Climate Change: Fracking

Debate between Baroness Royall of Blaisdon and Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Tuesday 6th September 2016

(8 years, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Neville-Rolfe Portrait Baroness Neville-Rolfe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I cannot agree with the noble Baroness. I believe that shale has the potential to make a strong contribution to the transition from a heavily coal-fired carbon-inducing energy mix to the vision that I think we all share for 2050.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon Portrait Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, in the Forest of Dean, to my sorrow, licences have been granted despite the opposition of all members of the community. There is great concern that the complex hydrology, local subsidence and faulting issues, as well as the shallowness of the carboniferous shales and coal-bed which the licence holder intends to explore, will be particularly prone to ground-water contamination through fugitive methane emissions and the chemicals used in the fracking and drilling process. Given that methane is 80 times more significant as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, what level of fugitive emissions —that is to say, leakage—would the Government define as an acceptable level?

Baroness Neville-Rolfe Portrait Baroness Neville-Rolfe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Baroness is right to draw attention to methane. That is, of course, one of the key focuses of the Environment Agency, which has control over the permitting process and environmental emissions.