J.A. Cameron : Evidence of Public Interest Issues

By May 30, 2015 News No Comments

Evidence of Public Interest Issues submitted for Session 3 on Economy. 15.01.2015

CW&C Cross Party Working Group investigating Unconventional Hydrocarbon Exploitation

Main Issues

  • Damage to the economy from the government which gives petrochemical energy companies nine times more subsidies than the renewable energy industries;
  • Potential damage to the economy from the Transatlantic Trade Agreement which allows such companies to sue governments for making laws which adversely affect their profits;
  • Loss of revenue from not requiring petrochemical companies to take full financial responsibility for all life cycle costs due to the exploitation of hydrocarbons and allowing the public to carry many of the costs and risks.

Detailed Issues to be addressed

  • Potentially adverse effects on existing sensitive and high risk installations with increased risks of seismic activity and seismic thresholds, fire and explosions; 
  • Potential damage to properties and effects on insurance, mortgages and property values some of which may be caused by contingent environmental issues or the risk of them;
  • Potential water shortages and or contamination of water, air or soil, adversely affecting other industries including farming, food production, the zoo, tourism and brewing;  
  • Lack and diversion of investment/loss of jobs in renewables and sustainable industries;  
  • False claims regarding numbers of jobs UGO will bring and UK/reduction of gas prices; 
  • False UGO industry claims regarding energy security as opposed to locally based sustainable resources;  
  • The cost to claimants and the public for damage to health or property which should be paid or underwritten by the industry up front. USA experience shows much use of stonewalling and use of massive power and resources to bankrupt and gag claimants and local institutions;
  • The costs of contingent health care and monitoring;
  • The full cost of monitoring, regulating and maintaining the wells in perpetuity which should be paid or underwritten by the industry up front;
  • The increased cost of flood protection contingent on exacerbating climate change;
  • The historically high risk of exploitation companies claiming bankruptcy and reneging on long term responsibilities and leaving ‘orphaned’ wells to be maintained at cost to the public;
  • Diversion of investment in sustainable, renewable energy technologies such as Carbon capture and storage, energy-saving, and development of novel energy-efficient technologies, more efficient solar panels and wind turbines.

Community Attendees to be confirmed

Phil Coombe, James Cameron, Matthew Bryan, Fiona Young, Dianne Parrish, Peter Benson, Steve Allman, Joanne Sparke as CWaC residents .

Supporting Material submitted in Evidence

JAC 30.12.2014

Evidence to CWaC Working Group for Session 3 Economy on 15 January 2015 References and Sources –

Andrews, I.J. (2014). The Jurassic shales of the Weald Basin: geology and shale oil and shale gas resource estimation. British Geological Survey for Department of Energy and Climate Change, London, UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/313702/BGS_DECC_JurassicWealdShale_study_2014_MAIN_REPORT_LOW_RES.pdf

 

Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (2014) ‘Shale gas and fracking: examining the evidence’

www.cieh.org/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=53520

Chester Zoo. Statement in Chester Chronicle (March 2014) http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/chester-zoo-hits-out-against-6869427

Davies, R.J., Almond, S., Ward, R.S., Jackson, R.B., Adams, C., Worral, F., Herringshaw, .L. G.,

Gluyas, J.G. and. Whitehead, M.A. (2014) Oil and gas wells and their integrity: Implications for shale and unconventional resource exploitation, Marine and Petroleum Geology http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.03.001

http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/506950/

Department for Energy and Climate Change. (2010).The unconventional hydrocarbon resources of Britain’s onshore basins – coal bed methane (CBM). Promote UK2011. https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/upstream/licensing/shalegas.pdf

Department for Energy and Climate Change. (Oct 2014) Community Benefits for Onshore Wind Farms. Best Practice Guidance for England.

https://www.gov.uk/government/topics/climate-change

Department for Energy and Climate Change. (March 2014) Shale Gas: Rural Economy Impacts. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/337654/RFI6751_Draft_Shale_Gas_Rural_economy_impact_report.pdf and Greenpeace Energy Desk comment August 2014 http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/newsdesk/energy/investigations/energy-files-social-impacts-fracking-redacted-0

Ecofys (Oct 2014) EU Commissioned Interim Report. Subsidies and Costs of EU Energy.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies/doc/20141013_subsidies_costs_eu_energy.pdf

Friends of the Earth, (2014). Coal Bed Methane. Briefing Note. http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/coalbed_methane.pdf

Institute du Development Durable et des Relations Internationnales (IDDRI) Unconventional Wisdom: An economic analysis of US Shale Gas and implications for the EU. http://www.iddri.org/Publications/Collections/Syntheses/PB0514.pdf

Jones N.S., Holloway S., Creedy D.P., Garner K., Smith N.J.P., Browne, M.A.E. & Durucan S. (2004). UK Coal Resource for New Exploitation Technologies. Final Report. British Geological Survey Commissioned Report CR/04/015N. Cleaner Coal Technology Programme, COAL R271. http://www.fraw.org.uk/files/extreme/bgs_coal_2004.pdf

Smythe, D.K. (2013). Written Evidence to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Select Committee on the ‘The economic impact on UK energy policy of shale gas and oil’. http://www.barcombe.org/fracking/docs/Prof%20David%20Smythe/Smythe%20shale%20gas%20submission%20to%20HoL%20v1.5.pdf

Smythe, D.K. (2014) Coal bed Methane. Coal Bed Methane. The Geological and Environmental Risks.

http://www.davidsmythe.org/fracking/CBM.htm

JAC 30.12.2014.