Critique of environm ental statem ent in the context of relevant - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
critique of environm ental statem ent in the context of
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Critique of environm ental statem ent in the context of relevant - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Apr 05, 2023 153 likes •277 views

Critique of environm ental statem ent in the context of relevant geology and hydrogeology David Smythe Emeritus Professor of Geophysics, University of Glasgow KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough Green 1 No DRILLING 2 Geology and

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Critique of environm ental statem ent in the context

  • f relevant geology and

hydrogeology David Smythe

Emeritus Professor of Geophysics, University of Glasgow

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

The Application is:

  • Incomplete
  • Incompetent
  • Disingenuous

Geology and hydrogeology

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Incomplete:

  • Insufficient seismic data
  • Selection of locality remains unexplained:

“Further clarification is sought with regard to how the primary and secondary search areas were defined, in particular, the extent and nature of geological data used” County Planning Department letter 3 December 2013

Geology and hydrogeology

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Applicant’s geological search area:

  • Not explained
  • No data
  • No rational basis
  • Non-geological criteria?

Primary search area 2 km x 3 km Secondary search area Seismic profiles

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

PEDL2 3 4 licence Limit of maximum maturity coincident with 3000’ (3500’) minimum depth (to top). Data from BGS Weald report.

  

Kim m eridge Clay Search area for unconventional oil

  • 6 3 % of the

licence area

Ellipses – Celtique’s search areas

 

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

The Application is:

  • Incompetent

[ Original application full of errors

  • some corrected later]

Geology and hydrogeology

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Geological cross-section is 80 m too deep

Geology and hydrogeology

Celtique Environmental Statement fig. 11.4

  • Incompetent - example

W ELL 7 Base of Weald Clay

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Disingenuous: Targets are unconventional

Geology and hydrogeology

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Geology and hydrogeology

The Application is for unconventional:

“On our Central Weald Licences (PEDLs 231, 234 and 243) we currently have an obligation to drill one well on each licence… the unconventional prospectivity we have defined at … levels are all laterally extensive. … Within our licence area we will be forced to relinquish an unconventional trend proven by drilling, under the 50% area relinquishment rule.”

[Celtique Energie letter to DECC, 15 December 2011] 9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

UK shale basins – basic facts: The Weald Basin:

  • 400 times as many faults as US basins
  • Different origin from US basins

Risky to groundwater and surface: Faults can be a fast track to the surface

Geology and hydrogeology

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

The Application has only two possible

  • utcomes:
  • Relinquishment of PEDL234

OR

  • Unconventional development

Geology and hydrogeology

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

KEEP Kirdford and Wisborough ‘Green’

No DRILLING

Conclusion - the Application is:

  • Incomplete
  • Incompetent
  • Disingenuous

Full details have been provided in my submission

  • f June 2014 (53 pages + 19 figures)

Therefore I recommend REJECTI ON

Geology and hydrogeology

END 12