Fracking protesters lobby Burnley politicians

This Is Lancashire: A drilling plant A drilling plant

A DOZEN anti-fracking protesters held a demonstration on the steps of Burnley Town Hall in a bid to raise the issue with councillors.

Keep East Lancashire Frack Free (KELFF), which opposes drilling for shale gas, waved placards and issued leaflets to members of the public in Manchester Road.

Burnley councillors promised to keep tabs on the controversial method after it was raised during a full council public question time.

KELFF member Jane Curran said: “Unconventional gas exploration is a ridiculous idea. Four hundred thousand jobs could be created by 2020 using clean energy. There can never be a guarantee that UK energy users would benefit from fracking.

“Shale gas should not be relied on for energy security. The UK’s geography means we don’t have wide open spaces away from the population and agriculture.

“Surveys have shown that less than half of the UK population support fracking. There are 130 groups in the country opposing it. The risk of fracking is not going away and neither are we.”

Coun Marcus Johnstone, said that although planning permission for exploratory drilling - such as that planned by Cuadrilla near Preston - lay with Lancashire County Council, Burnley Council would be a statutory consultee on all fracking proposals.

His Labour colleague and new council leader, Coun Mark Townsend, said: “It’s clear fracking provokes strong opinions, both for and against, and as someone who passionately believes in open public debates on key issues, I think that’s a healthy position.

“Other parts of the county are more advanced in terms of industry interest and formal applications, but I am sure interest will expand quickly.

“This council is clear that its focus is on supporting economic growth. We are recognised nationally for our enterprise and advanced manufacturing.

“Any potential industrial development that could increase Burnley’s economic base and competitiveness is one we should engage in debate on in an open-minded way.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:19pm Sun 8 Jun 14

DaveBurnley says...

If fracking came to this area we would get no benefits from it. The only ones who would benefit are the fracking companies and their shareholders.
If fracking came to this area we would get no benefits from it. The only ones who would benefit are the fracking companies and their shareholders. DaveBurnley
  • Score: -20

12:29pm Sun 8 Jun 14

2 for 5p ridesagain says...

Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then.
You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.
Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then. You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas. 2 for 5p ridesagain
  • Score: 20

12:48pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Nomad0612 says...

To the KELFF lady:

“Surveys have shown that less than half of the UK population support fracking.”

This is a totally vacuous statement. All surveys report only the views of respondents and you simply can't then extrapolate those views as being representative of the population as a whole. Attempting to do so is a naked effort to mislead.

And commenter Dave: there are plenty of businesses in the industrial heartlands of East Lancashire that could supply goods and services to the shale firms. These East Lancashire businesses provide employment in an otherwise economically depressed part of the region - you should be grateful for them, not trying to make out that only the shareholders of shale gas companies will get anything out of it.

Come on people - think it through!!!
To the KELFF lady: “Surveys have shown that less than half of the UK population support fracking.” This is a totally vacuous statement. All surveys report only the views of respondents and you simply can't then extrapolate those views as being representative of the population as a whole. Attempting to do so is a naked effort to mislead. And commenter Dave: there are plenty of businesses in the industrial heartlands of East Lancashire that could supply goods and services to the shale firms. These East Lancashire businesses provide employment in an otherwise economically depressed part of the region - you should be grateful for them, not trying to make out that only the shareholders of shale gas companies will get anything out of it. Come on people - think it through!!! Nomad0612
  • Score: 22

1:27pm Sun 8 Jun 14

cbmichaels73 says...

Within a margin of error surveys show that support for fracking is about 50%. Not the full story though is it Dave? Its not 50% for and 50% against is it? Opposition is about 25%. Yep, roughly double the number support fracking as oppose it.

But wait a minute. Aren't pro fracking parties getting all the votes? Didn't we just have a few independents stand in local elections on pure anti-fracking tickets and what happened to them on their own doorsteps? None of them won. Didn't the Greens just get less support than they had last time down from above 8% of the European election vote to less than 8%? And don't the Green party only poll at about 1% in national elections?

