The ArgusFracking law change is 'despicable' (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Fracking law change is 'despicable'

The Argus: A fracking exploration drill at Balcombe A fracking exploration drill at Balcombe

Plans to overturn ancient laws to allow fracking are “despicable”, says campaigners.

The Government is looking to change the law so firms can drill under houses without permission of the landowners.

Ministers are preparing to overhaul the trespass legislation that could have scuppered the plans of energy companies in Sussex.

It has been reported a British Geological Survey report to be published within weeks will reveal the Weald could contain up to a third of the reserves of oil and gas of the North Sea.

Landowner Marcus Adams was one of a number of campaigners who had first sought to use the old law to stop Celtique from exploratory drilling under their land in Fernhurst.

He said: “Frankly, I think this is despicable, and hopefully will become a major electoral issue. The fact that this Government, that I have supported all my adult life, wants to remove my rights so that a few individuals and their (mostly foreign) financial backers can make a quick buck, demonstrates just how little respect it has for the views of the majority of people.

“The vast majority of people living in Fernhurst do not want this development to go ahead and are becoming increasingly vocal about it. The word is also spreading to many other parts of the country.”

Under current law, firms need permission from landowners to drill fracking tunnels.

The change to the law is expected to be included in the Government's proposed Growth Bill.

It is thought the energy industry is unwilling to invest hundreds of millions of pounds into exploring the potentially huge resources under Sussex until the potential banana skin of trespass law has been reformed.

Compensation of about £100 could be offered to landowners.

Opponents argue the fracking process could cause earthquakes, pollute water, blight the countryside and affect house prices.

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:18am Thu 3 Apr 14

twonk says...

The trespass legislation was going to be overhauled anyway. Tree huggers should not take it personally.
The trespass legislation was going to be overhauled anyway. Tree huggers should not take it personally. twonk
  • Score: -20

7:30am Thu 3 Apr 14

dead by dawn says...

the tory party thinks its a law unto them selves cant wait till UKIP gets in and turns England back into England
the tory party thinks its a law unto them selves cant wait till UKIP gets in and turns England back into England dead by dawn
  • Score: -5

8:42am Thu 3 Apr 14

tykemison says...

twonk wrote:
The trespass legislation was going to be overhauled anyway. Tree huggers should not take it personally.
Not everyone concerned about the sadustic pillaging of our planet is a tree hugger twonk, these self-interest politicians bend over backwards for their"chums"in big business and at any cost, they are privileged, immoral, greedy, corrupt filth who treat the electorate with absolute disdain.
[quote][p][bold]twonk[/bold] wrote: The trespass legislation was going to be overhauled anyway. Tree huggers should not take it personally.[/p][/quote]Not everyone concerned about the sadustic pillaging of our planet is a tree hugger twonk, these self-interest politicians bend over backwards for their"chums"in big business and at any cost, they are privileged, immoral, greedy, corrupt filth who treat the electorate with absolute disdain. tykemison
  • Score: 26

9:25am Thu 3 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense. Plantpot
  • Score: -9

9:52am Thu 3 Apr 14

Morpheus says...

Just imagine the country if old laws had not been changed - most of use would have a vote for a start and we would still be on our knees to the Pope.
Just imagine the country if old laws had not been changed - most of use would have a vote for a start and we would still be on our knees to the Pope. Morpheus
  • Score: 0

10:56am Thu 3 Apr 14

whatone says...

'Democracy' in this country consists merely of being lent a pencil every few years in order to make a mark and choose which particullar self serving scumbags will join the gravy train.

It is akin to turning a dung heap and seeing which particular turd gets to the top.

Once in power the notion of 'serving the people' quickly disappears and laws are made simply to line their own pockets and those of their corporate masters!
'Democracy' in this country consists merely of being lent a pencil every few years in order to make a mark and choose which particullar self serving scumbags will join the gravy train. It is akin to turning a dung heap and seeing which particular turd gets to the top. Once in power the notion of 'serving the people' quickly disappears and laws are made simply to line their own pockets and those of their corporate masters! whatone
  • Score: 28

10:57am Thu 3 Apr 14

twonk says...

