Close scrutiny neeeded on both sides of fracking debate

I WORKED as an analyst for many years. Over the past year, I’ve been researching fracking, while trying manfully to maintain an unbiased and dispassionate position.

As the “pro” side stands to make significant gains from and the “anti” side stand to gain little other than environmental safeguards, the burden of proof must lie heavily with the pro lobby – ie gas companies and the Government.

I have found little or no hard evidence or data publicly available to support the claims of benefits and environmental safeguards made by the pro side, beyond comments along the lines of “don’t worry, it’ll all be OK and very well regulated”, backed up by virtually no proof.

A year ago, I suggested to my MP, Anne McIntosh, that openness and honesty would be the only way to gain public trust and consent. A year on, there is still no progress.

In those countries where the fracking process has been used extensively, there has been a high degree of self-regulation by the fracking companies. Historical evidence shows that self-regulation by mining, oil and mineral extraction companies has caused environmental havoc and countless deaths, so it is most certainly not a safe option.

It appears that conditions imposed during the planning process and subsequent enforcement will be absolutely critical to regulation of this industry, yet the planners and Government departments concerned can have virtually no specific expertise and will shortly be subject to yet more draconian budget and manpower cuts.

I suggest we need a well-chaired televised debate between “experts” from the pro and anti sides, where each can have their respective claims robustly challenged and questioned by the opposition.

Let’s see whose “facts” stand up to close scrutiny.

With a potentially rich seam of Bowland Shale and existing conventional gas exploitation, North Yorkshire is “desolate” and far enough from London to be a prime site for making a start. Energy, but at what cost?

The entirely realistic risk of polluted water supplies or air quality are drastic for every living organism, without even considering effects on transport, tourism, house prices, seismic activity etc.

Therefore, I’m now firmly anti-fracking and will remain so in the absence of any remotely compelling evidence. But don’t worry; this will only affect those who regularly access a supply of clean water or air.