Is fracking doomed? UK shale gas reserves could be up to 80% lower than previously thought
- Experts analysed samples taken from Bowland in Lancashire to make the finding
- Fracking has proved controversial in the UK for the firms that have explored it
- Backers claim exploiting the fossil fuel could reduce reliance on foreign imports
- Opponents of the process say it can cause earthquakes and damage countryside
Controversial fracking in the UK could be doomed after a study found that the amount of gas it produces could be significantly lower than previously thought.
Estimates that Britain had the equivalent of enough gas to supply the UK for 50 years were seized on by politicians including former Prime Minister David Cameron.
He said Britain should ‘get fracking’ and that Britain was sitting on 1,300 trillion cubic feet of gas – around the same amount of gas as in the North Sea.
The 2013 study estimated the productivity of the shale fields in northern England by comparing the region to data taken from shale beds in the US.
New estimates based on lab analysis of actual shale rock suggest there may be less than 10 years’ worth of gas at current levels of demand, at 150 trillion cubic feet.
Scroll down for video
Controversial fracking in the UK could be doomed after a study found that the amount of gas it produces could be significantly lower than previously thought. Pictured: Fracking protesters at Preston New Road in Lancashire in 2017
Researchers from the University of Nottingham and British Geological Survey (BGS) analysed samples taken from Bowland in Lancashire.
Fracking for shale gas, in which liquid is pumped at high pressure deep underground to fracture the rock and release gas, has proved controversial as attempts have been made to get the industry off the ground in the UK.
Backers, including the Government, claim exploiting the fossil fuel could reduce reliance on imports, secure supplies, help cut carbon emissions and create jobs.
But opponents of the process say it can cause earthquakes, damage the countryside and keep the UK hooked on fossil fuels instead of focusing on renewables to help tackle climate change.
The new study used a high pressure water technique that simulates oil and gas generation in deep reservoirs and applied it to shale to evaluate in the laboratory how much gas could be extracted.
It analysed shale rock from two locations, and extrapolated the findings to the whole of the Bowland Shale.
Professor Colin Snape, who headed the research, said: ‘In simple terms the initial estimates suggested Shale gas could be another North Sea.
‘If you think about it, the North Sea has kept Britain going for round about 50 years now.
‘I think it’s fair to say the shale gas resource is not going to be on the scale of the North Sea.’
He said that new estimates reckon that there is just ten years’ gas supply at current levels.
The study’s findings were dismissed by energy firm Cuadrilla, which resumed fracking at the UK’s only operation shale exploration site in Preston New Road (pictured), Lancashire, last week
Backers, including the Government, claim exploiting the fossil fuel could reduce reliance on imports, secure supplies, help cut carbon emissions and create jobs.
But opponents of the process say it can cause earthquakes, damage the countryside and keep the UK hooked on fossil fuels instead of focusing on renewables to help tackle climate change.
The new study used a high pressure water technique that simulates oil and gas generation in deep reservoirs and applied it to shale to evaluate in the laboratory how much gas could be extracted.
It analysed shale rock from two locations, and extrapolated the findings to the whole of the Bowland Shale.
Dr Christopher Vane, head of organic geochemistry at the BGS, and one of the study’s authors, said the research ‘transforms our view of UK shale gas reserves’.
‘This cutting edge science shows that shales within the Bowland Formation could potentially contain less recoverable gas than previously thought,’ he said.
But Prof Mike Stephenson, chief scientist for decarbonisation and resource management at the BGS, who was not one of the study’s authors, cautioned that the data only used a small number of rock samples from two locations.
The BGS also said shale gas reserves would vary across the area.
The study’s findings were dismissed outright by energy firm Cuadrilla, which resumed fracking at the UK’s only operation shale exploration site in Preston New Road, Lancashire, last week.
The company’s chief executive Francis Egan said: ‘Cuadrilla is getting on with determining the capacity of UK shale reserves by the only means possible which is to drill, hydraulically fracture and test the flow rate of gas from real world wells drilled into the shale rock.
‘Our early results are very encouraging.’
But Dr Doug Parr, chief scientist for Greenpeace UK, said: ‘The people of Sussex, Lancashire, Yorkshire and other potential fracking sites have made it very clear to the Government that when they decided to go ‘all out for shale’ during a climate emergency, they were backing the wrong horse.
‘Now it turns out that they were backing a three-legged donkey.
‘How much more damage and division will this country have to suffer before the Government admits that they made a mistake chasing gas we can’t afford to burn, and starts supporting technologies with a future?’
The full findings were published in the journal Nature Communications.
HOW DOES FRACKING TRIGGER EARTHQUAKES?
Earthquakes are usually caused when rock underground suddenly breaks along a fault.
This sudden release of energy causes the seismic waves that make the ground shake, and in extreme cases can even split the Earth’s crust up to its surface.
Fracking works by injecting huge volumes of water into the rocks surrounding a natural gas deposit or hydrothermal well.
The water fractures the rocks, creating dozens of cracks through which gas and heat can escape to the surface.
Fracking causes Earthquakes by introducing water to faultlines, lubricating the rocks and making them more likely to slip.
When two blocks of rock or two plates rub together, they catch on one another.
The rocks are still pushing against each other, but not moving, building pressure that is only released when the rocks break.
During the earthquake and afterward, the plates or blocks of rock start moving, and they continue to move until they get stuck again.
There are questions over whether a magnitude 5.6 temblor that hit Oklahoma – the biggest earthquake ever recorded in the state – was caused by the controversial process.
Source: Read Full Article