• Before the screening, the event will have a keynote address from Calvin Jones, eminent Cardiff University lecturer, specialising in the environmental impact of economic activity

• A ‘World Cafe’ style facilitated discussion on themes connected to the issue
• Refreshments (supplied by the Co-operative) to sustain you through the evening
• The premiere of 4 x 1 minute films , featuring local campaigners, which will form part of the online campaign
• The opportunity to watch Gasland on the state of the art facilities of the new theatre and discuss the issues

At this stage, we are not making this event open to the general public. The format of the the event does restrict capacity considerably and we have taken the decision to try and ensure that as many of the key decision-makers as possible will be at this event. We have produced an invitation list that includes large numbers of MPs, AMs, Councillors, local activists and affected residents, and key media people.

However, I am keen that anyone with a strong interest in this issue has the opportunity to attend.

If you are keen to attend and have not yet received an invitation to the event via the Co-operative, please feel free to contact Clair Stevens at the Co-operative – her contact details are on the flier below – or me, Andy Chyba, at gasland@chyba.go-plus.net or 07810663241.

I wish to put on record my immense gratitude to the Co-operative, and Sarah in particular, for the support they have offered us here in Bridgend, and now around the country, in promoting this campaign. The Co-operative are funding this entire event.

NOISE ISSUE –
This is an obvious ground for opposition, but one fraught with difficulties. Turn these difficulties to our advantage.

The advertised noise from the drilling equipment is not really the key issue. The stated 74dB, by CO&G, is noisy enough. The issue is how well controlled the noise is and environmental factors such as prevailing winds, surrounding topography and land use etc. The reality is that no-one can really predict exactly what the impacts will be. We can all conjure lies, damned lies and statistics when it comes to noise surveys before the event.

With background noise measured at c.20 dB, the noise predicted from the drills (by the CO&G commissioned survey) at the key properties has been contrived, by the assumptions underpinning the survey, to look acceptable. It is a best-case scenario. We could make a case for changing most of the assumptions and generate a worst case scenario in riposte.

My tack with the planners would be to emphasise that the assumptions made in any analysis are unlikely to match the reality on a consistent basis and that you want assurances that the drillers will be forced to take whatever remedial action may be necessary to eliminate any noise nuisance should it occur at any point during operations. This ought to be a perfectly reasonable condition for the planners to impose. It would probably be a fairly worrying one to the drillers, however, as they would have to take expensive precautions and face the fairly catastrophic (from their perspective) prospect of a shutdown if it were breached.

Noise nuisance should include secondary noise as well as the primary noise from the drill itself.

Related to noise is possible vibration issues that could be a significant impact to adjacent properties in particular. Again, this is extremely hard to predict, but it is entirely possible that resonances could occur within neighbouring properties that could generate secondary noise nuisance within the buildings, as well as issues from vibration disturbing people and equipment.

Another secondary noise impact could be from impacts on animals, such as the nearby dog kennels in the Llandow case. Noise surveys only generally consider the frequencies audible to humans. This sort of drilling could well generate frequencies that disturb animals – who could then disturb humans.

TRAFFIC ISSUE –
Again, there is a best and worst case scenario to be considered. Stress your opposition on the grounds of additional HGV traffic generated by the construction (heavy equipment) and drilling phases (water tankers) in terms of road safety, noise and damage to properties, accident potential, existing local traffic problems. Insist that, if approved, strict conditions be placed on permissible routes (this has been imposed in Bridgend) and times of movements.

OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES –
Potential inadvertent release of methane into water supplies – they are drilling into gas bearing rocks even if not commercially extracting it at this stage.
Use of scarce water supplies – where is it being taken from?
What is to happen to the polluted produced water from the drilling?
The myth of any local employment from this – Bridgend based CO&G sub-contact drilling work to a Sunderland based company (Drillcorp) that supplies the drilling equipment and hires its own labour (from places like Liverpool in the case of one operation in Bridgend).

