One year on: Green group slams gas drilling plans in Trafford

An environmental charity has again written to Trafford council about plans for a coal bed methane site near Davyhulme [1]

Trafford planning committee is meeting today (Thursday 8 October, 6.30pm) to decide on an application from IGas – the company behind the drilling at Barton Moss, Salford – for a 25 year permission to operate coal bed methane drilling and production. [2]

Friends of the Earth has written to the council to set out the serious flaws in the Council Planning officers’ recommendation for approval including:

* Environmental Impact Assessment:  If the well is likely to produce more than 500,000 cubic metres of gas per day during production, EIA would be mandatory as the site would fall within Schedule 1 of the EIA Regulations. No estimate of volume of gas expected to be produced is set out in the planning officer’s report, hence the conclusion that EIA is not required is at risk. As far as we are aware, EIA is now being regularly required required of unconventional oil and gas activities submitted to local planning authorities in England.

* Climate change:  We remind the Council that it has a clear duty to understand the climate change impact of the development. Section 19 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act is a specific plan-making duty to ensure that plans ‘contribute to the mitigation of climate change’. This decision must be made in accordance with the plan subject to other material considerations.  The applicant has removed the proposal for CHP, which is contrary to policy SPD1 Climate change on low carbon fuel.

* Inadequate information: The Health and Safety Executive notes in the Officer’s report that “there  is  little  in  the  way  of  information  to  show  compliance  with  UK  Legislation  for Health  and Safety  for the design  and  construction of  a  borehole.”

It is not clear that the Council knows what all the chemicals are which will be used by Igas to drill for and extract gas, nor whether they are hazardous or not, nor how these issues related to their use were taken into account. This is a highly risky approach as this could lead to unforeseen impacts.

* Groundwater:  We believe that the Council’s approach to groundwater regulation is flawed. Despite the fact that the borehole will pass through a principal aquifer (Sherwood Sandstone) nothing has been reported in the Officer’s report in relation to the hydrogeology of the site, nor of the likely impacts or risks of the exploration, testing and production activities planned.

* Venting and flaring:  Similarly we are concerned that the Council is relying unduly on regulatory processes to mitigate impacts from venting and flaring, since it is not clear from the planning officer’s report that the applicant has provided any hard and fast assessment of the expected use of these techniques or the likely impacts. It is therefore not possible for the Council to have any sense as to whether such use is likely to comply with existing requirements; whether their use would have to be limited significantly; and whether the development could infact proceed on that basis.

* Lack of conditions: We do not see a condition to control noise – a significant impact from experience at other sites. Nor is there a condition to control drill depth (for instance Igas at Barton Moss reportedly drilled to the shale layer despite applying to drill for coal bed methane) and case law makes clear that previous conduct of the applicant is relevant to the imposition of conditions – see R v Frack Free Balcombe Residents Association v West Sussex CC [2014] EWHC 4108 (Admin).

* Air quality: Whilst we note that the planning officer concludes that impacts on air quality would be “negligible”, we remind you of the duty in Article 13(1) of the EU Air Quality Directive (2008/50) to ensure that emissions limits are met “throughout their zones”. We also draw your attention to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of R (on the application of ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (April 2015) in which the Court held that exceedances of emissions limits must be reversed “as shortly as possible”. It is at best unclear how the development would help discharge this duty.[3]

Manchester Friends of the Earth member and Trafford resident Pete Abel said,

“It is astonishing that Trafford Council planners have not required IGas to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment when EIAs are now being regularly required required of unconventional oil and gas activities submitted to local planning authorities in England.”

“Granting planning permission for 25 years’ worth of unconventional fossil fuel production without fully taking into account the environmental, climate change and air quality impacts would be a serious dereliction of our councillors’ duty to local residents.”

ENDS

Contact for Comments:  

Ali Abbas, Manchester Friends of the Earth co-ordinator, 07786 090520