What worries me is that when fracking gets going people are going to be confused and think its all some conspiracy against them just because 150 people with a facebook friends list of 1500 turn up to cause trouble at drill sites and Greenpeace, itself a £250 million pound organisation (in some cases several times bigger than the fracking companies) manages to get 45,000 people out of tens of millions to sign a petition.

As for not benefiting the local economy Caudrilla put in a leaflet it handed out that its well (Preese Hall I think) had injected £1.3 million into the local economy. Anti-frackers, ever keen to attack, complained to the ASA (Advertising Standards Agency) on that point and Caudrilla submitted its evidence to the ASA and the ASA accepted the evidence, hence providing independent analysis of the benefits to the local economy.

At a drilling project I took part in a while ago our hotel bill for myself and our staff over the months and months of the project came to more than £45000. That hotel made improvements and had an expansion based on the continuous income of that well nearby. I have no idea if we secured the jobs of staff there, but I continuously see hotels that are empty most of the time and make their money over single holiday periods boosted or even kept alive because wells are nearby. Now span that over all the related service industries....
Within a margin of error surveys show that support for fracking is about 50%. Not the full story though is it Dave? Its not 50% for and 50% against is it? Opposition is about 25%. Yep, roughly double the number support fracking as oppose it. But wait a minute. Aren't pro fracking parties getting all the votes? Didn't we just have a few independents stand in local elections on pure anti-fracking tickets and what happened to them on their own doorsteps? None of them won. Didn't the Greens just get less support than they had last time down from above 8% of the European election vote to less than 8%? And don't the Green party only poll at about 1% in national elections? What worries me is that when fracking gets going people are going to be confused and think its all some conspiracy against them just because 150 people with a facebook friends list of 1500 turn up to cause trouble at drill sites and Greenpeace, itself a £250 million pound organisation (in some cases several times bigger than the fracking companies) manages to get 45,000 people out of tens of millions to sign a petition. As for not benefiting the local economy Caudrilla put in a leaflet it handed out that its well (Preese Hall I think) had injected £1.3 million into the local economy. Anti-frackers, ever keen to attack, complained to the ASA (Advertising Standards Agency) on that point and Caudrilla submitted its evidence to the ASA and the ASA accepted the evidence, hence providing independent analysis of the benefits to the local economy. At a drilling project I took part in a while ago our hotel bill for myself and our staff over the months and months of the project came to more than £45000. That hotel made improvements and had an expansion based on the continuous income of that well nearby. I have no idea if we secured the jobs of staff there, but I continuously see hotels that are empty most of the time and make their money over single holiday periods boosted or even kept alive because wells are nearby. Now span that over all the related service industries.... cbmichaels73
  • Score: 23

1:48pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Steven Seagull says...

2 for 5p ridesagain wrote:
Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then.
You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.
The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth.
[quote][p][bold]2 for 5p ridesagain[/bold] wrote: Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then. You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.[/p][/quote]The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth. Steven Seagull
  • Score: -17

4:10pm Sun 8 Jun 14

wilddog says...

They bury their heads in the sand while most likely getting a brown envelope via the fracking guys. Have the actual public had a vote on this? No!!!!!!!! Its here so therefore, shut up and accept it? That will never happen and i for one would love all this to go t!ts up because its 110% safe aint it? How has it been proven safe? 110%? It aint but by then. who cares eh? There will be a few more millionaires and all the cr@p will not be on their doorstep!
They bury their heads in the sand while most likely getting a brown envelope via the fracking guys. Have the actual public had a vote on this? No!!!!!!!! Its here so therefore, shut up and accept it? That will never happen and i for one would love all this to go t!ts up because its 110% safe aint it? How has it been proven safe? 110%? It aint but by then. who cares eh? There will be a few more millionaires and all the cr@p will not be on their doorstep! wilddog
  • Score: 17