I just get tired of home made facts on both sides.
I just get tired of home made facts on both sides. twonk
  • Score: -1

12:01pm Thu 3 Apr 14

gheese77 says...

In the United States the landowner owns the mineral rights for their own property so some people have made considerable fortunes by allowing fracking on or under their land. In the UK mineral rights are owned by the crown, so it gives the government another opportunity to steal what is really yours, no wonder they are so keen on fracking !
In the United States the landowner owns the mineral rights for their own property so some people have made considerable fortunes by allowing fracking on or under their land. In the UK mineral rights are owned by the crown, so it gives the government another opportunity to steal what is really yours, no wonder they are so keen on fracking ! gheese77
  • Score: 15

12:27pm Thu 3 Apr 14

getThisCoalitionOut says...

Fracking has just been banned in California, USA due to the number of earthquakes happening there after fracking was done in the state. They have realised the consequence of fracking and banned it but our corrupt politicians have decided to line their own pockets and those of their paymasters before putting human life first.

Let's hope London suffers an enormous earthquake and a lot of the politicians lose their lives.
Fracking has just been banned in California, USA due to the number of earthquakes happening there after fracking was done in the state. They have realised the consequence of fracking and banned it but our corrupt politicians have decided to line their own pockets and those of their paymasters before putting human life first. Let's hope London suffers an enormous earthquake and a lot of the politicians lose their lives. getThisCoalitionOut
  • Score: 1

12:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
Fracking has just been banned in California, USA due to the number of earthquakes happening there after fracking was done in the state. They have realised the consequence of fracking and banned it but our corrupt politicians have decided to line their own pockets and those of their paymasters before putting human life first.

Let's hope London suffers an enormous earthquake and a lot of the politicians lose their lives.
Total shoemakers.

http://www.scpr.org/
programs/take-two/20
14/04/02/36717/is-fr
acking-connected-to-
the-recent-earthquak
es-in/

http://www.motherjon
es.com/blue-marble/2
014/03/was-los-angel
es-earthquake-caused
-fracking
[quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: Fracking has just been banned in California, USA due to the number of earthquakes happening there after fracking was done in the state. They have realised the consequence of fracking and banned it but our corrupt politicians have decided to line their own pockets and those of their paymasters before putting human life first. Let's hope London suffers an enormous earthquake and a lot of the politicians lose their lives.[/p][/quote]Total shoemakers. http://www.scpr.org/ programs/take-two/20 14/04/02/36717/is-fr acking-connected-to- the-recent-earthquak es-in/ http://www.motherjon es.com/blue-marble/2 014/03/was-los-angel es-earthquake-caused -fracking Plantpot
  • Score: 4

3:43pm Thu 3 Apr 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 4

4:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

tykemison says...

Here,Here the voice,all over England they are doing their upmost to allow"developers"to destroy our green spaces for more cheaply built monstrosity estates,we have enough housing and people,having an open door policy on migration is an absolute disgrace and only serves their corporate friends in ensuring cheap labour for one and all,they can frack off.
Here,Here the voice,all over England they are doing their upmost to allow"developers"to destroy our green spaces for more cheaply built monstrosity estates,we have enough housing and people,having an open door policy on migration is an absolute disgrace and only serves their corporate friends in ensuring cheap labour for one and all,they can frack off. tykemison
  • Score: 2

4:45pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

tykemison wrote:
Here,Here the voice,all over England they are doing their upmost to allow"developer
s"to destroy our green spaces for more cheaply built monstrosity estates,we have enough housing and people,having an open door policy on migration is an absolute disgrace and only serves their corporate friends in ensuring cheap labour for one and all,they can frack off.
Where were you when the stadium was being built?
[quote][p][bold]tykemison[/bold] wrote: Here,Here the voice,all over England they are doing their upmost to allow"developer s"to destroy our green spaces for more cheaply built monstrosity estates,we have enough housing and people,having an open door policy on migration is an absolute disgrace and only serves their corporate friends in ensuring cheap labour for one and all,they can frack off.[/p][/quote]Where were you when the stadium was being built? Plantpot
  • Score: -1

4:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Thu 3 Apr 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 2

5:00pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free.

