This time, it’s petitioning Teresa May directly, with regard to the sweeping away of planning regulations with regard to exploratory drilling. Just in case you didn’t see it, the fracking reference in the Conservative manifesto is shown below, contrary to the majority of other parties’ manifestos which called for a ban.
Firstly, follow the link to the petition.
Then just a few counter-comments for the manifesto statements:
- “Shale is cleaner than coal” – Alas not. It’s all about the leaks. Methane is much much worse for the environment. Link here and here
- “Maintain public confidence in the process” – there is no public confidence, so they need to build it, not maintain it.
- “Uphold our rigorous environmental protections” – if they continue to under-fund key agencies for environmental protection, who will be checking if the frackers are sticking to the rules?
- Shale Wealth Fund – INEOS have said they want to use for themselves all the shale gas they extract by fracking. They will use the methane component of the gas to power their petrochemicals plants, and the ethane and propane it also contains will be used as basic materials for producing plastics. They will not be selling the shale gas they extract and so they will be able to claim that they have made no profit on it at all; meaning nothing whatsoever goes into the Shale Wealth Fund.
- Permitted development – like a garden shed. How can an exploratory well be the same as putting up a garden shed? Does that mean that we will all be allowed to build extensions now without planning permission?
- “Where communities decide that it is right for them” – so:
- (i) how does that work? You’ve just informed us that we won’t get a say anyway, as the planning will go through the National Planning Regime (?)
- (ii) does that mean that if we say no, and you frack us anyway, that we won’t get anything?