4:51pm Sun 8 Jun 14

jim 2012 says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
2 for 5p ridesagain wrote:
Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then.
You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.
The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth.
to get at the gas and oil you have to sink a bore hole two kilometres
under ground that,s a long way down so how can that affect the foundations of someone's house or affect the water table
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]2 for 5p ridesagain[/bold] wrote: Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then. You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.[/p][/quote]The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth.[/p][/quote]to get at the gas and oil you have to sink a bore hole two kilometres under ground that,s a long way down so how can that affect the foundations of someone's house or affect the water table jim 2012
  • Score: -21

6:28pm Sun 8 Jun 14

A Darener says...

Fracking only benefits the government and the fracking companies? The government is the people, so the people benefit.
Fracking companies have shareholders so why don't the anti frackers buy shares in the company? That way they can benefit from the profits they say will go to the companies. At the same time they can attend the shareholders meetings and put their point of view across, in a social and democratic way.
Fracking only benefits the government and the fracking companies? The government is the people, so the people benefit. Fracking companies have shareholders so why don't the anti frackers buy shares in the company? That way they can benefit from the profits they say will go to the companies. At the same time they can attend the shareholders meetings and put their point of view across, in a social and democratic way. A Darener
  • Score: 9

6:48pm Sun 8 Jun 14

cbmichaels73 says...

Wilddog says we have never voted on fracking.

Wliddog must not have noticed the recent elections, or the anti-fracking candidates that were resoundingly thrashed. Perhaps wilddog did not notice that the Green party ran a large anti-fracking campaign for the EU elections, which it hoped would give it a few MEPS...

Maybe Wilddog has missed that fracking has regularly been in the news over the past 4 years and that it has been propelled right up to the heart of politics, featuring on major news and debate programs on the BBC, ITV etc etc and has even had the Prime Minister and Chancellor directly making comment on it - and that since these comments there has been numerous elections.

I might be abit off my trolly, but at the point where something has been in the news for years, where top politicians have discussed things and made comment on national news programs and papers, where national papers have printed hundreds of stories, where political parties have made something the central plank of their manifesto and then after all this the public has gone to the ballot box and not voted how the environmentalists want and the environmentalists then say we haven't voted on it yet? It flabbergasts me, it really does.

Perhaps they mean that we haven't voted on it as a singular issue. That means we haven't voted on education, defence, policing, NHS or anything at all for decades.

At some point environmentalists we need to come to terms with having lost the fracking issue. Right now they are well behind on opinion, at nearly double the support for fracking as against it. However, what they haven't even faced yet is that we vote on multiple issues at a time. Fracking is well down the list for most people. We vote for things we don't like because we vote for whole manifestos, not single options. The parties can easily put fracking in their manifestos because those agreeing with it combined with those who don't care is nearly 75%. Those strongly opposed to it is more like about 5%.
Wilddog says we have never voted on fracking. Wliddog must not have noticed the recent elections, or the anti-fracking candidates that were resoundingly thrashed. Perhaps wilddog did not notice that the Green party ran a large anti-fracking campaign for the EU elections, which it hoped would give it a few MEPS... Maybe Wilddog has missed that fracking has regularly been in the news over the past 4 years and that it has been propelled right up to the heart of politics, featuring on major news and debate programs on the BBC, ITV etc etc and has even had the Prime Minister and Chancellor directly making comment on it - and that since these comments there has been numerous elections. I might be abit off my trolly, but at the point where something has been in the news for years, where top politicians have discussed things and made comment on national news programs and papers, where national papers have printed hundreds of stories, where political parties have made something the central plank of their manifesto and then after all this the public has gone to the ballot box and not voted how the environmentalists want and the environmentalists then say we haven't voted on it yet? It flabbergasts me, it really does. Perhaps they mean that we haven't voted on it as a singular issue. That means we haven't voted on education, defence, policing, NHS or anything at all for decades. At some point environmentalists we need to come to terms with having lost the fracking issue. Right now they are well behind on opinion, at nearly double the support for fracking as against it. However, what they haven't even faced yet is that we vote on multiple issues at a time. Fracking is well down the list for most people. We vote for things we don't like because we vote for whole manifestos, not single options. The parties can easily put fracking in their manifestos because those agreeing with it combined with those who don't care is nearly 75%. Those strongly opposed to it is more like about 5%. cbmichaels73
  • Score: 8

