[Closed] Help protect our national parks from fracking!

What are the pros and cons?

Potential pollution problems aside I suppose that an area being cracked would be closed to the public

What exactly are we protecting them from? The foot print of a fracking site and associated infrastructure probably isn't much bigger than a trail centre car park or farm yard. The sites aren't intended to pollute the land around them, in fact legislation and monitoring around them will be much tighter than your average farm yard. Farms for example have a pretty poor record when it comes to environmental pollution.

No thanks I'm for diversifying our energy sources

I am broadly a supporter of fracking.

Pros: -
- increased dividends to shareholders of utility companies
- potential for cheaper energy (some debate)
- increased revenue from corporate taxation (yeah right...!)

Cons: -
- continuing pollution from prolonged fossil fuel use
- pollution caused directly by extraction
- cost of subsidy/tax break to 'encourage' exploration and production
- potential for reduced or impaired access to parks
- environmental impacts including destabilisation etc...

Frack on I say.

Pros: some people will make a lot of money from fracking.

Cons: it won't be you or me. There's also the environmental damage, the fact that it will undoubtedly restrict public access to certain areas and it sets a precedent for future schemes to be allowed in UK wilderness areas.

I'm normally not one to sign up for online stuff as there's two sides to every debate, but fracking just seems like a terrible idea to me. Money should be invested in sustainable energy, not stuff like this.

I'm not a big fan of the National Parks. A bit too 'Scottish' an idea for my liking. So no, I'm not against a bit of exploratory Fracking.

colin9 - Member
I am broadly a supporter of fracking.

That's fair enough - room for two sides on an issue after all... If there is a pro cracking petition and you feel strongly about it you could start a thread! 🙂

I'm not a big fan of the National Parks. A bit too 'Scottish' an idea for my liking.

Eh? The first national park in England was designated in 1951, the first in scotland was over 50 years later in 2002. In what way is that a "Scottish" idea?

What, 'sustainable' like a chuffing great steel-giant of a wind farm you mean?? the ones that are never going around because it's too windy? The ones which have further blotted another hundred square miles of countryside with the endless miles of pylons and cables?

Or the ugly acres of solar-farms, sprayed to within an inch of their lives to keep the weeds at bay and all facing South so we get a surge of power at lunch time when nobody needs it??

Let's build a Nuclear power station and have done with it. If they lose the vote, we'll build it in Scotland to say thanks and show we care about the Scottish economy 😀

@gonefishin All a bit 'power to the people' 'let's tell the farmers what to do' for my liking.

[quote=crosshair said]I'm not a big fan of the National Parks. A bit too 'Scottish' an idea for my liking. So no, I'm not against a bit of exploratory Fracking.

the national parks are only in england and wales

I am not sure why th e"nationality" of an idea woudl make you pro another

What about democracy ...not a fan as it is a bit Greek?

Or the ugly acres of solar-farms, sprayed to within an inch of their lives to keep the weeds at bay and all facing South so we get a surge of power at lunch time when nobody needs it??

Bit like traditional power stations that used to stay on line all night and hence the promotion of economy 7...

Or the ugly acres of solar-farms, sprayed to within an inch of their lives to keep the weeds at bay and all facing South so we get a surge of power at lunch time when nobody needs it??

Bit like traditional power stations that used to stay on line all night and hence the promotion of economy 7...

I just couldn't believe how much the Scottish interfere with their private landowners. I was only up there a week and our hosts had about five visits from interfering jobsworths measuring this, assessing that and counting the other. It struck me that the National Park movement here was very similar in its outlook.

I'm a big supporter of the American National Park movement but over here it's just a bit un-English 😉 😀

Just an opinion.........

Don't get me started on planning permission and so called Heritage either 😀

Well if you mean left wing then come out and say that rather than trying to hide behind some slightly weak xenophobic garbage. Scottish people aren't some homogenous mass with identical political viewpoints. That said given that the current government is guttering criticism for it's protection of the national parks due the proximity of some cabinet ministers constituencies, it would seem like the right seem to think they are a pretty good idea!

psst Junkyard, there are two in scotland too. Loch Lomond and Caringorm.

Actually, I'm including nuclear when I say sustainable. Offshore wind farms and hydro electric power are also options if your delicate eyes are easily offended...

No, not just left wing. It's more subtle than that. A kind of patronising arrogance only found in slimy Salmonoids of the Alex variety 😀

@steezysix I just can't believed we've unwittingly visually-raped half of our countryside for some dubious wind-power with barely a consultation. I couldn't believe how many Scotland have got- an absolute travesty.

I'm a big supporter of the American National Park movement but over here it's just a bit un-English

Just an opinion..

obvious troll is obvious

Frack on I say.

will make my mind up based on science, not media scaremongering and political bs

I'm happy for fracking to take place [i]so long as the risks are properly identified and mitigated against[/i] which I know is a big ask.

There's a lot to be said for diversifying our energy sources and there's certainly political risk from expecting to get our gas cheap from Russia for the forseeable. If it drops energy prices and supports economic growth/helps pay off the national debt (which is huge and growing) then [i]well-managed[/i] fracking could help sort out a lot of our problems

Instead of spending time being anti-fracking, thinking about how to reduce the pollution from excessive use of cars and lorries might be a bit more constructive IMO

Is there even any evidence that fracking will take place in our national parks or is it just a story that NIMBYs like to tell? (note there's not a single source for any of the claims made in the petition other than a link to a Guardian article!)

I remember when Chris Bonnington put forward a proposal to ban driving in the Lakes and there was a hell of a fuss...

Junkyard, not trolling at all. America is so different to here- so much bigger and a lot less populated.
There version is all about wonder at nature, education and a sense of pride. Ours is more centred on controlling people and petty bureaucracy.

I'm all for it if it means more laughing at newsreaders talking about fracking 😀

[img] [/img]

And nuclear... nuke away 😀 . Cleanest and long term the only option. If we just hide that waste that is 😉

Think broess sums up my views - what he said!

Fracking in the Peaks will be interesting!!!!.They keep banning vehicles of the green lanes see what they do with that?Suppose be a lot of shale gas under the Peaks.I expect they will do it around Buxton near the Quarries out of the National Park 😉

I'm not a big fan of the National Parks. A bit too 'Scottish' an idea for my liking. So no, I'm not against a bit of exploratory Fracking.

National Parks were first created in England and Wales. 10 parks were created in the 1950's. Scotland has only recently created 2 National Parks in 2002 and 3003.

I am not against fracking in the right locations and with suitable controls.

God forbid they frack in the New Forest. They can't even cope with bikes without frothing at the mouth.

I am broadly a supporter of fracking.

I would be surprised if they get away with it in the national parks, the public opposition would be enormous, they will simply have to frack in places like under your house, since this Government is looking to prevent you from opposing that from happening.

Or what about in our forests? You know the ones this Government tried to sell off, and have quietly re-introduced that notion, in the very same paper that sets out how Lord brown is going to wreck the place with fracking.

He did such a good job in the gulf of Mexico.

There's a lot to be said for diversifying our energy sources and there's certainly political risk from expecting to get our gas cheap from Russia for the forseeable.

We don't get our gas from Russia.

If it drops energy prices and supports economic growth/helps pay off the national debt (which is huge and growing) then well-managed fracking could help sort out a lot of our problems

What, you think energy companies are clamouring to invest in fracking just to sell it to you cheap? 😆

Oil doesnt have to be massively intrusive. A big chunk of D Day was only possible because 3.5 million barrels were extracted from Sherwood Forest at Eakring with only a few hundred people ever knowing about it. The wells went on to total 47 million barrels, with very little to see on the ground that couldn't be hidden with a bit of shrubbery. I'd much rather a bit of (careful) drilling and fracking than going cap in hand to that nice Mr Putin.

Frack on.... frack off!

OP If you want it banning in the 'National Parks', does that mean you are happy for it to happen next to my house (which isn't in a National Park)?

There's a [url= https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/337209/14R_Offer.pdf ]Map[/url] on the DECC website which shows 14th onshore round of licensing blocks under offer, as well as blocks currently under licence.

El-bent - Member
We don't get our gas from Russia

Maybe, maybe not, but possibly will do.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10715674/Where-is-our-gas-coming-from-Centrica.html

I'll confess to being sceptical about the claims of fracking offering a huge boost to our economy

I'm sure i read an analysis somewhere stated that the majority of the north seal oil boom money got sunk into the London property markets, helping to drive up our housing bubble debt based economy
If we had a Norwegian style sovereign wealth fund then things might be different

Oil companies need to big up their reserves to keep the share price high, don't believe the hype !

As for fracking national Parks I suppose it depends how lax the laws are they can drill horizontally from quite a distance so it should possible to avoid conflicts with users

And pollution (from shale fracking, they've been fracking gas and oil onshore in the uk since the 80s). There's been some examples of groundwater contamination in the USA and the small earthquakes near Blackpool show that you need to be careful but accidents can happen

Less intrusive than covering the hills with windmills.

Can't we just leave it where it is until we know if the technique messes up water tables etc? It's not going anywhere and as a resource leaving it in the ground can only make it more valuable. Win all round in my book. Oh yes we are not interested in long term stuff just short term gain.

Less intrusive than covering the hills with windmills.

Such a lovely way to mill flour though.

crosshair - Member

Junkyard, not trolling at all. America is so different to here- so much bigger and a lot less populated.
There version is all about wonder at nature, education and a sense of pride. Ours is more centred on controlling people and petty bureaucracy.

Funny that, I found the exact opposite.
America is huge, but there is virtually no tolerance of wild camping by the law enforcement authorities.
They do not like people wandering around and living on the land:
It's un-American - no profit in it.

fracking in parks - some scaremongering the sites are just as (more likely) likely to be in farm land or somewhere else

Instead of spending time being anti-fracking, thinking about how to reduce the pollution from excessive use of cars and lorries might be a bit more constructive IMO

This needs serious attention too.

And I don't want people to frack under private property too.

[i]And I don't want people to frack under private property too. [/i]

Hmm, do you actually understand how fracking works - it's a bit like saying that a deep-mine can only mine under its own land.

We still need gas for years to come.

Fracking could be the most environmentally sound way of sourcing that gas.

Base your opinion on science and information not the Daily Mail and some NIMBYs

Fracking could be the most environmentally sound way of sourcing that gas.
Base your opinion on science and information not the Daily Mail and some NIMBYs

Totally agree with you it is stupid to rule things out. But since it is new technology and we are not 100% clear how it will work in a heavily populated water stressed country that depends heavily on ground water seems to me there is no rush. It is not going anywhere. The real argument is why would/should you do it now? Short term tax receipts to cover a deficit, now that sounds familiar.

Anything carbon based is generally a bad idea to base our future energy needs on. It's obviously polluting CO2 wise plus other unburnt or partial combusted gases. Weather we get it from Russia or not us a red herring, global supply gets constricted and all prices will go up.

I just don't like the scaremonger uninformed nimby rubbish spouted by people who are automatcally against anything and everything. As for those of you gibbering away about wind farms not producing a lot of the time, do you actually live near one. I seven within 10 miles of my house, the closest being a mile away, its unusual not to see the turbines turning. We need more sustainable dispersed energy sources not less, more investment in solar (and subsidies) wouldn't hurt, think of all the acres of commercial buildings that could have them on their roofs.

pollution from vehicles is also a joke, if the government wanted to it could seriously cut emmissions if it choose to reduce congestion. Driving back up the M5 and M6 yesterday was ridiculous due to the stopstart congestion caused by the long term road works. Reduce the impact of them and congestion would ease. Driving into Manchester at the moment is also a nightmare, partly due to bus priority roadworks which are causing congestion now and cause long term congestion as a significant part of the road is handed over to a minority of users.

We still need gas for years to come.

Fracking could be the most environmentally sound way of sourcing that gas

1. Could is not a fact it is uncertainty - ie you do not know.
2. It may well be the best environmental way to get that gas [ leading statement] but the best environmental way is to leave the gas there and use other sustainable means.

Base your opinion on science and information not the Daily Mail and some NIMBYs

I generally hate the kind of post I'm currently typing... But this thread is exactly why I rarely post here these days. Semi-intelligible codswallop from people who haven't taken the time to learn to type, let alone form an informed point of view.

Should have hit up the grump thread this morning, sorry. Grump.

Edit: and also lots of interesting views too. I need more sleep...

Plenty of oilwells already in the South Downs National Park. Anyone who cycles the South Downs Way will pass two of them without noticing anything (Avington, near Winchester and Singleton, West Sussex).

Not much of an impact from them in my opinion. I highly doubt that fracking sites will be much different. 90 days approx. of HGV movements while drilling takes place then things quieten down while they appraise the well. Production wells generate very few vehicle movements.

