Another Even Handed Piece From The BBC!
By Paul Homewood
h/t Joe Public
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26553117
It comes as no surprise to see the BBC pushing out yet more anti-fracking propaganda.
Fracking has the potential to devastate wildlife habitats across the UK, says research commissioned by leading wildlife and countryside groups.
The report Are We Fit to Frack? was launched by six organisations including the National Trust and the RSPB.
It was reviewed by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and is supported by a cross party group of MPs.
It contains proposals to limit the potential impact of fracking on the environment.
They include setting up so-called "no frack zones" around the UK’s most sensitive conservation areas.
Harry Huyton is head of energy and climate change at the RSPB.
He told BBC News: "We have found that there are serious potential risks to the environment from fracking.
"There are risks associated with using lots of water, with causing the accidental contamination of water, but also from the infrastructure that is required by the industry. This could mean lots of well pads all around the landscape. All of these could have an impact on wildlife.
"We would like the country’s most special sites to be frack free. We think that’s the reasonable thing to do at the outset of this industry. These areas are very special and also very vulnerable to disturbance and pollution. Why not, from the beginning, say that these areas are out of bounds."
The report expresses concern about the effects of potential water pollution on wildlife
Stephen Trotter, director of the Wildlife Trust, commented: "The big concern is the pollution issue. We know that to achieve the fracking process, the companies have to pour lots of saline solution and chemicals down in to the boreholes.
"Mostly, it’s a closed system, but particularly at the end of well production, if there are accidents, or if there are cracks in the pipework, then this can leak out and contaminate lakes and rivers. This has happened in the US, and it’s a big concern for the pristine environments that we have here.
"There is also the issue of the disturbance caused by the plants. They are very noisy, they operate 24 hours a day and there is lots of light pollution. So species that are very sensitive to disturbance can be affected, such as bats and some species of migratory birds."
The UK Onshore Operators Group said the industry already had extensive oversight
However, according to the trade body that represents the onshore oil and gas industry, many of the recommendations are already being adopted, and current regulations are strict enough to protect the environment.
Ken Cronin, chief executive of the UK Onshore Operators Group, said that the report contained "a number of critical inaccuracies".
"The UK onshore oil and gas industry is separately regulated by four layers of oversight provided by the environment agencies, the Health and Safety Executive, the mineral planning authorities and by the Department of Energy and Climate Change," he said.
"The industry currently has to comply with 17 European Directives, has to apply for up to nine separate environmental permits, and has to reach binding agreements on noise, hours of operation and on other local social issues."
Large swathes of the UK have already been opened up for energy exploration, so far concentrated in Lancashire, Cheshire, Yorkshire and Sussex.
The government is considering expanding this to potentially more than half of the UK. This should take place in the summer, in the next round of onshore oil and gas licensing.
Ahead of this, the Department for Energy and Climate Change (Decc) has published an environmental study into the scale of shale reserves and its potential impacts. It is out for public consultation until 28 March.
Doubtlessly, the BBC will point to the last few paragraphs, and claim that they have been even handed. But they know full well that most people will see the scary headline, read the first few sentences, and then move on. Job done!
As for the report, well pads? Where have they been these last few years when thousands of useless wind turbines have been erected? Do they think they float in the air?
Noisy and light pollution? Perhaps they would just like to close down the whole economy while they are at it.
Those who make donations to the RSPB will probably be horrified to learn that their money is being wasted on a “Head of Energy & Climate Change”. So step up, Mr Harry Huyton.
According to his Linkedin entry:
http://uk.linkedin.com/in/harryhuyton
In other words:
1) He has no qualifications or training regarding climate change.
2) He has no expertise of fracking, geology or any other relevant technology or science.
3) He has never done a proper job.
All he is actually good for is disseminating green propaganda. Perhaps he ought to get a job at the BBC!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I love headlines like that. When my kids were impressionable I just said replace whatever it is with Little Green Men, which is equally likely.
Little Green Men “could harm wildlife”
Wind turbines are a proven rather than a speculative hazard to birds, but the RSPB is in bed with Ecotricity, so they spout garbage like this.
Strange then that the RSPB opened a bird sanctuary in Old Trent Road, Beckingham, DN10 4PY on a site that has been fracked several times and even got the oil company to pay for the car park. If you go on street view on google maps you can see the nodding donkeys and I gather there is an underground pipeline to the nearby power station.
Link to the RSPB Beckingham marshes http://www.rspb.org.uk/discoverandenjoynature/seenature/reserves/guide/b/beckinghammarshes/
Wildlife seems to be fine!
Faulty wells are tied to water contamination, but not fracking, in the US.
Using horizontal drilling, the number of well pads is dramatically decreased.
“There is also the issue of the disturbance caused by the plants. They are very noisy, they operate 24 hours a day and there is lots of light pollution. So species that are very sensitive to disturbance can be affected, such as bats and some species of migratory birds.”
Exactly the same problem wind turbines cause, but where’s the outcry there? You are very correct to point this out. (Actually, as far as I can determine, people do think wind turbines sprout from seeds on wind farms. I’m only halfway sarcastic about this. Most are clueness as to the environmental damage is done in creating and installing a wind turbine.)
Are they going to keep those protected areas off limits to turbines, mirrors and solar panels?
Don’t geothermal plants require fracking in some circumstances?
Echo the comments on the RSPB.Why don’t they organise an audit of the birds and bats that are killed by the windmills.Why do bird lovers belong to such an organisation that does not take the govt. to task for allowing the rampant proliferation of the bird/bat killing machines.
Russian money seems to be behind at least a portion of the anti-fracking campaign. Which thankfully has not worked in The USA. Well, except in New York State, where Governor Cuomo banned the practice.
Obama can’t ban fracking, though he wishes he could. But since virtually all fracking here is on either State or private lands, even Obama is powerless. Much gnashing of his teeth I would imagine.
Speaking as a wildfowler exclusively interested in goose shooting, of which pink footed geese form the major part of the quarry species, I have to say that pinkfeet have been increasing year on year and that this year has seen more geese overwintering than ever.
Migratory Greylags have also appeared this year in greater abundance and Whitefronts, threatened as they are on their Greenland nesting areas by the more successful Canada geese, have also shown up in improving numbers.
Wind turbines are indeed a major hazard for pinkfeet with local anecdotal evidence of bodies being furtively collected from beneath remote upland sites that align with feeding and migratory flight paths.
We will never know how many are killed in the offshore array set in the racing tides of the Solway, nor will we know whether the crash in sea trout and salmon returning to the Solway rivers has been caused by the massive scouring effect of the platforms as evidenced by the transformation of the sands and channels of the inner Solway.
Agenda and greed driven hypocrites the lot of them.
No doubt, Roger, the fall in sea trout and salmon will be blamed on AGW
There is a fascinating paper (well worth the read) on this subject which refutes AGW as a cause and promulgates ocean cycles, both PDO and AMO as drivers of fish population fluctuations in the marine environment.
The argument is both compelling and irresistable, particularly with regard to pacific salmonids where modern records in the shorter cycle and native american folklore combine.
Click to access Climate_Changes_and_Fish_Productivity.pdf
What’s the point of trying to have a reasoned discussion with the likes of Mr Harry Huyton?
Time to take a leaf out of the “Green” handbook.
This Jizzweasel is not a climate scientist, he’s never had a proper job, he is a liar and his breath smells of booze.