7:14pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Steven Seagull says...

jim 2012 wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
2 for 5p ridesagain wrote:
Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then.
You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.
The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth.
to get at the gas and oil you have to sink a bore hole two kilometres
under ground that,s a long way down so how can that affect the foundations of someone's house or affect the water table
Jim have you seen the huge holes in America that appear in the ground and literally swallow houses?

It's no coincidence that they are near fracking sites.
[quote][p][bold]jim 2012[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]2 for 5p ridesagain[/bold] wrote: Oh well Dave if you are not going to personally gain from this, we best not do it then. You obviously don't have anything that runs on gas.[/p][/quote]The benefit of fracking in this area could possibly be that a large sinkhole might form under your house and subsequently consume it and hopefully take you with it to the bowls of the earth.[/p][/quote]to get at the gas and oil you have to sink a bore hole two kilometres under ground that,s a long way down so how can that affect the foundations of someone's house or affect the water table[/p][/quote]Jim have you seen the huge holes in America that appear in the ground and literally swallow houses? It's no coincidence that they are near fracking sites. Steven Seagull
  • Score: -10

8:20pm Sun 8 Jun 14

ragamala says...

cbmichaels you are destroying your own case. Regarding public opinion it is crystal clear that the more they know about fracking, the more the public's opinion is swinging against. Whether this is due to the politicians argument or to the opponents' is irrelevant.

If you examine the evidence you will see that the greatest fear of pro-fracking politicians, as well as industry players, is that they are losing the argument. They have lost on many of the issues. This is precisely why the government is adopting desperation measures of community bribes. It is why they are mounting a give-away on tax to the frackers. It is why they are stripping the regulation which - inadequate as it was - is ther to protect people and environment. It is why they are hell-bent on removing age-old landowner rights.

If you think these are the actions of a party which is indeed winning the argument you certainly do invite criticism of being misguided, if not actually off your trolley!
cbmichaels you are destroying your own case. Regarding public opinion it is crystal clear that the more they know about fracking, the more the public's opinion is swinging against. Whether this is due to the politicians argument or to the opponents' is irrelevant. If you examine the evidence you will see that the greatest fear of pro-fracking politicians, as well as industry players, is that they are losing the argument. They have lost on many of the issues. This is precisely why the government is adopting desperation measures of community bribes. It is why they are mounting a give-away on tax to the frackers. It is why they are stripping the regulation which - inadequate as it was - is ther to protect people and environment. It is why they are hell-bent on removing age-old landowner rights. If you think these are the actions of a party which is indeed winning the argument you certainly do invite criticism of being misguided, if not actually off your trolley! ragamala
  • Score: 14

8:34pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Doug86 says...

Hmm It seems that the pro fracking propaganda the government has been spoon feeding out, has really influenced the majority of the people commenting on this article. Quite a sad state of affairs really.
Firstly mainstream media is heavily swayed by the government and the oil and gas companies, The BBC rent their site in Manchester from Peel holdings plc which has massive interests and investments in the unconventional fossil fuel industry, and owns a vast amount of land in Lancashire (including the Barton Moss well site) so don't trust the BBC for the correct information.

With regards to the promise of jobs: Who out of you has actually researched the amount of jobs created by this industry before commenting? Just because some journalist in a paper has said 'It will greate thousands and thousands of jobs' doesn't mean its true.
Also do why do you think that jobs are more important than clean air and water? You can't drink and bathe in the money you earn from your zero hours contract, well site security and cleaning jobs.

