East Lancashire's fracking sites on official map

Lancashire Telegraph: Fracking is a controversial process Fracking is a controversial process

A NEW government map yesterday confirmed that East Lancashire could see ‘fracking’ for shale gas.

The guide, showing that two-thirds of England could see the process, caused green campaigners to claim much of the county was at risk.

The area earmarked for possible hydraulic fracturing of shale rock includes areas identified in June by the British Geological Survey as sitting on gas reserves.

It brings closer the prospect of fracking along the M65 corridor north of Blackburn through Burnley to Colne and the Rossendale Valley.

New fracking licences, currently only granted near Blackpool, will be issued in the spring with parcels of East Lancashire land on offer.

Publishing its ‘regulatory roadmap’ setting out the permits developers need before drilling, Energy Minister Michael Fallon stepped up government support for the controversial process.

He said the report showed large-scale production could create thousands of jobs and give almost £1billion to local communities.

It admits high production could adversely impact communities, through traffic congestion, fumes and pressure on water supplies.

Mr Fallon said: “There could be large amounts of shale gas available in the UK, but we won’t know for sure the scale until further exploration. This marks the next step in unlocking the potential of shale gas. It is an exciting prospect.”

Friends of the Earth regional energy campaigner Helen Rimmer said: “This report will cast a dark shadow over many communities The government has admitted fracking could cause significant adverse environmental impacts.”

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:25pm Wed 18 Dec 13

useyourhead says...

It's a fracking disgrace!
-
May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.
It's a fracking disgrace! - May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently. useyourhead

12:13am Thu 19 Dec 13

Pan-cake says...

useyourhead wrote:
It's a fracking disgrace!
-
May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.
I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option.
Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future.
In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions.
The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future.
I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.
[quote][p][bold]useyourhead[/bold] wrote: It's a fracking disgrace! - May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.[/p][/quote]I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option. Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future. In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions. The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future. I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward. Pan-cake

1:16am Thu 19 Dec 13

SWP supporter says...

Pan-cake wrote:
useyourhead wrote:
It's a fracking disgrace!
-
May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.
I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option.
Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future.
In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions.
The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future.
I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.
Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports.
Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2
When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable.
But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare.
There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs
Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result
Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities
[quote][p][bold]Pan-cake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]useyourhead[/bold] wrote: It's a fracking disgrace! - May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.[/p][/quote]I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option. Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future. In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions. The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future. I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.[/p][/quote]Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports. Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2 When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable. But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare. There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities SWP supporter

4:41am Thu 19 Dec 13

buckoff says...

You know whats going to happen we will have the wettest summer on record and their will still be no washing cars and a hosepipe ban. We do not have the means to produce enough water to supply fracking. We have some of the best drinking water in the UK. Once they have pumped chemicals into the water table it will take hundreds of years to break down before it gets back to normal. They have not got a clue of the outcome of this process until after its been done, Then theirs no going back. You wait and see you will be telling your grand kids that you used to drink water straight from the tap and bottled water used to only cost a £1!!. And watch your water bills double. Our gas bills have doubled over the last 5 years to cover costs of new energy sources so we should not need this.
You know whats going to happen we will have the wettest summer on record and their will still be no washing cars and a hosepipe ban. We do not have the means to produce enough water to supply fracking. We have some of the best drinking water in the UK. Once they have pumped chemicals into the water table it will take hundreds of years to break down before it gets back to normal. They have not got a clue of the outcome of this process until after its been done, Then theirs no going back. You wait and see you will be telling your grand kids that you used to drink water straight from the tap and bottled water used to only cost a £1!!. And watch your water bills double. Our gas bills have doubled over the last 5 years to cover costs of new energy sources so we should not need this. buckoff

7:56am Thu 19 Dec 13

A Darener says...

Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now!
Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now! A Darener

8:02am Thu 19 Dec 13

SWP supporter says...

A Darener wrote:
Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now!
Of course nuclear pollutes, from mining to disposal of waste
[quote][p][bold]A Darener[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now![/p][/quote]Of course nuclear pollutes, from mining to disposal of waste SWP supporter

10:26am Thu 19 Dec 13

burner says...

Something ECONOMICALLY VIABLE has to be done, and QUICKLY !! Fracking is productive and a far cheaper option than wind or sea energy . . . . . . . . . yes, I KNOW they are desirable but wise companies are pulling out - the costs are way too high. Nuclear is also an option, albeit costly.
Something ECONOMICALLY VIABLE has to be done, and QUICKLY !! Fracking is productive and a far cheaper option than wind or sea energy . . . . . . . . . yes, I KNOW they are desirable but wise companies are pulling out - the costs are way too high. Nuclear is also an option, albeit costly. burner

1:35pm Thu 19 Dec 13

darwenTower says...

A Darener wrote:
Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now!
Non polluting?

The mind boggles.
[quote][p][bold]A Darener[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power...non polluting. Get them built, now![/p][/quote]Non polluting? The mind boggles. darwenTower

2:54am Fri 20 Dec 13

Pan-cake says...

