Taxpayers to fund hundreds of fracking boreholes across the country

Drilling of holes to monitor ground movement and water pollution slammed as an attempt to dupe public over shale gas safety
Protesters demonstrate against fracking in Balcombe, West Sussex, last year.
Protesters demonstrate against fracking in Balcombe, West Sussex, last year. Photograph: Ben Stansall/AFP

Hundreds of government-funded boreholes are set to be drilled across Britain to try to persuade the public that a looming shale gas boom can be developed safely, the Observer has learned. Sensors in the boreholes would detect possible water pollution or earthquakes caused by fracking and the information would be made public.




David Cameron has said the government is “going all out for shale”, but the issue remains highly controversial, with protests across the country. Ministers see shale gas and oil, which have transformed the American energy market, as providing an important economic opportunity for the UK. Chemical giant Ineos said last Thursday that it would invest £640m to launch a fracking revolution in Britain and claimed it could turn villagers into millionaires.

But opponents fear that fracking, which extracts underground gas and oil using high-pressure water and chemicals, will harm the environment and exacerbate climate change. Most experts say it will not lower UK energy prices.

“There would be many, many tens of boreholes in each shale gas area,” said Stephenson, with deeper ones monitoring for earthquakes and ground movement and shallower ones monitoring for water pollution. “Groundwater contamination is the big worry people have. Companies are required by law to monitor at their sites, but our interest is wider. For example, several kilometres away, are we sure groundwater is untouched?”

Stephenson said that a “step-change” was needed in underground monitoring: “We don’t know the health of the sub-surface because it is very little monitored at the moment.” The data gathered would also assist plans to dispose of nuclear waste underground and bury carbon dioxide captured from coal-fired power stations.

It would also be appropriate to use taxpayer funds to help develop the shale gas industry, he argued. “It is a good use of government money if we can monitor the environment but also make it more efficient to develop whatever we want to develop. I don’t think the fracking companies paying for the whole caboodle would play well with the public.”

Lucas countered: “The government is increasingly indistinguishable from the fracking industry it’s supposed to regulate. No amount of monitoring can make fracking safe. The only safe and responsible thing to do with shale gas is leave it in the ground.” She said ministers should pursue energy efficiency and community-owned renewable energy instead.

Tony Bosworth, energy campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said: “The government is behaving like a love-struck teenager, showering the shale gas industry with gifts. [It is] not content with changing trespass laws and handing out tax breaks – taxpayers may now have to fork out for the industry’s research. The public are unlikely to be convinced by our ‘all out for shale’ government assuring them fracking is safe, even with additional monitoring.”

Stephenson said: “America did not do it right, so let’s do it right here. If we found it was impossible to frack in the UK because, say, there are lots of faults in the rocks, that would come out.”

The government has streamlined regulation to speed up fracking exploration, but development has been hit by small earthquakes in Lancashire, planning refusals in Sussex and controversy over legal changes that allow fracking under homes without permission. Energy experts have also warned against hype. “It is very frustrating to keep hearing that shale gas is going to solve our energy problems. There’s no evidence for that whatsoever … it’s hype,” said Professor Jim Watson of the UK Energy Research Council.