If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.[/p][/quote]The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free. If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested. Plantpot
  • Score: -2

5:20pm Thu 3 Apr 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free.

If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.
It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares.

You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.[/p][/quote]The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free. If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.[/p][/quote]It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares. You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in? thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 2

6:40pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pachallis says...

WDR - who cares what 'Landowner Marcus Adams' thinks. He says changes to trespass laws are 'despicable' and hopes this will become a 'major political issue'.

Just because several rich land owners (alongside Lord Cowdray whose fortune is allegedly based upon Oil) thought they could use trespass laws to stop fracking. They knew back in February that ministers were looking at changing laws anyway so this is just sour grapes.

At least if it does become a 'major political issue' about drilling under 'ones land' then, hopefully, all the relevant facts will be presented from both sides and we will hopefully be able to see the caliber of the protagonists and the detail of the points raised. At least we still get one man one vote so Marcus' views are as valid as anyone elses.

As far as I am concerned I am quite happy for someone to drill under my house as long as all relevant precautions are taken and if there is any damage then whoever drills compensates me and repairs the damage.

The rest of the comments above on dangers of fracking really bore me - especially from those that continually repeat the same old drivel in the hope that by repeating it people will actually believe it.

I did love the comments about 'privileged, immoral, greedy, corrupt filth' - which I assume is talking about politicians and big business- I wonder if they also think this about rich land owners?
WDR - who cares what 'Landowner Marcus Adams' thinks. He says changes to trespass laws are 'despicable' and hopes this will become a 'major political issue'. Just because several rich land owners (alongside Lord Cowdray whose fortune is allegedly based upon Oil) thought they could use trespass laws to stop fracking. They knew back in February that ministers were looking at changing laws anyway so this is just sour grapes. At least if it does become a 'major political issue' about drilling under 'ones land' then, hopefully, all the relevant facts will be presented from both sides and we will hopefully be able to see the caliber of the protagonists and the detail of the points raised. At least we still get one man one vote so Marcus' views are as valid as anyone elses. As far as I am concerned I am quite happy for someone to drill under my house as long as all relevant precautions are taken and if there is any damage then whoever drills compensates me and repairs the damage. The rest of the comments above on dangers of fracking really bore me - especially from those that continually repeat the same old drivel in the hope that by repeating it people will actually believe it. I did love the comments about 'privileged, immoral, greedy, corrupt filth' - which I assume is talking about politicians and big business- I wonder if they also think this about rich land owners? pachallis
  • Score: -1

7:02am Fri 4 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free.

If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.
It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares.

You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?
Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff?
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.[/p][/quote]The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free. If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.[/p][/quote]It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares. You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?[/p][/quote]Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff? Plantpot
  • Score: -2

7:04am Fri 4 Apr 14

Plantpot says...

Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free.

If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.
It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares.

You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?
Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff?
Oh, and I don't own shares in anything.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.[/p][/quote]The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free. If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.[/p][/quote]It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares. You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?[/p][/quote]Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff?[/p][/quote]Oh, and I don't own shares in anything. Plantpot
  • Score: 1

12:46pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Marine Environment Consultant says...

How low will the UK Government go? I've been telling people about the Trespass Law issue for months, so well done to The Argus for finally catching up with the news and allowing a Fernhurst resident to voice their concern in the 'public domain'.

Just because Marcus Adams has a middle class voice does not mean that many of the Fernhurst villagers aren't incredibly grateful to him, and Lord Cowdray (the upper class voice), for trying to stop oil/gas drilling in their peaceful, rural Sussex village. The fact that Lord Cowdray's granfather's fortune may have benefited from oil production does not exclude his voice from this discussion just as my grandmother working for CalTex doesn't stop me from being vociferously against oil & gas exploration world wide.

Lest we forget what Shell did to the Ogoni people (Ken Saro-Wiwa)
in Nigeria. Of course it will hopefully be more difficult for oil/gas companies to execute people like myself in this country, but I wouldn't count it out entirely.