COMPETENCY OF THE PLANNING AUTHORITY – If the Leader of the Vale Council, Coun Gordon Kemp, acknowledges that the whole issue is beyond the scope of the planning system, then how can a decision by his own Planning Department (or indeed any Local Authority planning department) have any credibility?
See second half of this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13983360 and
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/cardiffonline/cardiff-news/2011/06/15/calls-for-welsh-government-to-take-control-of-south-wales-gas-reserves-91466-28880099/#ixzz1PMlQpIqG

I hope this is helpful.

Andy Chyba

This is compelling. If the frackers are right and it is safe, she is right and water is lost to the water cycle. If she is wrong, the frackers are wrong and fracking is poisoning not just the groundwater, but the whole water cycle.

Fracking is the ultimate ‘NO WIN’ scenario:

The second (C04) is a essentially a call for an outright permanent ban submitted by Blackpool Greens Chair, Phil Mitchell, et al. It does, however, also include clauses aiming at greater regulation to minimise impacts.

The third (C05) is a short simple unambiguous motion from Richard Lane (Manchester GP) et al :
“The Green Party would put a moratorium on all onshore and offshore shale gas exploration, hydraulic fracturing (fracking), and coal bed methane extraction. A stronger scientific insight into the safety and environmental impact of these techniques is needed.”

Dealing with the ‘Blackpool’ one first, although I understand fully why they are calling for an outright permanent ban, I have argued strongly from the outset for an indefinite moratorium as a sounder intellectual standpoint that is likely to carry public opinion much more readily and thereby stand more chance of achieving the desired eventual outcome of a permanent ban on the practice of fracking. This position is shared by the Co-operative Toxic Fuels campaigners that I have been working closely with, and Kevin Anderson from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, author of the most rigorous shale gas report to date ( http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/sites/default/files/coop_shale_gas_report_final_200111.pdf ).

The most compelling argument for stopping fracking activity at the moment is the fact that no in depth scientific studies (geological, hydrological, biological, ecological, or even just plain logical!) have been undertaken to assess the impacts of fracking at the full range of spatial and temporal scales in the context of the crowded, geologically complex islands we live on. Given the evidence witnessed from other parts of the world, especially the USA, the case for undertaking this due diligence is overwhelming. Furthermore, I have no doubt that the result of doing the due diligence here will be an irrefutable case for banning the practice in the UK – and provide substance to the calls for a global ban.

In contrast, a call for an immediate permanent outright ban is all too easy to refute as it would be based on what opponents could call circumstantial evidence from less well-regulated countries (this is exactly what the pro-lobby – and Tim Yeo’s DECC report – has been trying to tell us). A call for such a ban smacks of another knee-jerk reaction from the ‘tree-huggers’. You can see the headlines in the Daily Mail, can’t you?

If this main thrust to the ‘Blackpool’ motion were not misguided enough, they then proceed to ‘muddy the waters’ by adding the clauses about regulation and minimising impacts, as if they know that their call for an outright ban is bound to fall on deaf ears and they therefore need a fall back position. Surely, their fall back position should have been the immediate moratorium, rather than accepting fracking is going to happen and that we need to try the control the ‘evil genie’ once it is out of the bottle.

Turning to the SOC composite motion, this combines the call for a moratorium, a la C05, with the fall back position of greater regulation to minimise impacts. It therefore undermines itself in the same way as the ‘Blackpool’ motion. It is a tangled mess – and that is never a recipe for saving time.

The Manchester motion gets it right. It is an unequivocal call a moratorium to allow the due diligence to be done. Pure and simple. Less is more. No fall back position needed.

Andy Chyba
Chair Bridgend Green Party

COMMENT INVITED

Sustainable Wales wants to help 500 south-facing (+/- up to 45 degrees) households with the installation of solar photo voltaics. This will contribute to the G-Cel consortium’s initial target of 2500 homes. This could save an estimated 3000 tonnes of C02 per year, while helping low-income households deal with fuel poverty.

Project Development Officer, Rob McGhee said, “This project will make a real difference for householders feeling the effects of rising energy prices as well as supporting community organisations suffering from the government cuts. To find out more or help contact, Sustainable Wales’ on 01656 783405 or email info. There is a page devoted to the issue on www.sustainablewales.org. Hard copy leaflets are available from SUSSED at 92, John St. Or the SW office.

