This piece is part of our special report on energy policy. To read the first piece in the series, click here. To read the third piece in the series, click here.
If its most ardent cheerleaders are to be believed, the start of fracking and the development of shale gas in the United Kingdom is set to be a game-changer, heralding an era of plentiful and cheap home-grown energy, far less environmentally destructive than our current reliance on coal. Almost all of those claims are unsubstantiated and they degrade the quality of the public debate on shale gas, inflating a bubble of expectation that is unlikely ever to be met.
Of course, gas is a fuel that remains vital in the UK—80 per cent of our homes rely on it for heating, while around 30 per cent of our electricity comes from gas-fired power stations. While Labour is committed to the decarbonisation of our electricity supply by 2030, and low-carbon power generation will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels over time, we still need flexible power to help manage peaks in demand and provide back-up generation to deal with the intermittency of some renewables. National Grid expects gas to play a vital role in our energy system for many years to come, and our ability to source this fuel within our own borders has been steadily declining. In 2004, the UK became a net importer of gas for the first time since North Sea extraction began. For those reasons, there are potential benefits to shale gas, if it can be extracted safely in a context of robust regulation, monitoring and local consent. It could help displace some imported gas, thereby enhancing the UK’s energy security.
But what level of contribution could it make? The British Geological Survey has estimated substantial resources of shale gas in the Bowland reserve in the northwest, while in the Weald Basin and the Midland Valley there is less. But not all resources will be recoverable. Until there is exploration, which has only just begun, we cannot be clear how much shale gas is extractable or what its contribution to the UK’s energy mix will be. Two years ago, Poland was widely thought to be in the vanguard of potential European shale production. In recent months, the fourth major company pulled out of Poland as they discovered flow rates are not good enough to make fracking there economic.
What’s more, there are still a number of regulatory questions which must be answered. Only by fully addressing these legitimate environmental and safety concerns with effective regulation, monitoring and enforcement will people have confidence that shale gas is a safe and reliable resource.
In 2012, Labour set out six conditions that we believe need to be satisfied for fracking to go ahead. On two of those—a full assessment of well integrity, and micro-seismic monitoring prior to any drilling—the government has accepted our proposals. On two—well-by-well disclosure of the frack fluid and a commitment to environmental impact assessments at every site—the industry has promised to meet our standard. But there is not yet agreement on the need for an assessment of groundwater methane levels or a requirement for on-site monitoring 12 months prior to any drilling. This misses the single biggest lesson we should learn from the United States. Fracking has been transformative there, but it has also been controversial, mainly because they didn’t always do proper public assessments before drilling began. When claims were made about the effects of fracking, they were very difficult to refute.
It is in the interests of the industry itself to support proper monitoring and assessments before drilling begins. Unless the government can provide these reassurances, the public may feel they are being bounced into accepting shale gas extraction, whatever the cost. That may prove poisonous to a fledgling industry. The irony is that much as the government talks of going “all out” on fracking, its failure to take a sensible and cautious approach is entrenching opposition and undermining the responsible case for shale as part of our energy mix.
