Fracking in the United Kingdom
In late May 2011, the first UK exploration for shale gas using high-volume hydraulic fracturing was suspended at Preese Hall at Weeton in Lancashire after the process triggered two minor earthquakes.
[24] In January 2014, the European Commission issued a set of recommendations on the minimum principles for the exploration and production of hydrocarbons from shale formations using high-volume hydraulic fracturing.
[25] A 2016 government report on the UK shale gas sector was finally made available in 2019 after a three year legal battle to make it public, but with three-quarters of its pages blacked out.
[5] In November 2019 the government announced "an indefinite suspension" to fracking, after a report by the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) said it was not possible to predict the probability or size of tremors caused by the practice.
[30] Each perforated section is isolated using a packer (seal)[29] For both low and high volume hydraulic fracturing stimulation of a hydrocarbon well, a high-pressure fluid (usually water) containing chemical additives and a proppant is injected into a wellbore to create an extensive system of small cracks in the deep-rock formations.
[36] Flowback fluid injection in deep disposal wells, which has been linked to significant increase in earthquake rate,[37] is not currently permitted in the UK by the Environment Agency.
[38] In January 2014, "applications for permits to frack" were withdrawn by Cuadrilla after arrangements for treatment and disposal of NORM-contaminated flowback fluid were considered inadequate by the Environment Agency.
[citation needed] Other fracturing fluid systems[49] such as gels, foams and compressed gases, including nitrogen,[50] carbon dioxide and air, can be injected in place of water.
[54] Only high volume hydraulic fracturing[55] combined with horizontal drilling is likely to enable commercial extraction of unconventional hydrocarbon resources, such as shale gas and light tight oil, in the United Kingdom.
[73] In October 2022, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reinstated England's fracking ban moratorium after it was briefly lifted by his predecessor Liz Truss.
[83] In July 2014, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) and Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) published a report about hydraulic fracturing that was broadly negative.
It referred to major shortcomings in regulatory oversight regarding local environmental and public health risks, the potential for undermining efforts to tackle climate change, and the possibility that the process might cause water shortages.
[84] The report received a negative review from an academic based upon the lead author being a Green Party candidate, and hydraulic fracturing protester, and the alleged selective nature of some[clarification needed] of the data used.
A consultation period solicited views from stakeholders, "individuals, organisations, such as charities; businesses; local authorities, and; community groups"; ran between August and October 2016.
[108] In February 2016, a study by the ReFINE consortium funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Shell, Chevron, Ineos and Centrica, found "substantial increases over the baseline""in local air quality pollutants", during the short-duration high-traffic phase which includes the delivery of hydraulic fracturing equipment, proppant, water, as well as the removal of flowback from the site.
[109] The industry group UKOOG criticised the ReFiNE study for failing to take into account that water for hydraulic fracturing fluid might be brought in by pipeline, instead of being transported by truck.
[117] Another 2013 paper from ReFine indicated the potential for surface gas leaks from abandoned wells[118] Treated mains water is the norm in the UK, and standards are required by legislation to be high.
[124] As of August 2016, there have been two cases in the United Kingdom of fault reactivation by hydraulic fracturing that caused induced seismicity strong enough to be felt by humans at the surface: both in Lancashire (M 2.3 and M 1.5).
[23] The company's temporary halt was pending DECC guidance on the conclusions of a study[132] being carried out by the British Geological Survey and Keele University,[129] which concluded in April 2012 that the process posed a seismic risk minimal enough to allow it to proceed with stricter monitoring.
[134] Cuadrilla commissioned an investigation into the seismic activity, which concluded that the tremors were probably caused by the lubrication of an existing fault plane by the unintended spread of hydraulic fracturing fluid below ground.
"[68] Public Health England's Dr John Harrison, Director for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, stated that: "Where potential risks have been identified in other countries, the reported problems are typically due to operational failure.
Good on-site management and appropriate regulation of all aspects of exploratory drilling, gas capture as well as the use and storage of hydraulic fracturing fluid is essential to minimise the risks to the environment and health.
[citation needed] Concerns about hydraulic fracturing have been raised across the United Kingdom, including: Sussex, Somerset and Kent in England, and; the Vale of Glamorgan in Wales.
[157] In 2012, industry assurances were tarnished when Cuadrilla came under fire for its categorical denials of its plans for hydraulic fracturing near Balcombe after documents from parent company AJ Lucas materialised appearing to indicate the opposite.
[159] In May 2014, a letter to the Department of Energy and Climate Change dated June 2011 emerged, confirming the company believed that to achieve commercial production, "significant amounts of hydraulic fracturing" would be required at Balcombe.
[178] Friends of the Earth gave assurance to the ASA that they would not repeat claims in their advertisements about "the effects of fracking on the health of local populations, drinking water or property prices" "in the absence of adequate evidence".
[183] The rejection came despite the Council being told that, strictly from a planning point of view, there were no "reasonable or sustainable grounds" to refuse, and despite the drilling application containing no explicit mention of hydraulic fracturing.
[185] Coastal's chances of success at the enquiry were boosted by Kent County Council approval of the company's near-identical plans for preliminary drilling in Woodnesborough,[155] and were increased to near certainty after Welsh Water effectively retracted its previous risk assessment.
[185] In arguing its case, Cuadrilla contrasts its approach with the one taken in the United States, claiming that only three chemicals—a polyacrylamide lubricant commonly found in cosmetics, hydrochloric acid, and a biocide used to purify drinking water—will be used in the UK, compared with the hundreds that can be used across the Atlantic; that it has invested in more expensive, better equipment than that used by companies operating in the US;[186] that its wells have three layers of pipe casing to line the wells, whereas many American ones only have two; that the barrier between the gas escaping up the pipe and ground water is thicker; that cement will be returned to the surface, blocking identified leak paths; and that drilling fluids will be collected in closed steel tanks, rather than in lined earthen pits, as often happens in the States.
[191] The Lancashire 'North West Energy Task Force', a body that broadly supports the extraction of shale gas, commissioned a report on the effect of house prices in the area surrounding the Preese Hall 1 well, after the seismic issues lead to a suspension of activity by the drilling company, Cuadrilla.