Energy security: Household bills WILL NOT come down, the chairman of cuadrilla (drilling company) has already said this. We are in a European market of energy and even if we fracked every square mile of this country it would not effect domestic prices.

This movement is not just for environmentalists and activists I'm just a normal bloke that did some of my own research one day, and that's all it takes to realise how screwed up, corrupted, polluting and full of lies this whole mess is.
Fracking does not work, both economically and environmentally. Don't believe the hype.
Hmm It seems that the pro fracking propaganda the government has been spoon feeding out, has really influenced the majority of the people commenting on this article. Quite a sad state of affairs really. Firstly mainstream media is heavily swayed by the government and the oil and gas companies, The BBC rent their site in Manchester from Peel holdings plc which has massive interests and investments in the unconventional fossil fuel industry, and owns a vast amount of land in Lancashire (including the Barton Moss well site) so don't trust the BBC for the correct information. With regards to the promise of jobs: Who out of you has actually researched the amount of jobs created by this industry before commenting? Just because some journalist in a paper has said 'It will greate thousands and thousands of jobs' doesn't mean its true. Also do why do you think that jobs are more important than clean air and water? You can't drink and bathe in the money you earn from your zero hours contract, well site security and cleaning jobs. Energy security: Household bills WILL NOT come down, the chairman of cuadrilla (drilling company) has already said this. We are in a European market of energy and even if we fracked every square mile of this country it would not effect domestic prices. This movement is not just for environmentalists and activists I'm just a normal bloke that did some of my own research one day, and that's all it takes to realise how screwed up, corrupted, polluting and full of lies this whole mess is. Fracking does not work, both economically and environmentally. Don't believe the hype. Doug86
  • Score: 12

8:54pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Hilfair3 says...

Many of the protectors have spent their time looking at evidence that has come out of America, Canada and southern Queensland where the frackers have ruined the countryside, water supply and health of families. That is why we are against it starting up in this country because it is too late when they get a foothold and all their lies about safety have ruined our environment. We can't drink money so please have a look at some films that have been made of affected communities before you think this is the answer to our energy needs and further feeding the addiction to the oil and gas industry. Gasland by Josh Fox available on YouTube was one of the first and Doreen's Story made by experience on the Fylde for example.
http://ecowatch.com/
2014/06/07/fracking-
unearthed-documentar
y-festival/
is a trailer of a soon to be released film.
Many of the protectors have spent their time looking at evidence that has come out of America, Canada and southern Queensland where the frackers have ruined the countryside, water supply and health of families. That is why we are against it starting up in this country because it is too late when they get a foothold and all their lies about safety have ruined our environment. We can't drink money so please have a look at some films that have been made of affected communities before you think this is the answer to our energy needs and further feeding the addiction to the oil and gas industry. Gasland by Josh Fox available on YouTube was one of the first and Doreen's Story made by experience on the Fylde for example. http://ecowatch.com/ 2014/06/07/fracking- unearthed-documentar y-festival/ is a trailer of a soon to be released film. Hilfair3
  • Score: -10

9:24pm Sun 8 Jun 14

clickhere says...

@ragamala quote "s. This is precisely why the government is adopting desperation measures of community bribes. It is why they are mounting a give-away on tax to the frackers. It is why they are stripping the regulation which - inadequate as it was -"

Err, excuse me, isn't that what has happened with the windmill industry? Do we not have, locally, money from the Belthorn windmills? Don't hear many objections to this bribery. Why is it OK for wind turbines to do this but not fracking. Is it because the Mr Millibean and his Government set up the wind bribes, but Dave Snooty is now doing the same for frackers?
@ragamala quote "s. This is precisely why the government is adopting desperation measures of community bribes. It is why they are mounting a give-away on tax to the frackers. It is why they are stripping the regulation which - inadequate as it was -" Err, excuse me, isn't that what has happened with the windmill industry? Do we not have, locally, money from the Belthorn windmills? Don't hear many objections to this bribery. Why is it OK for wind turbines to do this but not fracking. Is it because the Mr Millibean and his Government set up the wind bribes, but Dave Snooty is now doing the same for frackers? clickhere
  • Score: 9

9:25pm Sun 8 Jun 14

jenkinsroy says...

