Urgent! Tell the Environment Agency not to fast-track fracking in England!
- by: Beth Granter
- recipient: The Environment Agency
The UK Government is attempting to fast-track fracking by doing away with the need for the public to be consulted before test drilling goes ahead.
The changes, which have been quietly put out to public consultation with a deadline of midnight on 15th June (Monday!), mean the advice of local residents would no longer be sought in the early stages of most new oil and gas developments.
Please sign now to send an email to the Environment Agency's consultation - PLEASE ADD YOUR OWN COMMENT so that they consider each response as a unique opposition.
The Government is increasing the risk of pollution by relaxing the environmental scrutiny given in the early stages of hydraulic fracturing — where pressurised chemicals are used to break up rocks to release oil or gas.
The changes will sidestep the need for public consultation in England by changing the way permits are allocated for the exploration phase of a site’s development — during which tests are carried out on the site using conventional drilling techniques to determine how much oil or gas is present.
Under the proposed new permit regime, the Environment Agency will no longer visit the site and conduct a thorough environmental audit before drawing up a set of tailored requirements for the exploration company. Instead, it will create a one-size-fits-all permit based on a set of rules that will be awarded to oil and gas companies showing they can meet the criteria.
Experts who have studied the proposals say the site-specific assessments should apply to permits all the way along the process and are concerned it is being dropped in the early stages.
Oil and gas companies typically carry out extensive conventional drilling, using a wide variety of chemicals, during the explorative phase of their work – potentially putting the area at risk of water and air pollution and posing a threat to local wildlife.
Because fracking is new to the UK, this makes it harder to predict how the area will respond to exploration activities — at a time when the Government should be monitoring the process with increased scrutiny.
The changes, which have been quietly put out to public consultation with a deadline of midnight on 15th June (Monday!), mean the advice of local residents would no longer be sought in the early stages of most new oil and gas developments.
Please sign now to send an email to the Environment Agency's consultation - PLEASE ADD YOUR OWN COMMENT so that they consider each response as a unique opposition.
The Government is increasing the risk of pollution by relaxing the environmental scrutiny given in the early stages of hydraulic fracturing — where pressurised chemicals are used to break up rocks to release oil or gas.
The changes will sidestep the need for public consultation in England by changing the way permits are allocated for the exploration phase of a site’s development — during which tests are carried out on the site using conventional drilling techniques to determine how much oil or gas is present.
Under the proposed new permit regime, the Environment Agency will no longer visit the site and conduct a thorough environmental audit before drawing up a set of tailored requirements for the exploration company. Instead, it will create a one-size-fits-all permit based on a set of rules that will be awarded to oil and gas companies showing they can meet the criteria.
Experts who have studied the proposals say the site-specific assessments should apply to permits all the way along the process and are concerned it is being dropped in the early stages.
Oil and gas companies typically carry out extensive conventional drilling, using a wide variety of chemicals, during the explorative phase of their work – potentially putting the area at risk of water and air pollution and posing a threat to local wildlife.
Because fracking is new to the UK, this makes it harder to predict how the area will respond to exploration activities — at a time when the Government should be monitoring the process with increased scrutiny.
Dear Environment Agency,
Please accept this letter as an official opposition to your proposal, "Standard Rules Consultation No.11 - new standard rules for onshore oil and gas activities".
I also recognise that you requested a Word Doc to be attached to this email. I have answered each question contained in the document within this email below, so I expect this email to be sufficient to your requirements for an objection.
----
- I am responding as an individual
- I would like to receive an email acknowledging your response and to let you know that the summary of responses has been published.
- I found out about the standard rules consultation via petition website Care2.com.
Q1 Do you agree with our approach to use standard rules for these onshore oil and gas activities? No. Not if this removes the public consultation stage from any corporate application to mine or drill. Also, site-specific assessments should apply to permits all the way along the process.
Q2 Do you agree with the proposed new rules that we have set out in section 3 of this consultation?
