Oil Company Bonuses Linked To $1tn Spending On Extraction

Bosses at the world’s big five oil companies have been showered with bonus payouts linked to a $1tn (£650bn) crescendo of spending on fossil fuel exploration and extraction over nine years, according to Guardian analysis of company reports.

The unprecedented push to bring untapped reserves into production, and to exploit new and undiscovered fields, involves some of the most complex feats of engineering ever attempted. It also reflects how confident Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, Total and BP are that demand will remain high for decades to come.
The big oil groups are pressing ahead with investments despite the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimating that two-thirds of proven fossil fuel reserves will need to remain in the ground to prevent the earth from warming 2C above pre-industrial levels – a proposed temperature limit beyond which scientists warn of spiralling and irreversible climate change.

Multi-billion-dollar capital projects amount to huge, long-term bets by the big five that exorbitant costs associated with unlocking hydrocarbon reserves in some of the most inaccessible locations on the planet can eventually be recouped and converted into profits.

Bonuses for chief executives at all five firms are tied to the achievement of delivery milestones in the construction and deployment of such projects.
Shell’s Ben van Beurden, for example, last year received a pay deal worth $32.2m, including bonuses linked to delivering “a high proportion of flagship projects on time and on budget”. These are thought to include four platforms floating 1,000 metres or more above deepwater wells in the Gulf of Mexico, Gulf of Guinea and South China Sea.
Similarly, BP’s Bob Dudley was awarded a pay deal worth $15.3m, with bonuses linked to seven “major projects”, thought to include Sunrise, a tar sands joint venture in Canada, as well as projects in Angola, Azerbaijan, the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea.
The boss of Exxon, Rex Tillerson, was paid $33.1m last year including bonus payouts linked to projects including the first well in the Kara Sea, in the Russian Arctic, and the expansion of the Kearl tar sands operations in northern Alberta, Canada.

The Guardian asked each of the big five about the appropriateness of linking bonuses to capital spending given the looming threat posed by climate change. Shell said pay for Van Beurden “reflects delivery of company strategy, measured by both short-term and long-term targets”.
Chevron said executive rewards were “strongly tied to corporate performance and directly linked to increases in shareholder value”. Exxon Mobil and BP declined to respond, while Total did not answer.

for more detailed information go here

India Going Big On Dirty Coal

18 May, 2015

Countercurrents.org

“Just as a worker celebrating their 65th birthday can settle into a more sedate lifestyle while they look back on past achievements, we argue that thermal coal has reached its retirement age.” - Goldman Sachs

India is the world’s second-largest coal consumer overtaking Japan as the world’s second-largest importer. Coal and Power Minister Piyush Goyal emphasised that the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government has accorded a top priority to coal and generation of power. Narendra Taneja, energy spokesperson of BJP, has claimed that coal and gas will remain the mainstay of the country’s economy for the next 50-60 years. According to trade experts India is at the center of the coal market now that Chinese demand is slowing down. Indian buyers are taking advantage of low coal prices, which have dropped to near seven-year lows. Prices have slumped due to a combination of oversupply in the market and relatively weak demand. The depreciation in local currencies of producers such as South Africa and Russia against the dollar has given them room to cut their dollar-denominated selling prices as well. India’s coal reserves in the ground are among the largest in the world. But production by state-owned Coal India has failed to keep pace with demand growth, which has increased the need for imports. India doesn’t really have many options in terms of large scale, cheap fuel for power generation. It expects Indian coal imports to increase and India is commissioning new coal-fired power stations every year. And if India wants its economy to grow at 6 to 7 percent it needs thermal coal power generation. It’s already running short of power.

So India plans to double domestic coal production to 1 billion tonnes per annum by the end of this decade. An effort is now under way to dilute environmental laws in the country doing away with social impact assessment and community consent. The ordinance is facing stiff resistance from opposition parties and the general masses of India. Any project, either private or under a public private partnership, previously required the consent of 80 percent of the community that the project impacted but no such consent is now required. Social impact assessments that factors in effects on the environment and human health, among others, were mandatory for projects and while such assessments were shoddy in the past, doing away with them completely sets a poor precedent for industrial practices and gives even less of a reason for companies to clean up their acts.

