Myth Buster 2  "Shale gas reserves will last for 50 years"

But if we have 50 years’ worth of natural gas right under our feet, surely that could be enough to make a difference to the international market?

FACT: Whether it’s 50 years or nothing at all, the truth is that nobody has a precise idea of accessible shale gas reserves in the UK. However, a joint 2019 paper by the British Geological Survey (BGS) and the University of Nottingham, published in the journal Nature[i], found that shale reserves are “~10 times lower than previously thought” (i.e. than the original 2013 BGS desk-based study which came up with the 50 year figure) and “considerably below 10 years supply at the current consumption”.

A 2018 paper by Durham and Newcastle Universities, which considered fracking’s surface development requirements and its impact on existing infrastructure (roads, buildings etc)[ii] found that fracking would provide the equivalent of less than 3 years’ gas usage.

To quote financial conglomerate Citicorp, it is “doubtful that there will be anything other than a cottage shale industry”[iii].

[i] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-11653-4.pdf

[ii] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969717304096

[iii] https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/992297/uk-fracking-will-only-be-cottage-industry-says-citi-and-north-sea-even-more-doubtful-992297.html

Return to top

Myth Buster 3  "Fracking can be up and running within months"

Let’s say that the experts are wrong, and fracking can produce gas for us now when we need it – shouldn’t we get cracking with fracking?#

FACT: Even according to the industry’s own best-case scenario, fracking would produce only 5% of UK gas needs over the next 5 years.[i]  And that assumes no issues with planning, a dismantling of the current regulatory regime, and support from communities. A more likely scenario, according to Mike Bradshaw, professor of global energy at Warwick University, is that “it would require up to 40 wells in different locations to arrive at a basic reserve estimate. That could take five or six years to complete.”[ii]

Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng is on record as saying, “Even if we lifted the fracking moratorium tomorrow, it would take up to a decade to extract sufficient volumes – and it would come at a high cost for communities and our precious countryside”.  Bear in mind that the UK spent the best part of a decade attempting to get a shale industry off the ground with policy, media and political support from the highest levels. And failed. Repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of stupid.

[i] https://twitter.com/DrSimEvans/status/1500791327860133890?s=20&t=StjguTdtFxL4yVxIEkT_3w

[ii] https://www.marketplace.org/2022/03/10/could-u-k-fracking-wean-europe-off-its-addiction-to-russian-gas/

Return to top

Myth Buster 4  “UK Fracked gas would have lower carbon emissions and be better for the environment than imported gas”

We’re all worried about climate change, so isn’t it better to use locally produced gas, rather than transporting it halfway round the world?

FACT. That could only be true if the displaced imports are not used elsewhere. In reality, the tankers would just go somewhere else, with our local fracked gas contributing to increased global emissions. And in fact shale gas may not even be that much better than imported LNG anyway.

Manchester University’s report on shale gas and the UK’s carbon transition says “Unfortunately there is relatively little robust data on the carbon footprint of LNG” and finishes with “Consequently, the idea that UK shale gas will reduce global emissions by substituting imported LNG should be treated with caution”[i]. The same report goes on to say that shale gas is preferable to only coal when compared with other options such as solar, wind and nuclear.

There’s a better solution, according to a 2015 report by Verco and Cambridge Econometrics[ii]: making this country’s homes highly energy efficient would reduce gas imports by 26%. Given that, according to Government statistics, in 2021 LNG made up 29% of our gas imports[iii], simply insulating homes would pretty much eliminate the need for any LNG imports. So if the question is “What’s the best way to address climate change?”, fracking is not the answer.

[i] 89490 SGUK Low Carbon Transition.pdf (http://www.ukuh.org/media/sites/researchwebsites/2ukuh/89490%20SGUK%20Low%20Carbon%20Transition.pdf)

[ii] Energy efficiency a ‘win-win’ for Chancellor’s Spending Review (https://www.endfuelpoverty.org.uk/energy-efficiency-a-win-win-for-chancellors-spending-review/)

[iii] Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES): natural gas – GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/natural-gas-chapter-4-digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-dukes)

Return to top

Myth Buster 5 “Fracking will give us energy security”

But even if fracking won’t transform our energy reserves, isn’t it sensible to take gas from all sources, to take steps to increase our domestic energy supply?

