Corporations must not be allowed to dictate fracking issue

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/29/corporations-not-allowed-dictate-fracking-issue

Version 0 of 1.

What gives you the impression (Editorial, 27 January) that by 2030 “gas will not be needed for power stations, only for domestic and industrial heating”? National Grid, which manages both the electricity and gas transmission networks, does not concur. Under the greenest of its future scenarios, by 2030 total gas demand would decline by 25%, including a 37% decline in power station use. However, this is swamped by smaller percentage decreases in gas use for domestic and industrial heating, which together account for three-quarters of UK gas consumption. Moreover, they amount to more than double the total energy consumed as electricity.

Four-fifths of UK households rely on gas for heating. They are the lucky ones: those without access to the gas grid are more than twice as likely to be in fuel poverty. And that is the most optimistic scenario. Far more likely is an increase in gas use for power generation, as coal-fired and nuclear plants are decommissioned, and we lack any alternative to balance the intermittency of wind and hydro. (Storage is economically and environmentally unviable at the scale of peak grid demand.)

As UK offshore gas production continues to decline rapidly, then we either produce gas onshore or import more – most likely from Russia, with all the geopolitical risks that entails. The worst outcome would be for us to mimic Germany, where problems in balancing renewables on the grid recently prompted a “dash for coal”, reversing decades of progress in reducing carbon emissions. So let’s have the serious debate you advocate – but can engineers please be given a hearing?Professor Paul L YoungerSchool of Engineering, University of Glasgow

• Lancashire county council has deferred its decision on applications from Cuadrilla to begin fracking in the Fylde (Report, 29 January). In response to an LCC report recommending rejection of the applications on the grounds of unacceptable levels of noise pollution and traffic (Report, 22 January), Cuadrilla announced last-minute changes in its plans that would, it claimed, reduce these levels. LCC’s move to defer its decision was apparently taken in the light of advice from its legal team that Cuadrilla could sue the council if it did not consider the proposed changes before voting on the applications.

This sort of corporate blackmail has been going in other contexts. When Romania took the courageous decision to withdraw from opencast gold mining in Rosia Montana in September 2013 after weeks of public protest, the mining company Gabriel Resources responded by threatening to sue it. The Romanian government stood its ground under pressure from the population, and Gabriel did not sue. LCC should have done the same and called Cuadrilla’s bluff. Cuadrilla’s legal grounds for suing are not at all clear, and it would almost certainly not have been so dumb as to do so, but if it had sued it would have shown its colours for all to see.Norman and Isabela FaircloughLancaster

• Prince Rupert’s sovereign, Charles I, would have recognised parallels between the objection of many today to relaxing the planning laws to make fracking easier and that of his own subjects affected by the search for saltpetre, an essential ingredient of gunpowder. Successive sovereigns declared saltpetre to be vital to national security and gave those licensed to search for it wide powers. Saltpetre occurs naturally through the action of microbes on decaying living tissue – long undisturbed earth floors were an ideal place to dig for it.

“Petermen” authorised by the crown dug up the floors of barns, houses and churches, often without permission, causing local outrage. In 1628, 20 bushels of saltpetre were dug from the floor of Chipping Norton church, tossing seats aside and leaving the ground so uneven the parishioners could not kneel. Malcolm ThickHarwell, Oxfordshire

• The House of Commons vote to allow the law of trespass to be overridden by fracking companies (Report, 26 September 2014) makes a mockery of the celebration of the sealing of Magna Carta 800 years ago. The word “liberty” also refers to the land over which I exercise my liberty. At a stroke the government has swept away a fundamental liberty guaranteed by Magna Carta, specifically clause 39, which states that no one shall be disseised (ie dispossessed) of his liberty (property). King John must be rubbing his hands in glee in hell.Ian BeckwithChurch Stretton, Shropshire

• Serious arguments demand serious consideration. Try to think of an environmental problem that is not an unforeseen side-effect of new technology. You can’t do it. This is why we need a moratorium, a “precautionary approach” to fracking.Tom BrysonAcharacle, Argyll