The comment here below
“This council is clear that its focus is on supporting economic growth. We are recognised nationally for our enterprise and advanced manufacturing.
“Any potential industrial development that could increase Burnley’s economic base and competitiveness is one we should engage in debate on in an open-minded way.”
Suggested to me that Burnley council have already made their minds
up about fracking from what they say above they will let them frack
but keep an eye on them this is NOT good NEWS for you residents.
SOMEONE here is going to make a lot of money at the expense of us
So if I was you lot in Burnley I would be asking your M.P.
to go to the house of parliament and get him to ask DAVID THE PRIME MINISTER how we are going to benefit from fracking NOW ?
not in TEN YEARS TIME NOW after all the government will get there money has soon as they start work be it exploring or drilling for gas.
And if your M.P. will NOT ask the QUESTION you ask him to vote
OUT OF IS JOB AND GET SOMEONE WHO WILL ASK THE PRIME MINISTER WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON AND HOW MUCH MONEY WILL THE GOVERNMENT TAKE TO LET THEM FRACK IN OUR BACK
YARDS BUT NOT THERE LETS HAVE THE TRUE FACTS O.K. DAVID
The comment here below “This council is clear that its focus is on supporting economic growth. We are recognised nationally for our enterprise and advanced manufacturing. “Any potential industrial development that could increase Burnley’s economic base and competitiveness is one we should engage in debate on in an open-minded way.” Suggested to me that Burnley council have already made their minds up about fracking from what they say above they will let them frack but keep an eye on them this is NOT good NEWS for you residents. SOMEONE here is going to make a lot of money at the expense of us So if I was you lot in Burnley I would be asking your M.P. to go to the house of parliament and get him to ask DAVID THE PRIME MINISTER how we are going to benefit from fracking NOW ? not in TEN YEARS TIME NOW after all the government will get there money has soon as they start work be it exploring or drilling for gas. And if your M.P. will NOT ask the QUESTION you ask him to vote OUT OF IS JOB AND GET SOMEONE WHO WILL ASK THE PRIME MINISTER WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON AND HOW MUCH MONEY WILL THE GOVERNMENT TAKE TO LET THEM FRACK IN OUR BACK YARDS BUT NOT THERE LETS HAVE THE TRUE FACTS O.K. DAVID jenkinsroy
  • Score: 7

12:49pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Hilfair3 says...

KELFF statement and Public Question to Rossendale Borough Council on Friday 6th June, 2014

I am here on behalf of a newly formed group whose name - and aim - is Keep East Lancashire Frack Free. We hope that the facts I shall be presenting to you to help you answer our question, will leave no doubt in your mind that unconventional gas exploitation is a ridiculous idea. So why do the UK main parties support fracking? The arguments being used to justify fracking are as follows:

Firstly: That it will create jobs. A DECC report estimated a maximum of 24,300 of them. Yet 400,000 jobs could be created by 2020 by investment in the clean energy sector.

Secondly: That it will bring down energy bills like it has in the US. But the UK’s geology is more complex than in the US, which means that the process here will be uneconomic. As part of a European gas market the UK produced gas will be sold to the highest bidder of these countries by the fracking companies. There could never be a guarantee that UK energy users would have cheaper gas, Cuadrilla have admitted.

Thirdly: That it’s good for our energy security, despite a DECC Committee recommendation that shale gas should not be relied on to contribute to energy security. An energy security expert has said the best way to reduce energy security risks is to promote renewable power generation, improve energy efficiency and reduce overall energy demand.