FACT. There are many other better measures we could take right now to reduce our reliance on gas imports. For example, simply getting UK residents to turn down boiler flow temperatures and lower thermostat settings by 1oC would have 6 times the impact of fracking scenarios promoted by the industry. And we wouldn’t have to wait 5 years. Add in acceleration of onshore wind and solar, home insulation rates and heat pump installations and we can do 10 times better than anything fracking can provide[i].

So if energy security is the question then fracking isn’t the answer. Indeed, supporting a shale gas industry would distract and divert investment from what we need to do to improve our energy security.

[i] https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-why-fracking-is-not-the-answer-to-the-uks-energy-crisis/#evidence

Return to top

Myth Buster 7 “Fracking poses no risk to public health.”

All those health scares associated with fracking have been debunked haven’t they?

FACT: There is a growing body of medical research highlighting concerns into the health impacts of fracking. There are simply too many papers to list them all here, but here’s a selection:

Young children living near fracking wells (within 2km) at birth are up to three times more likely to later develop leukaemia, and there are still raised levels up to 10km away. Jan 2022, American Chemical Society. Assessing Unconventional Oil and Gas Exposure in the Appalachian Basin: Comparison of Exposure Surrogates and Residential Drinking Water Measurements | Environmental Science & Technology (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.1c05081); https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/17/young-children-fracking-wells-leukemia-study

Elderly people (aged 65 and over) living near or downwind of fracking sites are at a statistically significant higher risk of early death. Jan 2022, Harvard TH Chan School of Public HealthLiving near or downwind of unconventional oil and gas development linked with increased risk of early death (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/01/220127114329.htm)

Expectant mothers who live near natural gas fracking wells are 40% more likely to give birth prematurely and have a 30% increased incidence of ‘high-risk’ pregnancies. October 2015, John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 

Unconventional Natural Gas Development and Birth Outcomes in Pennsylvania, USA (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282361446_Unconventional_Natural_Gas_Development_and_Birth_Outcomes_in_Pennsylvania_USA);

Premature birth and problem pregnancies near fracking wells (https://theecologist.org/2015/oct/09/premature-birth-and-problem-pregnancies-near-fracking-wells)

55 human carcinogens determined to be potential water or air pollutants come from the fracking process.  October 2016, Yale School of Public Health. Fracking Linked to Cancer-Causing Chemicals, New YSPH Study Finds (https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/fracking-linked-to-cancer-causing-chemicals-new-ysph-study-finds/); Study underscores dangers of fracking (https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2016/11/08/study-underscores-dangers-of-fracking/)

Return to top

Myth Buster 8 “Disturbance to communities is over once the initial construction phase is completed”

FACT: The amount of gas produced by each fracked well declines exponentially, so sites will be subject to continued drilling and fracking to keep production going. 

According to the US Energy Information Administration’s example of a typical decline curve, production declines to 12% of its initial value within 2 years, and then down to 0.2% after 4 years[i]. Drilling new wells and fracking must be a continuous process to keep the flow going.

Fracking is only viable if done on a vast scale requiring thousands of wells. Heavy plant and machinery for drilling and fracking must be transported to the site. Drilling is a 24hr process; thousands of tons of chemicals and millions of gallons of water must be carried to the site by HGVs, involving thousands of journeys. And then after fracking millions of gallons of contaminated waste water are taken by tanker away from the site.

Estimates about how many wells will need to be drilled and fracked in the U.K. vary but a study in 2018 concluded that to replace 50% of U.K. imports over 6,000 wells would be required[ii]. The industry trade body UKOOG say they expect to need 4,000 wells[iii].

[i] Production Decline Curve Analysis – Energy Information Administration (https://www.eia.gov/analysis/drilling/curve_analysis/)

[ii] https://cdn.friendsoftheearth.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/FOE-Frack-Import-Report_0.pdf

[iii] Updated shale gas scenarios March 2019 website.pdf (https://www.ukoog.org.uk/images/ukoog/pdfs/Updated%20shale%20gas%20scenarios%20March%202019%20website.pdf)

Return to top