When working class people have their noses to the grindstone whilst also being strangled by debt and rising costs, is it any wonder that they don't have the time or resources to investigate and try to uphold ancient laws that were created to protect all of us from money and land grabbing tyrants?!

It only takes around 30 minutes of google aided research on government websites to discover that government advisors on energy, climate change and environment say shale gas will not reduce energy bills, will stop us from keeping our carbon reduction targets and that the technology poses a threat to our air, water & solid quality, which in turn poses a threat to public health, food & fresh water security. You cannot pull the wool over our eyes or bribe us with your dirty oil money.
How low will the UK Government go? I've been telling people about the Trespass Law issue for months, so well done to The Argus for finally catching up with the news and allowing a Fernhurst resident to voice their concern in the 'public domain'. Just because Marcus Adams has a middle class voice does not mean that many of the Fernhurst villagers aren't incredibly grateful to him, and Lord Cowdray (the upper class voice), for trying to stop oil/gas drilling in their peaceful, rural Sussex village. The fact that Lord Cowdray's granfather's fortune may have benefited from oil production does not exclude his voice from this discussion just as my grandmother working for CalTex doesn't stop me from being vociferously against oil & gas exploration world wide. Lest we forget what Shell did to the Ogoni people (Ken Saro-Wiwa) in Nigeria. Of course it will hopefully be more difficult for oil/gas companies to execute people like myself in this country, but I wouldn't count it out entirely. When working class people have their noses to the grindstone whilst also being strangled by debt and rising costs, is it any wonder that they don't have the time or resources to investigate and try to uphold ancient laws that were created to protect all of us from money and land grabbing tyrants?! It only takes around 30 minutes of google aided research on government websites to discover that government advisors on energy, climate change and environment say shale gas will not reduce energy bills, will stop us from keeping our carbon reduction targets and that the technology poses a threat to our air, water & solid quality, which in turn poses a threat to public health, food & fresh water security. You cannot pull the wool over our eyes or bribe us with your dirty oil money. Marine Environment Consultant
  • Score: 1

1:00pm Tue 8 Apr 14

whatevernext2013 says...

and some people still believe the world is flat ,when puntin cuts off the gas we need to have a back up in place
and some people still believe the world is flat ,when puntin cuts off the gas we need to have a back up in place whatevernext2013
  • Score: 0

6:24pm Tue 8 Apr 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.
We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets.

Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.
So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive?

Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty?

Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.
Will you allow fracking under your home for £100?

Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.
The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free.

If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.
It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares.

You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?
Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff?
The £100 for fracking is in the story. Maybe read before commenting?
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What would be despicable would be to continue to import gas and oil at great cost when we clearly have huge reserves of shale gas/oil ourselves. In fact a total nonsense.[/p][/quote]We have a volunteer here! Our resident tory, Plantpot, is happy to allow fracking under his/her home and all their buy to lets. Terrible idea, but no surprise coming from this disgrace of a government which is happy to wreck the environment for future generations. Not just with fracking but 'biodiversity offsetting.' As if you can compensate for destroying an established woodland by planting new trees somewhere else. The green space we have should be treasured and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone forever.[/p][/quote]So which govt. do you think will ignore shale reserves as imported oil and gas continues to be expensive? Do you want to see the poor and the old remaining in fuel poverty? Anti-fracking appears to be more about anti-capitalism and preserving property prices. Just like green policies are anti-corporate and anti-capitalist.[/p][/quote]Will you allow fracking under your home for £100? Capitalism creates fuel poverty - just look at the profits the energy companies are making. Surely you don't believe that old guff about lower energy bills. We heard all that nonsense when the energy companies were privatised.[/p][/quote]The law as it stands give the crown mineral rights for oil and gas for free. If power was re-nationalised do you think it would be a good deal for the taxpayer (clue - it would be terribly inefficient and costly). BTW, much private profit is reinvested.[/p][/quote]It would cost too much now to renationalise them. Had they stayed in public hands, we would not be in this situation. So I certainly am not going to believe this crap about lower energy bills when we were promised that the last time round. It's all about the money - don't pretend you give a **** about the poor and old. I reckon you have already bought your shares. You didn't answer my question. £100 to frack under your house. Are you in?[/p][/quote]Given that any drilling will take place hundreds if not thousands of meters under my house, why would I care? And what's this £100 for fracking? More imaginary stuff?[/p][/quote]The £100 for fracking is in the story. Maybe read before commenting? thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 0

3:34am Wed 9 Apr 14

Zeta Function says...

