Sponsored by
How much water will it takes to frack for oil in Balcombe?
JPCT 200112 Green Euro-MP Keith Taylor visits Balcome to support anti-fracking protestors. Mr Taylor with campaigner Vanessa Vine. photo by derek martin
FIVE Olympic-size swimming pools of water would be needed to fracture the shale and release the oil below Balcombe, according to drilling company Cuadrilla Resources.
It would happen at Lower Stumble, off the B2036 - and elsewhere across the South East - if exploratory drilling established the commercial potential of the rocks.
A Cuadrilla spokesman said each ‘frac’ stage would use around 1,000 to 2,000 cubic metres of water. He said: “So we would expect to use less than five pools worth of water to open up a well, depending on the depth of the seam.”
The spokesman said water availability was not an issue and he confirmed that the fracturing, or fracking, to let gas, or oil in the case of Lower Stumble, seep out would be effective for decades. Water and chemicals were not needed for on-going extraction either.
Green MEP for South East England Keith Taylor visited Balcombe last week to hear the concerns of anxious residents who fear earth tremors, falling house values and contaminated drinking water if fracking goes ahead.
Mr Taylor is concerned that EU chemical and environmental impact assessment rules do not cover fracking.
He said: “Energy companies are rushing to exploit the UK’s shale gas as if it’s the answer to our energy needs. But a recent report from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research shows that extracting shale gas could threaten the UK’s ability to meet our carbon reduction targets. Instead our government should be investing in renewable energy which is clean and does not risk wreaking havoc with the environment.”
See a full report on this story in today’s Mid Sussex Times
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Haywards Heath
Wednesday 22 February 2012
Today
Light rain
Temperature: 8 C to 10 C
Wind Speed: 21 mph
Wind direction: South west
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 9 C to 15 C
Wind Speed: 13 mph
Wind direction: West
Comments
There are 2 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
Chris French
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 03:18 PMThe amount of water quoted, 7,500 cubic metres, on a one off basis, to frack in Balcombe for shale gas, is quite insignificant, when compared to the potential of vast reserves of cheap, low-carbon gas (also donât forget 72,000 cubic metres of water are lost every day by South East Water). The âslickâ water used in fracking is 99.86% water and sand. Shale gas operations in the U.S.A, are heavily regulated and closely monitored. State regulators have all asserted in writing that there have been no verified or documented cases of drinking water contamination as a result of hydraulic fracking. The earth tremors associated with the fracking stage near Blackpool, produced tiny, barely perceptible tremors. The few production buildings for shale gas are no bigger than domestic garages. The output of a shale gas wellhead is equivalent to the average output of about 47 giant 2.5MW wind turbines, each one twice the height of Nelsonâs column with blades noisily thrumming the air. The gas wellhead can be hidden in a hollow or behind a hedge. The 47 wind turbines must be on top of hills. The gas well requires no subsidy â in fact it pays a hefty tax to the government â whereas the wind turbines each cost you a substantial add-on to your electricity bill. Unreliable wind power costs three times (nine times if offshore) as much as reliable gas-fired power. To persist with a policy of pursuing subsidized renewable energy in the midst of a terrible recession, at a time when vast reserves of cheap low-carbon gas have suddenly become available is so perverse it borders on the insane. Nothing but bureaucratic inertia and vested interest can explain it. Source: http:www.rationaloptimist.comblogshale-gas-shock Chris French Chairman UKIP Mid Sussex
Nawar A
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 07:30 PMThe solution for fracking pollution is waterless fracking; Gasfrac has done over a 1000 fracks with gelled propane; you don't need any water; you don't produce any waste fluids (no need for injection wells); no need to flare (no CO2 emissions); truck traffic is cut to a trickle from 900+ trips per well for water fracking to 30 with propane fracs; and on top of that the process increases oil and gas production; it is a win for the industry, a win for the community and a win for the environment.
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.