Fracking is a delusional scraping of the bottom of the fossil fuel energy barrel

The battle over fracking is the new front line in the battle against climate change and the madness of the 'free' market fundamentalists who are destroying our economy and wrecking our climate. The battle lines are clearly drawn, with 'free' market cheerleaders like Boris Johnson and George Osborne eulogising the 'benefits' of cheap energy from shale gas and the environmental movement warning about the potentially damaging consequences of the 'dash for gas' in the UK.

I've posted on here before about how 'free' market climate change deniers are determined to avoid the economic consequences of climate change - that we will have to move to a different kind of economy which is more local, greener and steady state - and want to protect their own selfish interests and preserve big 'business as usual' at all costs. That is because they recognise that the kind of green, 'low energy' economy that is essential to combat climate change will mean the end of capitalism as we know it. 

It has been claimed that fracking has produced a massive economic boost in the USA with cheap shale gas lowering energy prices and fueling growth in the economy. But the longer fracking continues in the USA, the more evidence accumulates that not only are there environmental risks with fracking, but also that it is uneconomic. Here is a quote from an article in Business Insider:

"The economics of fracking are horrid. All wells have decline rates where production drops over time. But instead of decades for traditional wells, decline rates in horizontal fracking are measured in weeks and months: production falls off a cliff from day one and continues for a year or so until it levels out at about 10% of initial production."

The Government's own advisers have shown that Osborne's dash for gas is likely to increase energy bills for UK consumers by £600 as opposed to £100 for renewable energy. As if all this wasn't bad enough there are serious concerns about the potential environmental impact of fracking including the pollution of groundwater by toxic chemicals. Like the exploitation of oil from tar sands, fracking is an act of desperation, a Canute like attempt to prevent the inevitable changes that will have to take place in the global economy if we are to survive the very real threat that climate change poses to the future of our species. Reject this neoliberal nonsense and join the Green Party's fight for a greener, cleaner and socially just economy. Our future depends upon it.

Costing the Earth?

Buttermere in the English Lake District

Interesting news last week - to the sound of a fanfare the Coalition government proudly announced a ground-breaking piece of work with the publishing of the National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA). According to the BBC - "Nature is worth billions to the UK" - no kidding? Or as we say in the UK - 'No shit Sherlock!". Its worth noting that there is nothing new in trying to put a cost on nature. The economist David Pearce did it in his book Blueprint for a Green Economy twenty years ago.

In the NEA, a bunch of economists - could these be the same ones who failed to spot the Great Crash that we've just been through? - set out to measure the monetary value of the UK environment. There were some priceless quotes including this one from Bob Watson, chief scientific adviser to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and co-chairman of the NEA:

"Humans rely on the way ecosystems services control our climate - pollution, water quality, pollination - and we're finding out that many of these regulating services are degrading,"

Really? Did you need to stick a price tag on a Beech tree to discover that? It seems to me that the people who did the NEA need to get out more - preferably out their cosy offices and into the environment itself. According to the NEA, the benefit to an individual of living near a green space is £300 per year and bees are worth £430 million or so a year to our economy. What's wrong with this is it's arrant nonsense, and potentially dangerous nonsense at that. Imagine that someone wanted to build a brick factory on the park next to your house and was willing to pay you £300 a year for the privilege, would you accept the money? - of course not. You might be £300 pa better off but you would have lost something far more valuable - your peace and sense of well being. As for bees, if we lost them we would all be screwed.

The simple truth, as we all know, is that bees, for example, are irreplaceable and therefore priceless. There is no way they can be costed. And what about the view of Buttermere Lake and Haystacks from Buttermere (see my photo) - how much is that worth? I guess if the NEA can help prevent developers and money grubbers from destroying our natural environment and wildlife it will have been worth the effort, but somehow I doubt that it will.