We need to get rid of the internal combustion engine. All vehicle engines & jet engines that spew out soot containing nitrogen oxides, sulphur, benzenes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, carbon monoxide, etc.

This is the stuff you breath in when air is polluted by traffic.

Super oil tankers and container ships have some of the largest internal combustion engines. They can burn up to 1,600 gallons of crude oil every HOUR.

The internal combustion engine belongs to the scrap heap.
We need to get rid of the internal combustion engine. All vehicle engines & jet engines that spew out soot containing nitrogen oxides, sulphur, benzenes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, carbon monoxide, etc. This is the stuff you breath in when air is polluted by traffic. Super oil tankers and container ships have some of the largest internal combustion engines. They can burn up to 1,600 gallons of crude oil every HOUR. The internal combustion engine belongs to the scrap heap. Zeta Function
  • Score: -3

8:26am Wed 9 Apr 14

pachallis says...

Zeta Function wrote:
We need to get rid of the internal combustion engine. All vehicle engines & jet engines that spew out soot containing nitrogen oxides, sulphur, benzenes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, carbon monoxide, etc.

This is the stuff you breath in when air is polluted by traffic.

Super oil tankers and container ships have some of the largest internal combustion engines. They can burn up to 1,600 gallons of crude oil every HOUR.

The internal combustion engine belongs to the scrap heap.
@Zeta Function - I totally agree that we need to do something about pollution and emission levels.

I would, though, question the pollutants you list and at what levels that we need to be worried about them. Some unaware people just hear the name of a chemical and panic. For instance, is sulphur at all poisonous?

What would you propose to do about it? Should we stop all further use of fossil fuels in engines and for heating? Should we encourage moving away from uses of fossil fuels? Should we plans for a steady migration to alternatives (i.e. nuclear, hydrogen, solar, wind, etc.)? Should we look at ways of reducing emissions from current vehicles by improving efficiency or moving to more sustainable, less polluting fuels (i.e. recycled oil, biomass, CNG, etc.)?

I am just worried that any movement away from the internal combustion engine is done in a multi-lateral, realistic and pragmatic way that doesn't ruin the UK economy.

I wouldn't want us to try and lead by example which would really make our global competitors happy.
[quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: We need to get rid of the internal combustion engine. All vehicle engines & jet engines that spew out soot containing nitrogen oxides, sulphur, benzenes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, carbon monoxide, etc. This is the stuff you breath in when air is polluted by traffic. Super oil tankers and container ships have some of the largest internal combustion engines. They can burn up to 1,600 gallons of crude oil every HOUR. The internal combustion engine belongs to the scrap heap.[/p][/quote]@Zeta Function - I totally agree that we need to do something about pollution and emission levels. I would, though, question the pollutants you list and at what levels that we need to be worried about them. Some unaware people just hear the name of a chemical and panic. For instance, is sulphur at all poisonous? What would you propose to do about it? Should we stop all further use of fossil fuels in engines and for heating? Should we encourage moving away from uses of fossil fuels? Should we plans for a steady migration to alternatives (i.e. nuclear, hydrogen, solar, wind, etc.)? Should we look at ways of reducing emissions from current vehicles by improving efficiency or moving to more sustainable, less polluting fuels (i.e. recycled oil, biomass, CNG, etc.)? I am just worried that any movement away from the internal combustion engine is done in a multi-lateral, realistic and pragmatic way that doesn't ruin the UK economy. I wouldn't want us to try and lead by example which would really make our global competitors happy. pachallis
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree