Britse regering geeft na 2 jaar eindelijk rapport vrij over Britse schalie-olie- en schaliegaswinning

Na 2
jaar de zaak te hebben tegengehouden heeft de Britse regering
eindelijk een geheim rapport over schaliegas- en oliewinning
‘vrijgegeven….’ Dat laatste tussen aanhalingstekens daar het
grootste deel van het rapport onleesbaar is gemaakt door diezelfde
Britse regering, ronduit een schandaal en het zet bovendien nog eens
extra vraagtekens bij de mate van democratie die de Britten
‘genieten……’

Ronduit
onbeschoft zoals het geteisem in Londen omgaat met haar burgers,
immers de schaliegas- en oliewinning kent net als de aardgaswinning
slachtoffers, bovendien wordt met deze vorm van winning (van fossiele
‘brandstof’), hele gebieden vervuild, evenals het grondwater……..
Waar deze winningen hebben plaatsgevonden, blijft een maanlandschap
achter…… 

Voorts moeten chemicaliën ten behoeve van het fracken worden afgevoerd en dat betekent in de praktijk, zoals in de VS gebeurt, dat men het vervuilde water ‘gewoon’ laat weglopen in rivieren of zeeën en het zou me niet eens verbazen als men het ter plekke gewoon
de bodem in laat verdwijnen….. Als deze afvalstoffen netjes vernietigd zouden moeten worden, zou alleen daarmee de prijs van schaliegas al fiks stijgen….. Daarover gesproken: er gaat een
 enorme bak subsidie naar de oliemaatschappijen die deze manier van winning in de VS en GB gebruiken…. Het laten weglopen van de troep richt veel schade aan, schade die amper is te herstellen, terwijl de gevolgen van deze schade in de nabije toekomst een enorme bak belastinggeld zal kosten…….

Verder komen bij het fracken grote hoeveelheden methaangas vrij, gas behorend tot de sterkste broeikasgassen op onze aarde en is een veel sterkere aanjager van de klimaatverandering dan CO2, daarmee is fracken een extra aanjager van die verandering in temperatuur….. (de kosten om de gevolgen van de klimaatverandering tegen te gaan en de schade te herstellen die ermee gepaard gaat, zijn al helemaal niet te berekenen…..)

Schaliegas-
en oliewinning zou als men alle milieuregels zou handhaven, veel te
duur zijn… Ach gelul, deze uitermate vervuilende methode van
winning is een gevaar voor mens, dier en natuur, dus gewoon niet doen, beter nog: verbieden!

Lees het
volgende artikel van Jasmine en dat werd geplaatst op Unearthed
(Greenpeace) en zie de arrogantie van de machthebbers….. Dit
rapport zou voldoende moeten zijn om een regering te laten vallen en
als dat niet gebeurt zou de kiezer de Tory Party moeten
afstraffen….. Helaas werkt het niet zo, de BBC maakt vooral veel
reclame voor de regering en gevaarlijke gekken als Boris Johnson en Nigel Farage, die het volk vertellen dat de klimaatverandering een sprookje is en dat we vooral
alles uit de bodem moeten slepen om te verbranden…….

Overigens is het bij ons niet veel beter, zie wat hufter Menno Snel van D66
heeft geflikt met de schunnige terugvordering van kosten voor de kinderopvang door de Belastingdienst en dan zo onbeschoft zijn te blijven zitten*, de
‘vent’ zou zich de oren van de kop moeten schamen!!! (terwijl de klokkenluider van de Belastingdienst die e.e.a. aan het licht bracht op non-actief is gesteld….)

Government
finally releases secret fracking report

The
still-censored document reveals details of huge Whitehall effort to
support development of shale gas industry in the UK

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Government finally releases secret fracking report

The
Cabinet Office has finally released its – still heavily redacted –
secret report on the fracking industry, following a 22-month Freedom
of Information battle with Unearthed.


The
document – produced by the Cabinet Office in 2016 but never
published – confirms government and industry players were privately
downbeat about the prospects for a UK shale boom, even as they talked
up the sector’s potential.


Unearthed first
discovered
 the
existence of the report in early 2018, but its information request
was rejected because the government 
claimed it
“could call into question the industry’s viability.” 


Following
a hearing in July this year, the information tribunal ordered the
government to release key extracts of the report. The
government 
failed
to comply
 with
the order to publish on 25 November, but finally released the report
late on Friday afternoon. 


Though
sections of the document have been unredacted, it remains heavily
censored.


Jon
Trickett, shadow minister for the Cabinet Office,
told Unearthed: “This report clearly shows that
the Tories have bent over backwards to serve the interests of big
business, especially the oil and gas industry.

The
Conservatives have taken money from oil executives, trashed the
rights of communities and enabled fracking companies to threaten
their local environment.

The
fact they have tried to cover this up by redacting pages of critical
information – like with their talks with the US over selling off
parts of our NHS – further illustrates this Government’s contempt
for the public.”


He
added that a Labour government would ban fracking, expand the Freedom
of Information act, and “introduce tough new transparency rules”.


The
Conservative Party failed to respond to requests for comment.

(For PDF of this report see original article – you should rotate the page, if you use a laptop or other computer)

Ken
Cronin, chief executive of trade group UK Onshore Oil and Gas (UKOOG), said:
“This 2016 report reveals no new information of interest. It is
true that shale gas development in the UK has progressed at a steady
pace, although this is commensurate with the exploratory and highly
regulated nature of the industry. 

Since
this report was [produced], the first hydraulic fracturing since 2011
has taken place, several sites have been constructed and tested
across North Nottinghamshire and multiple planning applications have
been submitted for further exploratory work across Derbyshire and
Lancashire.

As
with any industry that involves development, our progress has been
slowed by the local planning system. This is not a unique problem to
shale within the energy sector. Onshore wind and solar have met with
comparable delays where applications have been filed.”


The
report’s release comes as the government has 
placed
a pause on fracking
,
though activists fear the moratorium could be lifted by a
Conservative government after the election.


Business
Secretary Andrea Leadsom said the moratorium would remain in effect
until “new compelling evidence is provided” regarding the serious
seismic incidents drilling has triggered in the north of England.


The
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) was unable to
comment due to pre-election ‘purdah’.

Pro-shale
narratives’


The
Cabinet Office’s report, which is based on interviews with 28
industry stakeholders, identifies “low public acceptance of shale”
as the primary barrier to the industry’s progress.


This
is described in the report as “public opposition driven by concerns
re: local quality of life and safety, environmental protection,
crowding out of renewables.”


Rather
than address these concerns, however, the officials appeared to
regard them as a communications problem.


The
report notes that the now-defunct Department for Energy and Climate
Change (DECC) was “already undertaking crucial work on
communications to increase public acceptability of shale” such as
the “development of pro-shale national/regional narrative” and
“shale champions.”


Messages
from companies were even fed into the government’s “longer term
national communications efforts”.


This
public opposition, the report claims, led to “a set of more
practical ‘symptom’ barriers” that the Cabinet Office
deliberated on how to lift.

Industry
lobbying


It
said: “Operators highlight that the most significant barriers by
far are the long decision timelines and uncertainty experienced in
local planning system.”

Current
and future operators stress that they will only bring forward large
sites if current long planning times and perceived uncertainty is
reduced – ie unless this can be resolved, UK shale will not take
off even if geology proven.”


In
response, the report discusses a range of possible measures to smooth
and speed-up the permitting process for would-be frackers, including:

  • improving
    “incentives to process application[s] in [the] 16 week statutory
    timeframe”. 

  • possibly
    “moving shale from local planning into national planning regime”  

  • reviewing
    “scope for accelerating planned DECC work on developing options
    for the settlement of shale long-term liabilities, to prevent this
    becoming a potential source of further delays in the local planning
    system in the future” 

  • pressuring
    independent regulator the Environment Agency to speed up permitting
    process “without increasing risk of judicial review.”

  • exploring
    ways to make public consultations and the planning process “more
    predictable,” including receiving advice on whether they can “time
    out” statutory consultees who are late in submitting input and
    even “reducing resources [for local authorities] invested to
    request additional information from industry.”

Questions
over viability


Unearthed’s discovery of
the report nearly 2 years ago related to government’s internal
projections for the the growth of UK fracking, which turned out to be
far more conservative than the vast number of wells and wealth the
industry had 
predicted.


There
is much in the Cabinet Office’s report that indicates government
and industry players understood these growth forecasts could well be
overblown, and the long-term viability of UK fracking remained
unproven.

The
development of the UK shale industry over the next 5-10 years is
subject to great uncertainty – most importantly because the
viability of the UK shale reserves is not yet proven,” the report
states.


It
goes on to reference interviews with operators and industry experts
that “suggest that the industry could close down quickly if early
sites are unsuccessful. Developments in the next 5-10 years are
therefore crucial to establish long-term viability of the industry.”


The
extent of the detail provided in the report is that government
expected 5-10 horizontal wells could by fracking by 2020, “with a
realistic expectation being significantly closer to 5 than 20.”


With
less than a month to go before 2020, we now know that even the
government’s “realistic expectation” was excessively
optimistic. There are currently no fracking sites producing gas in
the UK, and the government has announced that it will not support
future projects.   


A
far cry from the 4,000 wells by 2032 forecast in 2014, which
 still
underpins
 industry
projections 6 years later.

Unearthed

@UE

Here’s the government’s secret fracking report we’ve been fighting nearly 2 years for (wait for the punchline) http://bit.ly/34JJqdM

Embedded video

105  13:23 – 3 Dec 2019

(voor de video in dit Twitterbericht, zie origineel)

Redactions
remain


The
revelations scattered through the report, however, should not
distract from the fact that the Cabinet Office’s report remains
heavily redacted.

37
of the 48 pages are fully censored and many of the others contain
significant redactions.

The
‘background’ page is effectively free to read and so to are major
extracts of the executive summary, and the occasional line from the
report’s body.

===========================================

* Zie: ‘Menno Snel (staatssecretaris D66) overleeft zonder enig ethisch besef debat over toeslag kinderopvang

Zie ook:

Milieugroepen buitengesloten van klimaattop Madrid

Het grootste olieveld ter wereld: niet in Saoedi-Arabië maar in de VS >> het Permian-bekken

Britse banken steunen kolenverbranding met 25 miljard pond

Klimaattop Madrid: de grote vervuilers hebben veel te veel invloed

Frans Timmermans (PvdA Europese Commissie) op de valsgroene tour

Frans Timmermans (PvdA, Europese Commissie) wakker geschrokken: wil geheel hypocriet belasting op kerosine

Klimaattop Madrid bij voorbaat mislukt

Shell en Exxon die ondanks eigen onderzoek niets hebben ondernomen tegen klimaatverandering, willen met subsidie CO2 opslaan in lege gasvelden

IETA, lobbygroep van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote vervuilers, manipuleert klimaattoppen

Shell houdt zich niet aan het klimaatakkoord: 8 bewijzen

Rutte 3 heeft gelogen over subsidies: jaarlijks 2,5 miljard euro belastinggeld naar olie, kolen en gas

Bas Eickhout (‘GroenLinks’ EU) was vanuit Bonn wel tevreden over het Rutte 3 regeerakkoord……….‘ (dezelfde Eickhout die als grofgraaier in de EU stemde voor het langer toestaan van het kankerverwekkende gif glyfosaat, onderdeel van Roundup…..)

Uniper (energiebedrijf van Finse staat) bezig met rechtszaak tegen Nederlandse staat voor sluiten kolencentrales

Exxon in VS onder vuur vanwege de al decennialang voorradige kennis over de menselijke hand in de klimaatverandering

Universiteit van Cambridge overstag: 6 miljoen pond voor onderzoek naar oliewinning t.b.v. Shell

Amazonegebied in brand, Black Rock verdient daar vele miljoenen mee‘ 

Kees Verhoeven (D66 2de Kamer) wil een grote EU, maar ‘alleen op de grote onderwerpen…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Klaas Valkering (CDJA en ‘hip haar’): het CDA heeft een eigen duurzaam beleid……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

PvdA, CDA en VVD willen zich niet bij het klimaatakkoord van Parijs neerleggen!!!!

Monsanto (Bayer) lobbyisten hebben EU politici bewerkt >> kankerverwekkend glyfosaat nog jaren toegestaan in (corrupte) EU

In het
hieronder opgenomen artikel geschreven door Zach Boren en Arthur
Neslen op Unearthed, een ‘onafhankelijk’ journalistiek forum dat
‘wordt gefinancierd door Greenpeace donateurs’ (behoorlijk vaag,
kortom een project van Greenpeace, maar goed…), aandacht voor de
totstandkoming in het EU parlement van de verlenging van de vergunning voor het levensgevaarlijke gif glyfosaat, onderdeel van Roundup t.b.v. de landbouw (dus ook voor tuinders) en
dat met een periode van 5 jaar……..

Ongelofelijk
weer dat men in de EU zo speelt met mensenlevens en smerige
gifmengers als Bayer, sinds kort de eigenaar van Monsanto, door laat
gaan met het vergiftigen van de EU consumenten en het verder laten uitsterven van insecten (de laatste 30 jaar met 75%!! Insecten waaronder de grote bestuivers als bijen, zonder wie de mens het kan vergeten…..)…… 

Benieuwd
hoeveel geld er is uitgeloofd door Bayer/Monsanto voor deze beslissing, geld waar men nog
even af moet blijven, totdat men een paar jaar uit de
politiek is…….. (hoewel een dik betaalde baan ook tot de mogelijkheden behoort)

Het
geteisem dat hier voor heeft gestemd in de EU (o.a. ‘GroenLinks’
hufter Bas Eickhout), zou samen met de fabrikant
strafrechtelijk moeten worden vervolgd……….

How
lobbyists for Monsanto led a ‘grassroots farmers’ movement
against an EU glyphosate ban

Irish
PR firm Red Flag effectively mobilised farmers in its ‘freedom to
farm’ campaign

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor How lobbyists for Monsanto led a ‘grassroots farmers’ movement against an EU glyphosate ban

Monsanto
was bought by German agrochemical company Bayer earlier this year.
Photo: Adam Berry/Getty Images

Irish
PR firm Red Flag effectively mobilised farmers in its ‘freedom to
farm’ campaign

17.10.2018
Zach
Boren
and Arthur Neslen

American
agrochemical giant Monsanto paid a public-affairs consultancy
 up
to €200,000

to set up a ‘grassroots farmers’ operation across Europe to
oppose a prospective EU ban on glyphosate, 
Unearthed has
learned.

Glyphosate
is a key ingredient in Monsanto’s signature Roundup weedkiller.

Dublin-based
political firm
 Red
Flag Consulting
 led
the pro-glyphosate campaign, quietly launching a wide-reaching PR
drive and enlisting the support of thousands of farmers from stands
at agricultural fairs in “the eight most important EU countries.”

In
contemporaneous reviews
 seen
by 
Unearthed,
sales representatives working at the booths said that their job
involved distributing
 “truth-clarification
materials”
 about
glyphosate, and gathering contact information and signatures.

In
recent promotional literature Red Flag describes how it “won the
single-biggest regulatory and public affairs campaign in the European
Union,” using “non-traditional allies” in an attempt to change
the positions of eight countries in the EU.

Red
Flag leveraged these efforts on identified targets through media and
direct engagement to ultimately change votes in a key committee in
Brussels to bring about a win for our client,” one brochure says.
The firm did not confirm whether these claims referred to its work on
glyphosate.

The
firm’s campaign was run in tandem with a US consultancy, Lincoln
Strategy, that worked on 
Donald Trump’s
2016 presidential campaign
.

While
Monsanto mostly uses Fleishman Hillard for its PR work in
Brussels, Unearthed has established that they
accepted an approach from Red Flag to orchestrate the influence
drive, which was run at arm’s length from the firm.

Red
Flag’s other
 big
spending clients
 include
US biotech company Anitox, which has been described as “
extremely
active

in its support of glyphosate in the EU, and British American
Tobacco (BAT), 
according
to the EU transparency register
.

Monsanto
must have been desperate to use these methods,” Green Belgium MEP
Bart Staes told 
Unearthed.

It
really is a scandal. Sadly, this is fully in line with Monsanto’s
behaviour throughout the whole glyphosate [relicensing] campaign.”

A
spokesperson for Monsanto confirmed to 
Unearthed that
it –  along with a ”coalition of users and manufacturers of
glyphosate and other plant protection products” – supported the
Red Flag project.

Thousands
of farmers across Europe have supported this initiative and made
their voices heard in support of maintaining access to this vital for
modern and sustainable agriculture,” the spokesperson added.

Credit:
Agriculture et Liberte

Agriculture
et Liberte

Red
Flag’s contribution to the campaign involved setting up entities
such as
 Agriculture
et Liberte
 in
France, described by industry insiders as “a grassroots farming
coalition.”

The
firm’s CEO, Karl Brophy, said this was not a lobbying exercise.

Instead
he told 
Unearthed Red
Flag provided “factual information about the science on glyphosate”
to farmers and other individuals who “elected to be educated” and
who then “made their concerns known in their own voices and by
their own volition.”

Reference
to Agriculture et Liberte’s industry support can be found in a
bulletin point at the bottom of
 their
website
.

But
there is no mention of Red Flag – or its industry funding – on
the group’s
 twitter
account
,
which describes itself as “a group of French farmers who have come
together to protect our way of life and livelihoods,” nor in
its 
press
coverage
.


Unearthed has
identified similar entities in six other EU countries that appear to
be the localised branding in Red Flag’s ‘freedom to farm’
campaign. 

It
includes the names Free to Farm in the UK, Liberta di coltivare in
Italy, Raum für Landwirtschaft in Germany, Libertad para consultar
in Spain, Rolnictwo Dobrej Praktyki in Poland* and Vrijheid om te
Boeren in the Netherlands**.

These
outfits – which are often registered to Red Flag’s Dublin address
and an email account belonging to a Lincoln Strategy staffer – have
appeared or are due to appear at 
33
events since the start of 2017
.

Brophy
told 
Unearthed he
does “not recognise a number of the groups you appear to be
referring to,” but declined to elaborate. There had been no attempt
to conceal the involvement of Red Flag or Lincoln Strategy, he said.

Monsanto
wants it to appear as though farmers are independently speaking out
to support continued use of this chemical, when in reality these
‘farmer’ groups are actually little more than pawns in a public
relations campaign drawn up by its hired spin agents,” said Carey
Gillam, investigative journalist and author of
 Whitewash,
which details Monsanto’s history and the rise of glyphosate
herbicides.

It
has used these tactics in countries around the world to try to sway
public opinion in support of its products, to downplay risks to human
health and the environment, and to pressure and harass scientists and
lawmakers who Monsanto perceives as a threat. It is well past time
that these secrets are exposed.”

Red
Flag ran the campaigns with assistance from Lincoln Strategy, whose
northern Europe director Daisy Odabasi was
 quoted as
representing Agriculture et Liberte in one newspaper article.

Unlike
Red Flag, Lincoln does not have an EU transparency listing.
Lincoln’s
 staff
email accounts
 were
used in Red Flag’s campaign as part of its role “providing
logistical and operational support to the project.”

A
Lincoln spokesperson said all of the firm’s campaigns – including
its work in support of clean coal –  “rely solely on sharing
information with genuine citizens and encouraging them to make their
voices heard on topics that are important to them.”

Credit: Agriculture et Liberte


Health
concerns


The
effects of glyphosate on farmers and gardeners who come into contact
with it have been contentious ever since the World Health
Organisation’s agency on cancer
 labelled
the substance “probably carcinogenic”
 in
2015.

In
August, a US court
 ordered
Monsanto to pay $289 million
 in
damages to a groundskeeper who claimed he contracted Non-Hodgkin’s
Lymphoma from using Roundup, a landmark decision that could trigger
an avalanche of similar verdicts in further cases.

Health
concerns were at the heart of the EU’s apparent reticence to
reauthorise glyphosate, although reports from regulatory agencies
claimed that the chemical was safe.

Ultimately
while the pesticides industry did not succeed in renewing
glyphosate’s 15-year license in Europe – it was cut down to five
years – a complete ban was averted.

In
a lengthy statement supplied to 
UK
news outlet
 The
Independent, 
Brophy
said:

Red
Flag is an agency with a number of clients in the food and
agriculture sectors and a wide network of contacts in the
agricultural community. We worked to bring a number of our clients
and contacts together in order to help those people who would be most
affected by a potential glyphosate ban – the  farmers who
produce Europe’s food.”

We
are grateful to several clients for supporting the project.  But
it was the farmers who stood to lose most if an activist-led campaign
to ban glyphosate – flying in the face of science, the position of
all relevant EU regulatory agencies and the position of the European
Commission – was successful.  And it was the farmers who
responded to the threat.

Last
November, a very large majority of European Union countries voted to
re-authorise glyphosate. We’re proud to have played a small part in
providing the information that was used by many committed individuals
to stand up for their livelihoods, their communities and for the
future of Europe’s food supply.”

* A
previous version said the Polish campaign’s name was ‘Wolsnosc
Dla Farm’



** De schrijvers vergissen zich volgens mij, het gaat hier niet om de naam van  organisaties, maar om de naam die de petitie kreeg voor het behoud van het kankerverwekkende glyfosaat…. In Nederland wordt deze petitie door Boerderij.nl gevoerd onder de naam ‘Vrijheid om te Boeren‘ (‘vrijheid’ om de consument, de insecten en de aarde in haar geheel te vergiftigen met kankerverwekkende troep)…… Zie wat dit betreft ook de noot van de Unearthed schrijvers hier direct boven.