Air pollution is killing Indians every year and is now the fifth largest contributor of deaths in the country. The fact that 13 of the world’s 20 most polluted cities are in India is a cause for great alarm. A study has indicated that one in three children have shown a reduction in lung function in Delhi. The World Health Organisation report, which makes this claim, advises it is only getting worse. In Delhi, for instance, coal roughly contributes 30 percent of recorded air pollution (particulate matter) and the numbers are higher in the coal clusters of the country. Coal-fired plants are a large source of the air pollution that is taking a toll on people’s health and their livelihoods. A report reveals in another 15 years between 186,500 and 229,500 people may die premature deaths annually as a result of a spike in air pollution caused by coal-fired power plants.

The reality of climate change is that by signing on to a global agreement that pledges to limit the rise in the earth’s surface temperature to 2 degrees Celsius, India has effectively signaled the imminent decline in the use of fossil fuels in order to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. To achieve this much needed and agreed upon limit on temperature rise, 82 percent of known global coal reserves should be left in the hole. This roughly translates into 66 percent of known coal reserves in India and China. Investment in coal would come at a heavy ecological cost.

Piyush Goyal, said that India’s per capita consumption of coal is what the US had in the 1860s. “The US has had 150 years to develop their country from cheap power using coal. Having met their development needs, it is easy to tell us that it is India’s imperative to clean the world. That is not acceptable.” And so capitalist growth prevails as government policy, regardless of the known effects upon the health of the environment and of the Indian people themselves.

Sources:
http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/03/why-investors-should-think-twice-before-investing-in-coal-in-india-part-2/
http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/india-to-the-rescue-as-australia-eyes-coals-crown/
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/climate-change-keep-indias-needs-in-mind-goyal-tells-developed-nations/article6996211.ece

Groundbreaking Study: Fossil Fuels Must Be Left In The Ground

A groundbreaking new study is confirming what green campaigners have long argued: in order to stave off climate disaster, the majority of fossil fuel deposits around the world—including 92 percent of U.S. coal, all Arctic oil and gas, and a majority of Canadian tar sands—must stay "in the ground."
The research is a boost to world-wide green campaigns, from the bid to stop the Keystone XL pipeline to grassroots protest against Arctic drilling.

The new findings were published in the journal Nature and authored by Christophe McGlade and Paul Ekins, both of whom hail from the University College London.
They write, "Policy makers have generally agreed that the average global temperature rise caused by greenhouse gas emissions should not exceed 2 °C above the average global temperature of pre-industrial times."
The researchers explain that they employed a "single integrated assessment model that contains estimates of the quantities, locations and nature of the world's oil, gas and coal reserves and resources" to determine what it would take to stay below this limit. "Our results suggest that, globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused from 2010 to 2050 in order to meet the target of 2 °C," the researchers explain.

While this is not the first study to note that fossil fuels are being dangerously over-exploited, the research is unique in that it pinpoints the national locations of specific reserves that must remain untapped.
The scientists find that 92 percent of U.S. coal reserves and 90 percent of Australian coal reserves, must be left alone. In addition, 100 percent of Arctic oil and gas must remain beneath the earth. Furthermore, most Canadian tar sands must remain unexploited, the study concludes.
This graphic created by the Guardian summarizes other location-specific findings by researchers:








































The researchers note that their findings, ultimately, mean that, despite the industry drive for exploitation, staving off disaster requires a different course. "[P]olicy makers' instincts to exploit rapidly and completely their territorial fossil fuels are, in aggregate, inconsistent with their commitments to this temperature limit."

from here

Fanciful Tales from the Polluters

Oil is the the most valuable commodity in international commerce and major producing firms like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Shell regularly top lists of the world’s most profitable enterprises.  Still, these companies are not just employing conventional legal and corporate tactics to protect their position, they’re mounting a propaganda assault of their own, claiming that fossil fuels are an essential factor in eradicating poverty and achieving a decent life on this planet. Instead of retreating, the major companies have gone on the offensive, extolling their contributions to human progress and minimizing the potential for renewables to replace fossil fuels in just about any imaginable future. Improbable as such claims may seem, they are being echoed by powerful officials around the world. Once upon a time, the giant carbon companies like Exxon sought to deflect environmental attacks by denying the very existence of climate change or the role of humans in causing it - or at least by raising the banner of “uncertainty” about the science behind it.  They also financed the efforts of rogue scientists to throw doubt on global warming.  While denialism still figures in the propaganda of some carbon companies, they have now largely chosen to embrace another strategy: extolling the benefits of fossil fuels to human well-being. The vision into which the energy corporations are presenting still entails sinking incredible resources across much of the planet into fossil fuels, ignoring the catastrophic warming of the planet.  They offer it, of course, as a glowing dreamscape of a glorious future though a nightmare is what should come to mind.