Notes:

*1. The ‘G-Cel’ consortium

The project has partners all linked into G-Cel, a consortium of well – established community-based groups of which Sustainable Wales and SUSSED Wales are members. G-Cel is a new social enterprise established to obtain the required finance, the technical back-up and practical skills. (Groups include: Creation Dev Trust, New Sandfields Aberavon Dev Trust, SUSSED Wales, Green Renewable Wales (technical back-up and installation), Glyncoch Community Regeneration Ltd, Action in Caerau – Ely)

I WOULD URGE YOU ALL TO REGISTER YOUR INTEREST – print out the form below or if you have an questions or would like to register your interest via phone call: 01656 783405 or email info@sustainablewales.org. There is a page devoted to the issue on www.sustainablewales.org. Hard copy leaflets are available from SUSSED at 92, John St. Or the SW office.

—————————————————————————————————————————–

REGISTER OF INTEREST FORM FOR FREE PV PANELS

Please note: This form does not commit you to having Solar Panels. It registers your interest in the project. If your property meets the requirements, a structural engineer will call to examine the roof and provide you with full details and advise you of your eligibility. There will be community benefits from every installation.

Please tick or complete the following, as appropriate.

1. Detached □ Semi-detached □ Terraced □ Flat □
2. Owner-occupier □ Mortgaged □ Rented □ (Inc Council or Housing Association)

3. When was the property built? ______.
4. Is the roof south-facing? FRONT □ BACK □ OTHER □
5. Is the attic clear of obstruction? YES □ NO □(NOTE: For the safety of the installers we require clear access to the underside of the roof (south side) in the attic space)

6. For scaffolding, is there a clear space to the south-facing exterior of the property?

YES □ NO □(NOTE: Space required approx 10ft long x 8ft wide.)

7. Is there a skylight on the south-facing roof? YES □ NO □
8. Do you have more than 6 inches of loft insulation? YES □ NO □
9. Do you have cavity wall insulation? YES □ NO □

10. How did you find out about the project?…………………………………………………..

NAME………………………………………………………………………………

PHONE NO………………………………………………..

ADDRESS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………..POSTCODE………………………………..

SIGNATURE………………………………………………………………………..DATE……………………………………..

Your personal details are covered under the DATA Protection Act and will not be sent to any organisation other than those directly involved in the project.

If you have an questions or would like to register your interest via phone call: 01656 783405 or email info@sustainablewales.org.UK

Return by Hand or post to: Sustainable Wales, 41 John Street, Porthcawl CF36 3AP.

As the officer handling this application, in light of the all the controversy surrounding ‘fracking’ related activities, and bearing in mind he public comments made by Councillor Gordon Kemp, leader of Vale of Glamorgan council, in June (see this article that featured in the Western Mail on 15th June: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/cardiffonline/cardiff-news/2011/06/15/calls-for-welsh-government-to-take-control-of-south-wales-gas-reserves-91466-28880099/#ixzz1PMlQpIqG ), can we safely assume that you, or Councillor Kemp, or someone within the Vale of Glamorgan council will be requesting that this planning application be called in by the Welsh Government?

Councillor Kemp did, after all, write to Carwyn Jones asking the Welsh Government to take responsibility in planning matters relating to the exploration and exploitation of shale gas reserves. Coun Kemp recognised that a national Welsh framework policy needed to be drawn up by the Government to guide councils about whether drilling for the gas should be allowed. This clearly recognises that the council is not qualified to judge these issues.

We know that Carwyn Jones has had nothing to say on this issue publicly to date, despite being pressed by myself and others. We also know that the Welsh Government are uncomfortable with taking the issue on themselves, as all the Labour administration have publicly said is that it “would welcome” working with the UK Government on developing a framework for the whole of UK.

To some, this can appear to be ‘passing the buck’ to Westminster. To me, it is the perfectly reasonable response to an issue that has such complex and potentially dire ramifications that it should be dealt with properly at the highest level. This does not mean another fudge of an enquiry such as that chaired my Tim Yeo earlier this year. It means a national moratorium, as in France and South Africa, while a proper, independent, scientific study of what fracking would mean is undertaken. With my own background in geology and geography, I am confident in what the outcomes of a properly structured investigation would be.

