Attached and at the bottom of the post, is the letter I received today from DECC Correspondence Unit in response to the letter I delivered to 10 Downing Street on 1st December. (Apologies for it being in 3 bits – technical issues!)

My response is as follows:

Dear Mr McHugh,

I have no idea how you were selected for the task of responding to our letter to Mr Cameron, and have no idea how you went about composing this response, but as it consists entirely of the poorly thought through responses already in the public domain, I suspect it exercised the copy and paste facility on your computer more than your own grey matter. However, I am happy to give you another chance, and would like you to personally reflect on the following points and then go away and seek out some proper answers for us.

Taking your letter paragraph by paragraph:
Paragraph 1 – It is a trivial but revealing point that you thought our letter was dated the 10th January. It was actually dated 1st December. I guess you were given this task on 10th January and got round to your copy and pasting on the 12th.

Paragraph 2 – Thank you for the admission that “the Government is committed to ensuring that we maximise economic recovery of UK hydrocarbon resources“. This is totally consistent with the blinkered, myopic energy policy and big business inveigling that we have come to associate with this Government. It is a pity you cannot honestly make the statement substituting the word renewable for the word hydrocarbon. So, can you please explain how this statement fits with the Government’s legally binding commitments on climate change?

Paragraph 3 – That the “Government’s position on UK unconventional gas resources matches that which it takes towards conventional oil and gas ” underlines that the Government just does not ‘get it’. The technologies involved are fundamentally different. The risks are fundamentally different, and more significant. These extreme technologies, alongside deep coal bed methane and underground coal gasification, represent the desperate last attempts to squeeze out the last drops of hydrocarbons for the earth’s crusts. This is consistent enough with the highlighted statement in paragraph 2, but ought to shout out ‘BEWARE’ to anyone of intelligence. The economics are dodgey enough – but that is only a risk to the Government’s risk-loving mega-rich investor friends. Given the Government’s self-confessed inability to recognise the fundamental differences in this branch of the oil and gas industry, it invalidates any claim to have “full regard to the protection of the environment”. The conventional industry’s track record in this country is hardly blemish free. These unconventional industries have appalling records everywhere they have been established. Yet the Government remains steadfastly blasé. Perhaps, for example, you could tell us exactly what is DECC’s suggested remedy for a contaminated aquifer?

Paragraph 4 – This paragraph acknowledges the many reported and confirmed issues with shale gas in the US. I am sure that you would acknowledge the similar problems experienced in Australia. These are the only countries to date that have experienced commercial scale fracking. Problems are beginning to emerge in countries dabbling with fracking, e.g. Poland and China. Where do Australia/USA/Poland/China rank on the World Environmental Protection Index? Dismally at 48/49/22/116 respectively. The only frack site in the UK ran into immediate problems. Fracking will assuredly see us tumble down the EPI rankings. The question for you therefore has to be just how much evidence, that points to the fundamentally flawed nature of this technology, is required to trigger the precautionary principle with this Government?

Paragraph 5 – Again you highlight the arrogant and blasé disposition of the Government by assuming we have an adequately “robust regulatory system” to ensure “high standards of safety and environmental protection”. The hydrocarbon industries have always been amongst the worst performing industries – using tried and tested (and all too often failed) conventional methods. The litany of mining disasters and health issues lingers to this day. Serious spills of oil and gas from North Sea platforms occur at the rate of one a week, undermining oil companies’ claims to be doing everything possible to improve the safety of rigs – under this supposedly robust regulatory system! ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jul/05/oil-gas-spills-north-sea ) We have seen for ourselves (Llandow Public Inquiry) that even when planning committees reject this industry’s application, after full and detailed scrutiny, the system is rigged to undermine local democracy and allow the industry full reign.

Paragraph 6 – Assurances about the the EA requiring full disclosure of chemicals used in fracking are undermined by a few inconvenient truths. There is no such thing as proprietary frack fluid. You do not buy it off the shelf with a nice contents label and a MSDS. It varies at every stage of the fracking and with variations in local geology. You would need a presence at every single fracking operation, at every single site, to sample the fluid used every time. This is a practical impossibility. So the EA asks the industry to declare what it is using. I have already demonstrated the lies that UK frackers, Cuadrilla and their friends, tell about the chemicals they use ( https://bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/2011/11/24/the-blatant-lies-of-the-frackers-and-their-friends/ ). After Cuadrilla fracked in Lancashire, the EA tested the flow back water. They identified all sorts of nasties flushed out of the shales, but there was no sign, in the analysis I have seen, of the chemicals Cuadrilla admitted to using – leave alone the ones they may not. The fact is that the EA can only identify things it makes an effort to look for. I cannot find things that it is not looking for. Do you 100% trust the industry to be completely honest about every chemical it uses in every frack job? Really?

Paragraphs 7,8 & 9 – same issues as paragraph 6.

Paragraph 10 – The Select Committee’s 2011 report can be systematically taken apart ( https://bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/analysis-of-the-conclusions-and-recommendations-of-government-shale-gas-inquiry/ ), but let me focus on the essence of its absurdity that you so kindly flag up: “Shale gas extraction poses no direct risk to underground water aquifers, provided the well is constructed properly”. As various studies (e.g. Ingraffea, A. 2011. Unconventional gas Development from Shale Plays: Myths and Realities Related to Human Health Impacts) into the lifelong effectiveness of well casings shows a 5% failure rate in new oil and gas casings, and a 50% failure rate in wells 30 years old, the only rational conclusion is that shale gas extraction must pose a a significant risk to underground water aquifers. Would you agree?

Paragraph 11 – Contains the similar ‘Big Ifs’ of assuming “operational best practice” and “enforced through regulation”. This has already proven inadequate at one single, solitary site in Lancashire. Can you please explain how this can be expected across the many tens of thousands of largely remote and isolated sites across the country, if full scale production goes ahead as the Government clearly hopes? If only 1% of frack jobs has a problem and only 1% of well casings fail, have you any idea of the likely consequences?

Paragraph 12 – Please explain the “control measures to mitigate the risk of seismic tremors” that the Government claims to have imposed. What are they mitigating against? Do you think they are going to stop seismic activity happening? Do you think that they are going to stop seismic activity compromising the integrity of the well casings? Get as technical as you like – I am a geologist.

Paragraph 13 – What fab news, that there is going to be a “new Office of Unconventional Gas & Oil“, it suggests that Government does, after all see this branch of the industry as different . However, given that it appears to be, from what you say, a marketing office to attract investors; and given that investors regard Government regulation as a ‘hazard’, according to UK Shale Gas Business Confidence survey; the goal of a simplified and streamlined regulatory process is hardly re-assuring to us, as it clearly aimed at appeasing and attracting investors. Do you think you might get told off for copying and pasting this bit?

Paragraph 14 – Given the fact that you admit that “it is not at this stage possible to confirm that these constitute an economic resource, or to offer any estimates of how much resource may be technically and economically recoverable”, setting up a new Office of Unconventional Gas & Oil seems somewhat premature, wouldn’t you agree?

Paragraph 15 – In the spirit of mutually sharing “further information about shale gas and fracking”, I would recommend you look here: http://frack-off.org.uk/ or any of the links here: http://frack-off.org.uk/resources/fracking-links-library/ . “I hope that this is helpful.”

I look forward to continued correspondence with you.

Yours sincerely,

Andy Chyba
The Vale Says No!
Frack-Free Wales
Anti-Fracking Network

Be under no illusion as to what Gerwyn and his cronies are up to. They are not very clever at disguising their intentions. Down at Llandow, their initial bungled application clearly stated shale gas at the target. As soon as the locals rose up and organised opposition (the Vale Says No! Campaign group) they resubmitted trying to pretend they were only really interested in conventional sandstone oil/gas. Pathetic. At St Johns Colliery, they successfully sneaked an application through to target the deep lying shales in January 2011, before we caught on to what they are up to. They again brought Drillcorp in to do that test borehole, but my understanding is that they had to abandon it because Drillcorps equipment was not up to the job.

Gerwyn is getting on a bit. Speculating on unconventional gas is his pension plan, I believe. He has picked up licences to explore for resources for very little investment (just a few thousand pounds) in South Wales, the Mendips and Kent. By undertaking some test drilling and conjuring up fanciful figures for the potential resource, he will look to sell on his licences at substantial profit and disappear into the sunset well before the frackers roll in and wreak their havoc.

There are now local opposition groups springing up across South Wales , and in order to share knowledge and resources we have recently seen FRACK-FREE WALES launched in Cardiff, which in turn belongs to a national (and increasingly international) network e.g. FRACK OFF and the ANTI-FRACKING NETWORK. We are watching them closely, but even with all the immense time, energy and effort of the fractivists, we still desperately need the general public to wake up to what is at stake. It needs to become a major political issue with peoples votes at stake, because this is the biggest threat to face the people of South Wales (and other threatened regions) for a generation at least.

The Tories in government have nailed their colours to the mast – short term profit and tax revenue, at any cost. The ‘Greenest Government Ever’ was laughable when they first uttered it. It is now just another nauseating lie. The Labour administration in the Welsh Government have steadfastly sat on the fence over this issue, and shamefully kowtowed to Westminster at every opportunity. Our Labour controlled Council in Bridgend (in common with all Local Authorities) are completely out of their depth; have nobody providing leadership or expertise; and yet are still the planning body we have to rely on to save us from this menace. As last week’s rubber-stamping exercise demonstrated, we simply cannot rely on them for that.

So finally, a plea for everybody to educate themselves and wise-up quickly. Just google fracking, or else check all the resources and information on the local situation at bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/?s=fracking . You can contact me for more information via the about page there.

Andy Chyba

Chair Bridgend Green Party

Co-Founder of the Anti-Fracking Network

SUBMITTED TO GLAMORGAN GAZETTE / WESTERN MAIL / SOUTH WALES ECHO / BRIDGEND GEM

Terrapinn, the organisers of Europes leading Shale Gas meeting, are conducting a UK Shale Gas Business Confidence survey. We would appreciate you taking 5 minutes to complete this multiple-choice survey.

The results will be presented at a networking drinks reception on 30 January at 6:00pm in London, to which you would be very welcome. We will also distribute them to all participants.

I thank you for your time in advance.

Best regards,

Terence ODwyer
Director
Shale Gas World UK
http://www.terrapinn.com/conference/shalegasuk

Suggested answers:

Q1-Other. Industry observer
Q2-UK
Q3-Never
Q4-Little or no impact
Q5-Other. Public opposition. Knowledgeable and well-organised anti-fracking movement
Q6-Profit and tax revenue
Q7-Yes
Q8-10-20%
Q9-YES
Q10-NO
Q 11- Whatever you see fit, or leave blank

Question 5 really takes the prize for revealing the mentality of these frackers:

5. What do you feel is the biggest threat to shale gas exploration success in the UK?

a) Government and regulatory hazard b) Technology and supply chain limitations

c) Other (please specify)It would be fantastic to think that the Government and proper regulatory regime could be seen to be the biggest threat to these bastards coming in and doing their dirty deeds, but with Cameron in Downing Street, that really isn’t likely to worry them much – unless we do something about it! (See video below). But the sheer wording of the question sickens me – they perceive being regulated properly as an occupational hazard – and all hazards are to be avoided, aren’t they? Our job therefore is to ensure that we, and the Fractivist movement as a whole, become their unsurmountable hazard!! As for Cameron – I think this sums him up pretty well. Cameron’s Ecocide: http://vimeo.com/43463474

The Railway PH at the bottom of Station Hill (upstairs meeting room).

ALL WELCOME (Especially new members!)

AGENDA:

1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Apologies for Absence
3. Minutes and matters
4. Officers’ reports
5. Councillor feedback
6. Campaigns update – Fracking / 20’s Plenty/Atlantic Array
7. Spring Conference – Nottingham Feb 2012
8. Electoral strategy discussion
9. AOB incl. Blog update;
10. DoNM

NOTE – Venue is 1 minute’s walk from both the Bus and Train stations in Bridgend.

REMINDER – If anyone needs a lift to any of our meetings, let Andy know and we will organise it for you.

I recently received this plea from Ricky Knight, of North Devon Greens (via Pippa Bartolotti):

Things are really hotting up here in North Devon with regard the proposed Atlantic Array. There is sadly much opposition building up against this crucial project and we are determined to support it as much as we can.

Are you able to help facilitate this for us, please? – it’s not just about an economic fight between say Port Talbot and Ilfracombe (er, no contest!) – it’s just that this is not a Nimby issue; it’s an issue of vital national interest: either the AA or Hinkley C/EDF; or in your case, either Gwynt y Mor or Wylfa B/Hitachi!

For those of us so entrenched in the fight AGAINST fracking for short-term, extreme, fossil fuel energy; it is great (in my opinion) to have something to also fight FOR in terms of vital long term, large scale, renewable energy.

According to the group’s mission statement, the Atlantic Array Supporters Group exists to:

• Promote a proper understanding of the economic benefits of the scheme
• Address the myths put against Wind Energy and off-shore Wind Turbines
• Campaign for Political support of the present proposals put forward to develop an off-shore wind farm by RWE
• Educating the public on the proposals and exposing false media reporting

The Atlantic Array Supporters Group believes the Array will provide:

• A sustainable form of energy that reduces Northern Devons impact on the environment
• A major contribution towards reducing Carbon Emissions from Northern Devon
• High quality employment prospects for Northern Devons young people
• A reduced future cost of energy in Northern Devon and make a substantial contribution to reducing fuel poverty
• The necessary impetus for the regeneration of Illfracombe
• A draw for investment into the region
• Energy security for Northern Devon in an uncertain world
• Replacement income for Northern Devons diminishing marine industry
• New opportunities for tourism

All of these points are applicable to South Wales too.

Ricky Knight points out:
“One thing RWEs presentation [see link above] does do here, which supporters often find hard to represent & quantify, is the economic one. It ticks two major boxes for me namely, the Sustainable Development one and One Million Green Jobs one (admittedly not quite that many on this project alone ..). Nicholas Stern pointed out sagely that the Climate Change camp could never achieve the success it seeks without the economic/financial strand embedded in the arguments not easy with on-shore wind, limited by so many constraints and mostly small scale but in this case, it is over-whelming. We are talking billions.”

For all these reasons, I have assured Ricky of my support, and that (I am confident) of all Bridgend and South Wales Greens.

Andy Chyba

We had this Facebook conversation, which I would like to share with you:

DORY HIPPAUF (DH)
The attached spreadsheet is my connect the dots raw data for marcellus shale players. Marcellus Gas Play Players.xls

ANDY CHYBA (AC)
Very impressive
2 questions:
1. How long has this taken to piece together
2. What has been the most profitable use you have found for this info?

DH
1. I started working on it about 2 1/2 years ago, it will continue until it’s no longer needed
2. Most profitable? My blog posts and presentations are based on the data, and I share it with others.
Opens people’s eyes to how much money is being passed around and how incestual the relationships are between corporations, politicians and other organizations.
When organizing a protest – it’s helpful tool to know who’s who so the protest is targeted at the right person/corporation. No sense in staging a protest outside of Exxon-Mobil when you have the issue with Royal Dutch Shell – right?
The frackers know who we are, what organizations we belong to etc. So I thought turn about is fair play.

AC
Fantastic – thanks for that. Very helpful.
Is there a big fractivist community where you are? (Which where exactly?)
And what about public awareness and perception over there. We are still struggling to wake people up over here.

DH
I live in Pennsylvania, I am chair of the research committee for Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition (FB page – https://www.facebook.com/GDACoalition)
Website: http://www.gdacoalition.org/
Our Videos: http://www.gdacoalition.org/GDAC_VIDEO.html
Natural gas is “cooked” in our area – meaning there is not enough gas to make it worthwhile to drill. However, we are central for the mid-stream infrastructure of compressor stations, dehydration plants, and main gas transmission lines – all of which is as hazardous (if not more) than a drill pad.
Public perception here is also a problem. Seems no one will get off their duff until there’s a natural gas blowout in their backyard.
We keep trying by being as active as we can in the community. We reach out to people who may have a problem with the gas industry, try to mobilize neighborhoods where infrastructure may be built, and we do presentations, bring in speakers and anything else we can think of to raise awareness and get people involved.

AC
I too am involved with a wide range of anti-fracking groups. With a Geography/Geology background I hope to help with understanding the technicalities of fracking and also the vagaries of the UK planning system. Our story is diarised in reverse chronological order via my local Green Party blog: https://bridgendgreens.wordpress.com/?s=frack
It has been great to make this contact with you. It serves to underline the the near global nature of this menace

DH
Great to meet you too !

Link to my blog posts
http://blog.shaleshockmedia.org/author/dhippauf/

Dory Hippauf | No Fracking Way
http://www.facebook.com

(Full Excel spreadsheet attached – see end of posting).

It is a list of the contact details of what appears to be just about all of the UK based PEDL holders –

frackers and potential frackers – and a few other potential players.I am sure you will all be able to

recognise a few names on this list.
FYI re Coastal Oil and Gas/UK Methane, the listed name, Oliver Taylor, is their in-house geologist.

Gerwyn Williams is the aging managing director looking for the quick speculative gain to fund his retirement.

I recommend that you register for a free account with https://www.duedil.com/ and check out the

companies you are interested in.
You will probably be surprised/shocked at what little tin-pot companies most of these are.

If you struggle with this, let me know which company and I’ll get you a summary.

What to do with this contact information? Suggestions welcome – use your imaginations!

That it has taken this long for American mainstream news channels to catch up with the story is a bit of a shock – but better late than never! Thanks for the heads up Denis.

He writes:

Hey folks!

Mainstream news provider NBC News Today Show -Rossen Reports – this morning showed this explosive story on water set ablaze (like in Gasland).

This is HUGE! A mainstream news organisation running this story in the USA with an audience in the millions is a big break for the movement.

Go to iTunes until Sunday night and download the 11 January episode of NBC TODAY show (video) to save forever to your iPhone or iPad. Dont have one? No problem, go to this website to see the story. http://todaynews.today.com/_news/2013/01/11/16462830-rossen-reports-family-discovers-their-tap-water-is-flammable?lite

Very important that such a mainstream group has this story.

Please spread this.

Denis Campbell