Finally: The government claims that shale gas is a transition fuel to a green energy economy. Yet the DECC -commissioned report on fracking’s greenhouse gas emissions has been shown to be based on POOR DATA and exaggeration. It shows that burning shale gas to produce electricity is about as bad as burning coal!

Our geology is too complex for fracking to be safe or economic – after the first unconventional frack on the Fylde there was an earthquake. In the US gas was shown to come out of the tap and there is evidence of families health deterioration.

In the UK we don’t have wide open spaces away from the population or agriculture. Industrialisation of the countryside and loss of agricultural land to roads, well-pads, pipelines, compressor stations will devastate communities and environment.

The huge quantities of water required and many trucks passing through towns and villages will deteriorate roads, causing potential chemical spills/noise and light pollution.

The carcinogenic properties of the chemicals used pollute the air, water and earth. Companies are reluctant to admit which pollutants they use or speak to local communities. Water contamination of aquifers is irreparable and regions are left to clean up.

A growing number of climate change scientists are recognising that to have any chance of us staying below the two degree increase in global temperature that is required to avoid catastrophic climate change, we have to leave 80% of all already discovered fossil fuels in the ground.

So our question is – Will you as elected representatives of Rossendale say no to fracking and yes to keeping East Lancashire frack free?
End
KELFF statement and Public Question to Rossendale Borough Council on Friday 6th June, 2014 I am here on behalf of a newly formed group whose name - and aim - is Keep East Lancashire Frack Free. We hope that the facts I shall be presenting to you to help you answer our question, will leave no doubt in your mind that unconventional gas exploitation is a ridiculous idea. So why do the UK main parties support fracking? The arguments being used to justify fracking are as follows: Firstly: That it will create jobs. A DECC report estimated a maximum of 24,300 of them. Yet 400,000 jobs could be created by 2020 by investment in the clean energy sector. Secondly: That it will bring down energy bills like it has in the US. But the UK’s geology is more complex than in the US, which means that the process here will be uneconomic. As part of a European gas market the UK produced gas will be sold to the highest bidder of these countries by the fracking companies. There could never be a guarantee that UK energy users would have cheaper gas, Cuadrilla have admitted. Thirdly: That it’s good for our energy security, despite a DECC Committee recommendation that shale gas should not be relied on to contribute to energy security. An energy security expert has said the best way to reduce energy security risks is to promote renewable power generation, improve energy efficiency and reduce overall energy demand. Finally: The government claims that shale gas is a transition fuel to a green energy economy. Yet the DECC -commissioned report on fracking’s greenhouse gas emissions has been shown to be based on POOR DATA and exaggeration. It shows that burning shale gas to produce electricity is about as bad as burning coal! Our geology is too complex for fracking to be safe or economic – after the first unconventional frack on the Fylde there was an earthquake. In the US gas was shown to come out of the tap and there is evidence of families health deterioration. In the UK we don’t have wide open spaces away from the population or agriculture. Industrialisation of the countryside and loss of agricultural land to roads, well-pads, pipelines, compressor stations will devastate communities and environment. The huge quantities of water required and many trucks passing through towns and villages will deteriorate roads, causing potential chemical spills/noise and light pollution. The carcinogenic properties of the chemicals used pollute the air, water and earth. Companies are reluctant to admit which pollutants they use or speak to local communities. Water contamination of aquifers is irreparable and regions are left to clean up. A growing number of climate change scientists are recognising that to have any chance of us staying below the two degree increase in global temperature that is required to avoid catastrophic climate change, we have to leave 80% of all already discovered fossil fuels in the ground. So our question is – Will you as elected representatives of Rossendale say no to fracking and yes to keeping East Lancashire frack free? End Hilfair3
  • Score: -8

3:33pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Hilfair3 says...