SWP supporter wrote:
Pan-cake wrote:
useyourhead wrote:
It's a fracking disgrace!
-
May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.
I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option.
Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future.
In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions.
The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future.
I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.
Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports.
Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2
When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable.
But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare.
There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs
Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result
Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities
And how long would it take to accomplish your long list of changes to the worlds lifestyle? (for any effect on supposed climate change our countries efforts alone will not have any effect)
The lights are about to go out. We are legally bound to close all coal fired power stations within the next 2 or 3 years.
Remember the effects of the three day week and the power cuts.
[quote][p][bold]SWP supporter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pan-cake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]useyourhead[/bold] wrote: It's a fracking disgrace! - May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.[/p][/quote]I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option. Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future. In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions. The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future. I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.[/p][/quote]Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports. Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2 When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable. But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare. There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities[/p][/quote]And how long would it take to accomplish your long list of changes to the worlds lifestyle? (for any effect on supposed climate change our countries efforts alone will not have any effect) The lights are about to go out. We are legally bound to close all coal fired power stations within the next 2 or 3 years. Remember the effects of the three day week and the power cuts. Pan-cake

3:01am Fri 20 Dec 13

SWP supporter says...

Pan-cake wrote:
SWP supporter wrote:
Pan-cake wrote:
useyourhead wrote:
It's a fracking disgrace!
-
May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.
I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option.
Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future.
In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions.
The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future.
I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.
Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports.
Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2
When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable.
But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare.
There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs
Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result
Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities
And how long would it take to accomplish your long list of changes to the worlds lifestyle? (for any effect on supposed climate change our countries efforts alone will not have any effect)
The lights are about to go out. We are legally bound to close all coal fired power stations within the next 2 or 3 years.
Remember the effects of the three day week and the power cuts.
Much of it could be achieved within a year. See the detailed pamphlet "1 million green jobs", free online, with costings of the proposals.
Such a step would put massive pressure on other countries to do it.
[quote][p][bold]Pan-cake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SWP supporter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pan-cake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]useyourhead[/bold] wrote: It's a fracking disgrace! - May the homes of every fat cat involved be on a fault line and may there bidets spout fire intermittently.[/p][/quote]I presume then that you are happy to import gas from far off countries with extremely dubious human rights records?.And pay a high price for the option. Fracking may not be an ideal option but at least (if they find gas) it is ours and it secures much our energy supplies into the future. In recent weeks plans for several large, nay, gigantic, offshore wind farms have been abandoned as uneconomic and doubts about the technology of giant turbines in hostile off shore conditions. The conversion of Eggborough from coal to biomass (imported environmentally dubious wood pellet) has also stalled as the promised subsidy to effect the change has been lost following the reduction in subsidies to ease the cost to the bill payers. If a solution cannot be found to the funding,Eggborough, which produces 4% of the UK energy, will close in start running down next year and close in 2015 due to the increased carbon taxes demanded to force a low carbon future. I wonder how much carbon candles give off? The way this and previous governments have messed up our energy security probably means that candles will be the only way of keeping the lights on, going forward.[/p][/quote]Your presumption is wrong. One can be against fracking and gas imports. Sustainable energy is far less destructive, and does not increase CO2 When you say offshore wind farms are "uneconomic" you really mean they are not profitable. But it's only under capitalism that profits determine what should be done, regardless of human welfare. There are in any case numerous sources of clean energy, as well as good ways of reducing our energy needs Think of how many jobs would be created if every house in the country was properly insulated and retrofitted for energy efficiency. Think of what a difference a new, comfortable and convenient rail network was built, and how many jobs would result Think of the difference if people didn't have to commute miles to a job because of badly planned towns and cities[/p][/quote]And how long would it take to accomplish your long list of changes to the worlds lifestyle? (for any effect on supposed climate change our countries efforts alone will not have any effect) The lights are about to go out. We are legally bound to close all coal fired power stations within the next 2 or 3 years. Remember the effects of the three day week and the power cuts.[/p][/quote]Much of it could be achieved within a year. See the detailed pamphlet "1 million green jobs", free online, with costings of the proposals. Such a step would put massive pressure on other countries to do it. SWP supporter

5:12pm Fri 20 Dec 13

It's a spade! says...

The idea of cheap shale gas is appealing, look at the benefits it has had on the US economy. Shale rigs are no more intrusive on the countryside than collieries and mills were for a couple of hundred years.

However, the reality will be that vested interests will take over and they will be built everywhere and anywhere. Somehow the cheap energy will never materialise because someone somewhere will be making a killing.

Green energy is a con and all the talk of us saving the world is pointless when China and India plough on regardless. Fire the nuclear waste into space along with the greedy politicians ,

As previously pointed out if we are going to be a green country then why are we talking about building new airports and runways. Planes are the worst polluters. Building unwanted and unnecessary bypasses (polluting cars and trucks) and industrial parks on green belt (Colne) yet not looking at building or re-instating railways. Except to build (at Massive expense) the pointless HS2 line. Again the only people who will benefit are the select few and not Joe Public who will end up paying for it. We are either green or we're not we can't be both otherwise it's a waste of time.
The idea of cheap shale gas is appealing, look at the benefits it has had on the US economy. Shale rigs are no more intrusive on the countryside than collieries and mills were for a couple of hundred years. However, the reality will be that vested interests will take over and they will be built everywhere and anywhere. Somehow the cheap energy will never materialise because someone somewhere will be making a killing. Green energy is a con and all the talk of us saving the world is pointless when China and India plough on regardless. Fire the nuclear waste into space along with the greedy politicians , As previously pointed out if we are going to be a green country then why are we talking about building new airports and runways. Planes are the worst polluters. Building unwanted and unnecessary bypasses (polluting cars and trucks) and industrial parks on green belt (Colne) yet not looking at building or re-instating railways. Except to build (at Massive expense) the pointless HS2 line. Again the only people who will benefit are the select few and not Joe Public who will end up paying for it. We are either green or we're not we can't be both otherwise it's a waste of time. It's a spade!

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