Not much of an impact from them in my opinion. I highly doubt that fracking sites will be much different

Given that more people turned up at a public meeting against an Indian restaurant in the village than turned up to protest about the new open cast coal operation, I'm expecting tracking near here any day now!

Though tbe coal operation is pretty low key, and we compromised to just a takeaway rather than a restaurant, so win-win 😉

I thought the plan was just to plonk all the Fracking wells in the 'desolate' north? With it all being so grim and horrid, and populated as it is by frightful uncouth trogladites, and communists?

If you live somewhere nice, you probably vote Tory, so therefore there's nothing to worry about

Progress trap.

I thought the plan was just to plonk all the Fracking wells in the 'desolate' north? With it all being so grim and horrid, and populated as it is by frightful uncouth trogladites, and communists?

If you live somewhere nice, you probably vote Tory, so therefore there's nothing to worry about

Well you keep moaning about the mines being closed down, and here's an opportunity for some re-industrialisation to remind you of how it used to be. Make your mind up! 🙂

Yellowstone national park dates from 1872. Just saying.

Pumping toxic propellant into the ground. What could possibly go wrong?

Then store the contaminated water, in large reservoirs above ground, until it hopefully evaporates, bunch of gullible fools, this is not the answer to future energy needs, total hype, with serious exaggeration of possible long term benefits by the government.

We still need gas for years to come.

We choose to need their are alternatives they are just more expensive for us /govt/profit but it is a choice.

I have 4 log burners (beat that STW!) solar hot water and an air source heat pump. I'm an environmental nut.

However if you want to stop the lights going out, we need gas. I'd rather we didn't... but we do.

Currently we're importing gas from Qatar, Malaysia... everywhere. And this gas is transported in massive carbon spewing tankers. Fracking is taking gas from the UK for the UK. The carbon footprint is significantly smaller.

In the US fracking was largely experimental and unregulated. Here it would be more tried and tested and regulated to buggery.

Finally we've been fracking for oil in Southern England since the late 70's and no-one has noticed or given a toss!

if you want to stop the lights going out, we need gas

The carbon footprint is significantly smaller.

How much investment is the UK putting into Thorium Reactors?

China and India will have reactors up and running while the UK etc will still be waiting time with fracking crap.

How much investment is the UK putting into Thorium Reactors?

China and India will have reactors up and running while the UK etc will still be waiting time with fracking crap.

Because we waited for the privatised energy companies to build any kind of reactors for us? And guess what? Never happened.

That and this fracking is a classic example of the short term make a quick profit attitude that has diseased this country and is sending us backward when trying to compete with our rivals.

As a generally right leaning chap brought up in the Thatcher era, I am coming to the realisation that El-bent may have a point.

Thorium is a load of guff. Indians have been trying to get it to work for years will little success.

Wind farms that do little seem to be springing up all over Scotland because the landlords can offset then against tax. Hilarious that the subsidies the lefty Green movement want are helping the mega rich, didn't see that on coming.

Oh anyone who visits Ikea in Glasgow check out the output from their roof mounted solar panels, pathetic is the word. Failed to meet their target every single month this year.

So while fracking comes with some issues, if done well it could really benefit the UK.

marthall - Member
Fracking is taking gas from the UK for the UK.

So the market is going to completely change as well?

dragon - Member
So while fracking comes with some issues, if done well it could really benefit the UK.

How?

So none of the gas will be sold to europe then?

A few facts on fracking would probably help inform the national debate so we can come to a well-informed decision, instead of vested interests spewing their own self-serving propaganda.

History suggests this won't happen however.

No-one talks about reduce, reuse, recycle anymore. How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?

How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?

Because reducing use of energy doesn't make anyone money they can donate to political parties.

How about we just reduce our usage of energy rather than hunt out new sources?

This is very much part of what we should do!

Because reducing use of energy doesn't make anyone money they can donate to political parties.

Unfortunately true...

dragon - Member
Thorium is a load of guff. Indians have been trying to get it to work for years will little success.dragon

The Americans had a molten salt water reactor running in the 60's before it was shelved because they wanted Plutonium for weapons.

India already has an experimental reactor running. They plan to have a reactor on the grid within the decade. China is throwing the kitchen sink at Thorium and heads will roll there (literally) if they don't have reactors running in 15 years.

Meanwhile the UK will have pumped and burnt all the shale gas, polluted a few rivers and will be in an even bigger mess than today.