Colorado landslide near fracking operation, no way is this safe!
https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=X2Omha8C
4WY&app=desktop#t=10
26
So much denial is going on.
Colorado landslide near fracking operation, no way is this safe! https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=X2Omha8C 4WY&app=desktop#t=10 26 So much denial is going on. Hilfair3
  • Score: -8

3:47pm Mon 9 Jun 14

A Darener says...

Hilfair3 wrote:
Colorado landslide near fracking operation, no way is this safe!
https://www.youtube.

com/watch?v=X2Omha8C

4WY&app=desktop#
t=10
26
So much denial is going on.
Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute.
[quote][p][bold]Hilfair3[/bold] wrote: Colorado landslide near fracking operation, no way is this safe! https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=X2Omha8C 4WY&app=desktop# t=10 26 So much denial is going on.[/p][/quote]Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute. A Darener
  • Score: 11

7:43pm Mon 9 Jun 14

clickhere says...

@ hilfair3

"after the first unconventional frack on the Fylde there was an earthquake".

Yes there was - very similar to the negligible tremors in the area both before and after the fracking trials, when, of course, no fracking was taking place.

Coincidence springs to mind.
@ hilfair3 "after the first unconventional frack on the Fylde there was an earthquake". Yes there was - very similar to the negligible tremors in the area both before and after the fracking trials, when, of course, no fracking was taking place. Coincidence springs to mind. clickhere
  • Score: 3

5:39pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Hilfair3 says...

What is you response to this video?
http://youtu.be/uokm
sSi7LTY
What is you response to this video? http://youtu.be/uokm sSi7LTY Hilfair3
  • Score: -1

12:06pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Hilfair3 says...

A Darener says.
Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute.

Please look at the scientific concerns: http://news.national
geographic.com/news/
energy/2014/05/14050
2-scientists-warn-of
-quake-risk-from-fra
cking-operations/
A Darener says. Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute. Please look at the scientific concerns: http://news.national geographic.com/news/ energy/2014/05/14050 2-scientists-warn-of -quake-risk-from-fra cking-operations/ Hilfair3
  • Score: -2

12:41pm Sat 14 Jun 14

A Darener says...

Hilfair3 wrote:
A Darener says.
Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute.

Please look at the scientific concerns: http://news.national

geographic.com/news/

energy/2014/05/14050

2-scientists-warn-of

-quake-risk-from-fra

cking-operations/
This video studies the disposal of waste water after fracking, British fracking companys will not be allowed to dispose of this waste water in the same way so this problem should not arise.
[quote][p][bold]Hilfair3[/bold] wrote: A Darener says. Although Colorado is not in a high probability earthquake zone it has over the years had some minor earthquakes similar in size to the seismic activity described in the video. Fracking could have been the cause, but on the other hand so could a natural earthquake. Coincidence? Maybe, either way not conclusive. As far as I am aware there are no major mountains to slip in any of the fracking areas currently being studied here in Britain so the dangers of a major landslip here are very minute. Please look at the scientific concerns: http://news.national geographic.com/news/ energy/2014/05/14050 2-scientists-warn-of -quake-risk-from-fra cking-operations/[/p][/quote]This video studies the disposal of waste water after fracking, British fracking companys will not be allowed to dispose of this waste water in the same way so this problem should not arise. A Darener
  • Score: -4

6:29pm Wed 18 Jun 14

ConcernedOssy says...

DaveBurnley wrote:
If fracking came to this area we would get no benefits from it. The only ones who would benefit are the fracking companies and their shareholders.
But you know Clowncillors and Politicians always Frack About !!! LOL
[quote][p][bold]DaveBurnley[/bold] wrote: If fracking came to this area we would get no benefits from it. The only ones who would benefit are the fracking companies and their shareholders.[/p][/quote]But you know Clowncillors and Politicians always Frack About !!! LOL ConcernedOssy
  • Score: 11

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree