requirement of up to 108 million cubic metres, which would place a substantial burden on existing infrastructure.
The eight-megawatt solar farm at Ketton [cement works in Rutland] is part of Hanson’s action plan to increase the use of renewable energy to achieve its 2020 goal of cutting carbon emissions by 10% per tonne of product.
When cement contributes 1 tonne of CO2 for every tonne produced, producers like Hanson and Holcim will need to do much much more in the years and decades ahead - the UK government for one has set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050.
Posted by
Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, 6 May 2014

Fracking and sand

Some companies in the minerals industry will be rubbing their hands at the prospect of fracking in the UK, if the US is anything to go by. Much has been said about the environmental damage of fracking, its impact on groundwater, its impact on the climate; less has been said about the silica sand - frac sand - suspended in the toxic concoction of chemicals pumped underground, needed to prop the fractures open - "a single fracked well can require 10,000 tons of industrial silica sand”. This BGS presentation maps the UK silica sand deposits.

If the UK is to embrace fracking, it must be ready to embrace an increase in silica sand quarrying, and the carcinogenic silica dust that goes with it.



Posted by
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)