In the meantime, you will be well aware that the original application stimulated great local opposition, focussed on the “Vale Says No!” campaign. This campaign group is still alive and kicking, but has developed and morphed into the “No Fracking UK” campaign group that has fostered links with the Co-operative and garnered support from across the political spectrum both locally (Alun Cairns and Jane Hutt for instance) and nationally.

This application, more than any other in South Wales, will become the focus of intense interest again. I personally can assure of this through my representation of the anti-fracking movement in South Wales at high profile events throughout September (Green Party Conference, the national Camp Frack event near Blackpool, and a high profile event being sponsored by the Co-operative in Bridgend – more details on this soon).

So, Mr Ball, do your duty to the people you serve and ensure that this application is handled in the right context and by the people that ultimately need to take responsibility for what is at stake here.

Yours,
      
Andy Chyba
Bridgend Green Party
Blog: https://bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/
Mobile: 078 1066 3241
Email: greens

1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Apologies for Absence
3. Minutes and matters arising
4. Officer reports
5. Campaigns update – Fracking/’Power for the People’
6. Elections – BCBC 2012
7. Conference – September in Sheffield
8. Camp Frack arrangements
9. AOB
10. DoNM

NOTE – new venue for trial period. 2 minutes walk from both the Bus and Train stations.
See map: https://bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/2011/07/16/next-meeting/

Gasland – UK première, Tuesday 16th August, 11pm

CURRENT TV – SKY CHANNEL 183 (or Virgin 155)
If you haven’t heard about “fracking” you have not been visiting this site enough and you need to listen up right now, because it’s very likely to come to a town near you!

Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is a process used by gas companies to extract natural gas trapped inside hard shale rocks deep inside the earth by flushing it out.

Why is this a bad thing we hear you ask. Well have a look at the trailer for the Oscar nominated documentary Gasland and you will understand why fracking in the UK is something we all should be concerned about.

Not only can the water used to flush out the gas from the shale rocks be poisonous for you and the environment – it can ignite!

Exploration companies claim there is a potential £70bn of gas reserves in rocks deep under south Wales, they have already started franking in Blackpool and there are applications in process for fracking sites all over the UK and Europe.

http://gaslandmovie.co.uk/

TRAILER:

You can see AN OPEN LETTER TO JOURNALISTS FROM GASLAND DIRECTOR JOSH FOX IN RESPONSE TO ATTACKS BY GAS INDUSTRY here:

http://imaginepeace.com/archives/13304

Your leading article of 9 August suggests that “it is spurious to draw a connection between [deprivation and the social marginalisation of inner-city youth] and specific outbreaks of violence of the sort we have seen in recent days”.

Really? Is it so spurious to suggest that an economic and political system that stresses materialist wealth, which constantly exposes us to increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous advertising, yet which oversees the breakdown of communities and the impoverishment of millions in order to increase the wealth of a minority of individuals and businesses, might be responsible for creating the sorts of individuals who have taken to the streets?

We do not need to argue that these people were explicitly politicised, or fighting for some sort of social justice on the contrary, we can draw the opposite conclusions. Many of these people appear to have been acting selfishly, competitively, and without thought for the consequences of their actions. If only they had a middle-man in a developing country to do their looting, they would make fine capitalists.

When riots like this take place, it is spurious to suggest the social context is not to blame. I do not condone much of what I have seen, but it is perfectly understandable, when we reflect upon the sort of society more respectable thieves in suits have created for us.

Matthew Wilson, Lancaster

Thatcher’s children

The Tories take office and, as night follows day, hundreds of thousands of jobs are sacrificed, welfare services are slashed and rioting returns to the streets of our major cities. People who feel they have a stake in society do not riot and loot.

It is a sad reflection on 99 per cent of the media that it has failed to connect the events of the past few days to news of another round of obscene bankers’ bonuses, projected tax cuts for the wealthiest and another round of “quantitative easing”: that is the squandering public money to placate the financial markets.

If you want evidence of “mindless” looting and vandalism look no further than the Government’s fiscal and social policies.

Dr Mick Wilkinson, Lecturer in Race & Social Justice, University of Hull

Andy.