Letters - April 6, 2016
ENERGYLet's have a balanced view on shale gasI have read your front page leader article in April 1 edition of the Gazette.
I am aware it was April 1, but I do not think the article was intended as some kind of prank. The item was full of inaccuracies.
Living locally, I have to say that I have not encountered anyone over the past 5five years who was aware of the tremor at the time of the event.
Indeed, there have been previous tremors in the area which were “noted”, but not elevated to a newsworthy status. They happen all the time, all around the world, with, or without, fracking or Cuadrilla.
Your array of local experts should be introduced to the worldwide academics on these matters. The majority of these academics seem to have a somewhat different view on the causes, and the risks, from these events. My money is on the people who have experience on any matter. I would not risk acting on an untrained medical opinion over that of a qualified surgeon.
Perhaps you need to look at reporting some of the more learned statements on the topic, and be seen as being true journalists providing a balanced view.
Name and address supplied
New research is a worry for Fylde
The welcome article regarding the anniversary of the first tremors caused by hydraulic fracturing in the Fylde (Gazette, April 1), coincides with the results of a new study linking hydraulic fracturing to earthquakes in British Columbia.
The new research concludes that 90 per cent of seismic activity in the region was the direct result of fracking operations.
If Cuadrilla is allowed to go ahead with its plans to test drill for shale gas at the two sites inFylde, then surely they are taking enormous risks with the health and safety of local residents? No amount of regulation can secure our safety in this process.
Scientific backing for opposition
Mr Linderman writes of his concerns about The Gazette’s approach to shale (Your Say, March 4), and says “Perhaps have an article from a geologist who can put people’s minds at rest.”
Now that made me chuckle, because much of the article was based on work by geoscientists !
I recognise information taken directly from papers published by Dr C J de Pater and Dr Baisch, by Dr Green, Prof Styles and Dr Baptie, and by Dr Westaway, to name but a few, and they represent a range of universities, technical companies involved with earth sciences, and the British Geological Survey.
I would be interested too, to know how Mr Linderman squares the statement by Ken Cronin, CEO of UKOOG, that “Operators will be required to confirm that wells are not be drilled into, or close to existing faults...” given that at Preston New Road the well would be much closer to a major fault than is advised, and the applications clearly show that the wells will be drilled through faults at both sites.
Having an interest in Earth Sciences, I have written to several professors and geoscientists, and find that none are happy for shale gas exploration to go ahead as currently planned – even those who are in principle ‘pro shale’, have serious concerns about different aspects of the current applications for the Fylde.