Carbon-producing nations like Russia and Saudi Arabia or the representatives of American energy-producing states like Texas and Kentucky are intent on ensuring that any path to a carbon-free future will, at best, be long and arduous. The oil, gas, and coal companies are selfishly pursuing mega-profits at the expense of the climate, the environment, our children and grandchildren, and even possibly a future of any reasonable sort for humanity as a whole.  Basically the big energy companies have said, “We’re going to wreck the planet, we don’t care what you say, we think we can, and we dare you to stop us.”

The fossil fuel industry are the nucleus of a global system of wealth and power that drags down democracy and perpetuates grotesque planetary inequalities.  They're big enough that you can buy off politicians.

The cornerstone of their claims is that ever-increasing supplies of energy are needed to sustain economic growth and ensure human betterment, and that fossil fuels alone exist in sufficient quantity and at affordable enough prices to satisfy rising international demand.  “Forecasting long-term energy trends begins with a simple fact: people need energy,” an Exxon report asserts.  “Over the next few decades, population and income growth -- and an unprecedented expansion of the global middle class - are expected to create new demands for energy.” Some of this added energy, Exxon acknowledges, will come from nuclear and renewable energy. Exxon estimates 67% will be provided by fossil fuels. Of the 201 quadrillion BTUs in added energy required by the developing world between now and 2040, predicts Exxon, 148 quadrillion, or 74%, will be provided by fossil fuels. Africa, for example, is expected to witness a 103% increase in net energy consumption between now and 2040, with 83% of that increase supplied by fossil fuels.

Without fossil fuels, this argument holds, there can be no economic growth because we have not found, through technology or other means, another fuel that can substitute for the role that oil plays in transportation. Natural gas is equally essential because it is the world’s fastest-growing source of energy and a key ingredient in electric power generation. Nor will coal be left out of the mix.  It, too, will play an important role in promoting economic growth, largely by facilitating a rapid increase in global electricity supplies.  Despite all the concern over coal’s contributions to both urban pollution and climate change, Exxon predicts that it will remain “the No. 1 fuel for power generation” in 2040. Without carbon-based fuels economic growth will screech to a halt and the world’s poor and disadvantaged will stay immersed in poverty, is the case for the defense. We are to shed a tear (fossil fuelled humanitarian tears, that is) for the fifth of the world without access to electricity. The blame can be placed upon the fact renewable sources of energy like wind and solar power are just not up to the task of providing the necessary extra energy needed to sustain economic growth and propel billions of people into the “middle class”.  The problem is that wind and solar are more costly than the fossil fuel alternatives and so are not growing fast enough to meet rising world demand. Renewables are also said to be problematic as they provide only intermittent sources of energy -- failing at night and on windless days -- and must be bolstered by other fuels to ensure uninterrupted energy output.

The oil and gas and coal corporations will generated on a massive scale a message that only by continued reliance upon their industries can the whole world enjoy the American Dream and prosperity for all. Their vision is all a lie. There is no reassuring future of carrying on business-as-usual and that there will actually be more for all.There is no mention of horrific droughts, colossal super-storms, or mass migrations of desperate people seeking to flee devastated areas. Croplands will wither and  coastal cities will flood. Preventing these catastrophes will involve sustained and dedicated effort by all those who truly care about the future of humanity and trusting less in the PR departments of vested interests and heeding more the wisdom of the scientists. 

Adapted from here

Is Australia a good neighbour?

Climate Change Warriors from 12 Pacific Island nations including Fiji, Tuvalu, Tokelau, Micronesia, Vanuatu, The Solomon Islands, Tonga, Samoa, Papua New Guinea and Niue paddled canoes into the world’s largest coal port in Newcastle, Australia.

“We want the Australian community, especially the Australian leaders, to think about more than their pockets, to really think about humanity not just for the Australian people, but for everyone,” Mikaele Maiava from Tokelau said. “We’re aware that this fight is not just for the Pacific. We are very well aware that the whole world is standing up in solidarity for this. The message that we want to give, especially to the leaders, is that we are humans, this fight is not just about our land, this fight is for survival.”

On Oct. 13, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said that “coal is good for humanity.”

Mikaele questioned Abbott’s position, asking, “If you are talking about humanity: Is humanity really for people to lose land? Is humanity really for people to lose their culture and identity? Is humanity to live in fear for our future generations to live in a beautiful island and have homes to go to? Is that really humanity? Is that really the answer for us to live in peace and harmony? Is that really the answer for the future?”

Mikaele said “We are educated people, we are smart people, we know what’s going on, the days of the indigenous people and local people not having the information and the knowledge about what’s going on is over. We are the generation of today, the leaders of tomorrow and we are not blinded by the problem. We can see it with our own eyes, we feel it in our own hearts, and we want the Australian government to realise that. We are not blinded by money we just want to live as peacefully and fight for what matters the most, which is our homes.”

The Pacific Islands Forum describes climate change as the “single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and well-being of the peoples of the Pacific.” Pacific Island leaders have recently stepped up their language, challenging the Australian government to stop delaying action on climate change.

Burning up the planet

Oxfam describes as a “toxic triangle” the “political inertia, financial short-termism and vested fossil fuel interests,” which must be dismantled if climate change is to be controlled. Fossil fuel advocates policies threaten to raise global temperatures, leaving 400 million people in jeopardy of hunger and drought by 2060, Oxfam UK warned in its report ‘Food, Fossil Fuels and Filthy Finance’. A powerful and lucrative fossil fuel industry, spends up to €44 million a year on lobbying EU governments in pursuit of policies that bolster its profits.

Oxfam’s Chief Executive, Mark Goldring, warned the fossil fuel industry, with the help of EU governments and investors, is effectively “trapping us into a warming world.”  EU governments and profit-driven investors are empowering the industry to recklessly pursue myopic profit-centered interests at the expense of ordinary citizens. “The world’s poorest are already being hit hardest and millions more will be made hungry by climate change,” he added.

 $674 billion was spent on fossil fuel energy in 2012. The NGO’s report revealed investment in the industry was bolstered by convenient tax breaks, incentives brokered by governments and approximately $1.9 trillion in subsidies each year.  $6 trillion will be spent in further developing the industry over the next 10 years.

Fossil fuels are responsible for 80 percent of CO2 emissions – the primary contributor to rising temperatures, which threaten well-being, economies and food security. Profit comes before everything, even people and the planet.

From here 

Seismic Tests In Amazon Imperil Indigenous People

Sometimes one shouts out loudly and involuntarily at the breathtaking disregard of those on the crusade for profits over people. This happened to be one of my moments even though I've long realised there are no lengths to which capitalism will go. Air, water, soil, animals, people - even those who have only just, or yet to discover, what drilling is: all are dispensable in the grand scheme of things.
JS

On January 27, 2014 Peruvian government regulators approved plans for gas company Pluspetrol to commence drilling in a once-protected reserve for indigenous peoples in the Amazon rainforest. The approval comes after Peru quashed a decidedly critical environmental impact report on the operation by the Culture Ministry (MINCU), the resignation of the Culture Minister and other Ministry personnel, and heavy criticism from Peruvian and international civil society.
A subsequent MINCU report requested that Pluspetrol cancel plans to conduct seismic tests in one specific portion of the reserve because of the “possible presence of [indigenous] people in isolation,” yet it didn’t object to tests across a much broader area.
The planned operations expand the Camisea gas project, Peru’s biggest energy development, with active well platforms already in the indigenous reserve producing gas. Almost three-quarters of Pluspetrol’s operation overlaps the reserve, created in 1990 and given greater legal protection in 2003.
The reserve’s inhabitants live in what Peruvian law calls “voluntary isolation” or “initial contact,” having little-to-no contact with outsiders and thus lacking immune defenses. Pluspetrol concedes that contact with the reserve’s inhabitants is “probable” during drilling, and that such peoples in general are thus susceptible to “massive deaths” from transmitted diseases.

Read more here



 

Fact of the Day

In 2013 the IMF found that when “post-tax” externalities like carbon emissions, effects on health and resource scarcity were considered, global subsidies of fossil fuels rose to “$1.9 trillion worldwide – the equivalent of 2.5 percent of global GDP, or 8 percent of government revenues.” 

Estimates for renewable subsidies top out at a comparably measly 88 billion dollars globally.

From here

People instead of Profits

There is never peace in West Virginia," labor organizer Mary "Mother" Jones famously said nearly 100 years ago, "because there is never justice."

Three-quarters of the 1,727 US coal mines listed haven't been inspected in the past five years to see if they are obeying water pollution laws. Also, 13% of the fossil-fuel fired power plants are not complying with the Clean Water Act.

After the West Virginian Elk River environmental disaster hearings and investigations will be held, legislation introduced, an un-enforced regulation or two added, perhaps even a corporate official might be fined or even go to jail although that is very unlikely, but the truth is that toxic pollution from various stages of coal mining will continue with costly and devastating health effects.

In a nation that prioritizes coal industry profits over workplace and residential safety, people are as disposable.

Taken from here

The Fossil Fuel Gamble

$ 800 for each person on the planet is invested into fossil fuel companies through the global capital markets alone. That’s roughly 10% of the total capital invested in listed companies. The amount of money invested into the 200 biggest fossil fuel companies through financial markets is estimated at US$ 5.5 trillion.

By keeping their money in coal and oil companies, investors are betting a vast amount of wealth, including the pensions and savings of millions of people, on high future demand for dirty fuels. The investment has enabled fossil fuel companies to massively raise their spending on expanding extractable reserves, with oil and gas companies alone (state-owned ones included) spending the combined GDP of Netherlands and Belgium a year, in belief that there will be ongoing demand for dirty fuel.

Arctic oil drilling is possibly the ultimate example of fossil companies’ confidence in high future demand. Any significant production and revenue is unlikely until 2030 and in the meantime, Arctic drilling faces high and uncertain costs, extremely demanding and risky operations, as well as the prospect of heavy regulation and liabilities when (not if) the first major blowout happens in the region.

Those investing in coal and oil have felt secure seeing the global climate negotiations proceed at a disappointing pace.

Enough sunlight hits the earth’s surface in one hour to power humanity for one year. Scientists also know that 40% of solar energy lies unused in the near-infrared region of the spectrum, and thus, conventional silicon-based solar cells cannot harness it, thereby missing 40% of the sun’s energy. A number of companies are offering a new generation of storage systems to capture the power generated by home solar systems. Thus, a home with solar turns into an all-in energy source, night and day, rain or shine.

It is highly probable that oil & gas companies will get increasingly involved in ever-bigger ways over the coming years. They have little choice.

From here

Climate Change - Who is to blame?

The climate change crisis of the 21st century has been caused largely by just 90 companies, which between them produced nearly 63% of the greenhouse gas emissions generated since the dawning of the industrial age, new research suggests.  Half of the estimated emissions were produced just in the past 25 years – well past the date when governments and corporations became aware that rising greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of coal and oil were causing dangerous climate change.

The companies range from investor-owned firms – household names such as Chevron, Exxon and BP – to state-owned and government-run firms. The list of 90 companies included 50 investor-owned firms – mainly oil companies with widely recognised names such as Chevron, Exxon, BP , and Royal Dutch Shell and coal producers such as British Coal Corp, Peabody Energy and BHP Billiton. Some 31 of the companies that made the list were state-owned companies such as Saudi Arabia's Saudi Aramco, Russia's Gazprom and Norway's Statoil. Nine were government run industries, producing mainly coal in countries such as China, the former Soviet Union, North Korea and Poland, the host of this week's talks.Many of the same companies are also sitting on substantial reserves of fossil fuel which – if they are burned – puts the world at even greater risk of dangerous climate change.

"There are thousands of oil, gas and coal producers in the world," climate researcher and author Richard Heede at the Climate Accountability Institute in Colorado said. "But the decision makers, the CEOs, or the ministers of coal and oil if you narrow it down to just one person, they could all fit on a Greyhound bus or two....These entities extract resources from every oil, natural gas and coal province in the world, and process the fuels into marketable products that are sold to consumers on every nation on Earth," Heede writes in the paper.

 Naomi Oreskes, professor of the history of science at Harvard, who has written extensively about corporate-funded climate denial, noted that several of the top companies on the list had funded the climate denial movement.
"For me one of the most interesting things to think about was the overlap of large scale producers and the funding of disinformation campaigns, and how that has delayed action," she said.

We know who does it , we know why they do it but we still do not try to end it. We remain on that Doomsday course.

Capitalist Criminals

The lead industry, the asbestos industry, and the tobacco companies all knew the dangers of their products, made efforts to suppress the information or instill doubt about it even as they promoted what they made, and went right on producing and selling while others suffered and died. With all three industries, the negative results conveniently arrived years, sometimes decades, after exposure and so were hard to connect to it. Each of these industries knew that the relationship existed. Each used that time-lag as protection.


The most profitable corporations in the world, giant energy companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, and Shell, certainly know what they were doing. These companies have been extracting fossil fuels from the Earth in ever more ingenious ways. The burning of those fossil fuels, in turn, has put record amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. Only this month, the CO2 level reached parts per million for the first time in human history. A consensus of scientists has long concluded that the process was warming the world and that, if the average planetary temperature rose more than two degrees Celsius, all sorts of dangers could ensue, including seas rising high enough to inundate coastal cities, increasingly intense heat waves, droughts, floods, ever more extreme storm systems, and so on. None of this is exactly a mystery. It’s in the scientific literature. Those who run the giant energy corporations know perfectly well. Its top executives continue to plan their futures knowing that their extremely profitable acts are destroying the very habitat, the very temperature range that for so long made life comfortable for humanity.

These companies have even begun taking advantage of climate change itself -- in the form of a melting Arctic -- to exploit enormous and previously unreachable energy supplies. Oil and gas companies evidently has no qualms about making its next set of profits directly off melting the planet. With their staggering profits, these industrial barons could have decided anywhere along the line that the future they were ensuring was beyond dangerous. They could themselves have led the way with massive investments in genuine alternative energies (solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, algal, and who knows what else), instead of the exceedingly small-scale ones they made, often only for publicity purposes.

To destroy our planet with malice and forethought, with profits as motive, isn’t that the ultimate crime against humanity?
Adapted from here

Fracking Hell

Induced hydraulic fracturing , commonly known as fracking, is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas and coal seam gas).This type of fracturing creates fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations. Water is nature's most important and kindest gift to humanity yet incredible amounts of water is used in the fracking process.

We are currently experience the driest period in the UK since 1976.  The Environment Agency has declared that East Anglia, the South East, parts of Yorkshire, the Midlands and the South West are officially in drought. We have been banned from using hosepipes with the threat of a £1000 fine . There has been a severe impact upon on farming. Advice are bombarded upon us: "Take a shower instead of a bath" and "Don't forget to turn off the tap when brushing your teeth"

It's estimated that between two and five million gallons of locally sourced freshwater are used for each fracking attempt, depending on the depth of the well. That's the equivalent of using the amount of freshwater that would fill four to ten Olympic sized swimming pools each time a well is flushed. The number of wells per football pitch-sized pad is predicted at 20. However, the present proposals for operations in the UK is ten per pad. Following the test fracking last year,  between five and ten fracks per well. A conservative average of the sums above would be: three million gallons per frack x ten wells per pad x seven fracks per well = 210 million gallons per site.

That calculation is just for one single site in the UK. Cuadrilla Resources, which carried out the the first test fracking in the UK, have plans for between 40 and 80 sites in Lancashire alone. If we take the midpoint of this range, 60 sites, and multiply it by the above calculation of 210 million gallons per site, that is a total of 12.6 billion gallons of fresh water mixed with toxic substances. Polluted fracking water can never be returned to the freshwater it originally started out as. It is destroyed and decimated forever. Dr Paul Hetzler, a technician who was responsible for investigating and managing groundwater contamination at the New York Department for Environmental Conservation: "If you were looking for a way to poison the drinking water supply, you could not find a more chillingly effective and thorough method of doing so than with hydraulic fracturing."

Water companies in England and Wales are wasting, through leaks, a staggering 3.3 billion litres every day. United Utilities, who lose 464 million litres of water a day through leaky pipes, and are identified by Ofwat as "cause for concern" over the maintenance of their sewer underground infrastructure, sold water to Cuadrilla Resources for the first test fracking in the UK. Cuadrilla has also obtained licenses for fracking at sites in Sussex, Surrey and Kent - areas of all three counties are officially classified as being in drought.

The No Fracking UK environmentalist organisation which researched and analysed the potential impact of fracking in South Wales explains "Three million gallons per frack is a reasonable average. Using industry sources, there will be an average of around ten boreholes per drilling pad, with at least six fracks per borehole in its lifetime - that's at least 180 million gallons of water used per site. With sites needing be spaced at regular intervals of just a few miles apart (they are just a few hundred metres apart in some parts of the world) we could see 1,000 and upwards across South Wales alone. 180 billion gallons of water. That's roughly 330,000 Olympic sized pools' worth, or nearly three Lake Windermeres. We cannot predict the consequences of our actions. We know nothing about our preserved rocks and are taking the shameful attitude of: 'Let's do what we want, we'll get away with it.' We are advocating a process which has a huge impact on already fraught water supplies - and encouraging potential disaster. "

The Broderick research report states: "Requirements for water in commercial scale shale gas extraction could put pressure on water supplies at the local level in the UK. Shale gas extraction requires high volumes of water. Given that water resources in many parts of the UK are already under pressure, this water demand could bring significant and additional problems at the local level."

Nor has SOYMB  even mentioned the possible earthquakes from fracking!!

From here