No. Although this does not relate to applications directly to do "fracking" - it does relate to the exploratory processes which precede fracking.
These drilling processes are in themselves problematic, especially since decreased accountability and scrutiny inevitably means a higher risk of pollution.
Local people like me should have the ability to be consulted on whether they can go ahead. They should not be approved so easily and without full analysis of the impact on the local community and environment - each time an application is made.
Q3. Have we correctly identified all the risks for each activity, as described in the generic risk assessments associated with the consultation? No. I recognise that you say this would only apply to 'low risk' sites, but I feel that you cannot assign this 'low risk' status to a site without public consultation and site-specific assessments all the way along the process.
Q4. Are there any barriers to complying with the standard rules? N/A.
Q5. Do you think that the introduction of standard rules for these activities will have a significant financial impact overall on your operation? N/A.
Q6. Are there any other activities that you think would benefit from the standard permitting approach or future revisions? No. Public consultation should be available at all stages of oil or gas drilling and fracking.
Q7. Please tell us if you have any other views or comments on these proposed revisions that have not been covered by previous questions. Yes. I do not feel that enough publicity was given to this consultation, so organisations concerned were not given time to respond or inform their network. This means a full argument and analysis of your proposal hasn't been completed by all the necessary parties.
[Your comments]
Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your address]
Please accept this letter as an official opposition to your proposal, "Standard Rules Consultation No.11 - new standard rules for onshore oil and gas activities".
I also recognise that you requested a Word Doc to be attached to this email. I have answered each question contained in the document within this email below, so I expect this email to be sufficient to your requirements for an objection.
----
- I am responding as an individual
- I would like to receive an email acknowledging your response and to let you know that the summary of responses has been published.
- I found out about the standard rules consultation via petition website Care2.com.
Q1 Do you agree with our approach to use standard rules for these onshore oil and gas activities? No. Not if this removes the public consultation stage from any corporate application to mine or drill. Also, site-specific assessments should apply to permits all the way along the process.
Q2 Do you agree with the proposed new rules that we have set out in section 3 of this consultation?
No. Although this does not relate to applications directly to do "fracking" - it does relate to the exploratory processes which precede fracking.
These drilling processes are in themselves problematic, especially since decreased accountability and scrutiny inevitably means a higher risk of pollution.
Local people like me should have the ability to be consulted on whether they can go ahead. They should not be approved so easily and without full analysis of the impact on the local community and environment - each time an application is made.
Q3. Have we correctly identified all the risks for each activity, as described in the generic risk assessments associated with the consultation? No. I recognise that you say this would only apply to 'low risk' sites, but I feel that you cannot assign this 'low risk' status to a site without public consultation and site-specific assessments all the way along the process.
Q4. Are there any barriers to complying with the standard rules? N/A.
Q5. Do you think that the introduction of standard rules for these activities will have a significant financial impact overall on your operation? N/A.
Q6. Are there any other activities that you think would benefit from the standard permitting approach or future revisions? No. Public consultation should be available at all stages of oil or gas drilling and fracking.
Q7. Please tell us if you have any other views or comments on these proposed revisions that have not been covered by previous questions. Yes. I do not feel that enough publicity was given to this consultation, so organisations concerned were not given time to respond or inform their network. This means a full argument and analysis of your proposal hasn't been completed by all the necessary parties.
[Your comments]
Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your address]
Update #19 years ago
Hi all - thanks for signing. Many people who tweeted this petition then received a tweet from an organisation telling them that petitions will be ignored. Please be reassured that when you signed this petition, if you're in the UK, an email was sent to the Environment Agency on your behalf as a formal opposition. If you added a custom comment this will encourage them to count your letter as a unique complaint.
See more petitions:
You have JavaScript disabled. Without it, our site might not function properly.
By signing, you accept Care2's Terms of Service.
You can unsub at any time here.
Having problems signing this? Let us know.