Scotland Bans Fracking... Forever

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Zainab Calcuttawala via,

The Scottish Parliament voted to ban fracking countrywide on Wednesday, making a moratorium on the controversial technique a permanent affair.

The narrow vote can after the legislative body temporary outlawed fracking in January 2015 while it conducted a public health impact assessment and consulted environmental experts.

The Scottish Greens, the Liberal Democrats, and the Labour Party joined together to hand a 32-29 defeat to the Conservatives, who vehemently opposed the permanent measure, The Guardian reported.

Legislators affiliated with the Scottish National Party chose to abstain from the vote, which prompted its fellow liberal parties to call on the group's leaders to clarify its position on fracking and its energy platform.

The Scottish National Party’s energy minister, Paul Wheelhouse, said he and his government remained “deeply skeptical” on the merits of fracking and confirmed that the practice would not be allowed in Scotland until there is clear evidence that it does not cause health-related or environmental harm.

Maurice Golden, a newly elected member of parliament for the Conservative party, argued in favor of fracking, and said the “leftwing cabal” of the three united liberal parties had been “ignoring” scientific evidence regarding the practice, which, if allowed, would add jobs and boost the economy.

The Scottish vote comes right after local leaders in the North Yorkshire region of the United Kingdom approved industrial tests that would allow fracking in the country for the first time in more than five years.

The Guardian reported that the go-ahead “swept aside” vocal protests from residents and environmentalists who feared “catastrophic seismic activity, health problems, and pollution” if hydraulic fracturing was introduced.

Two other high-profile applications to frack in the Lancashire area have been rejected by councilors since late-2011, but the companies have lodged appeals to reverse the decisions.

The UK remains one of the few European countries that has not banned fracking on a national level. Hydraulic fracturing has been seen by many as a means of decreasing the dependence on Russian natural gas deliveries. The contrary seemed to have taken place however as Gazprom’s CEO Alexei Miller said on June 1 that natural gas exports to the U.K. have increased by 91,5 percent to 3.85 billion cubic meters in the first five months of the year.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Vlad the Inhaler's picture

Good for them.  Why not buy cheap gas from foreign countries instead of ruining your own?   It's like buying paper from the store instead of chopping down the trees in your backyard.  You'll never produce enough gas domestically to be independent anyways.  Better yet, go renewable --

Manthong's picture

What a shame.

They won’t get to enjoy breaking up boring days with continual earthquakes and having tap water flambeau.

Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Garrrrrgh! Be wary of the Fracken, she be rising from depth of sea from yonder locker of Davey Jones.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

Looney toon lefty libs open their mouths before knowing the science.  There is no evidence fracking done right affects water tables.

Jeffersonian Liberal's picture

No problem.

All the oil companies need to do is create a new name for "fracking" and, voila, it will not be a banned practice.

After all, Obammie the Commie renamed Al Qaeda "ISIS" and that suddenly made it a non-treasonous offense to supply them with arms.

COSMOS's picture

'Maurice Golden' lol, tells you already why the blood sucker wants fracking. It will help the economy, lol, more like his cousin's private equity funds that own the fracking leases and also donate to his campaigns.

Maurice Golden, what nice CELTIC name that is LOL

"Maurice Golden, a newly elected member of parliament for the Conservative party, argued in favor of fracking.... if allowed, would add jobs and boost the economy."
I think he has a couple of cousins in the USA FED that also said their policies would add jobs and boost the economy, scum like Greenspan, Bernake, and Yellen.
HEY its a FAMILY BUSINESS and its all for the benefit of the gents. Consider yourself ENSLAVED. Now be thankful and visit your local Holo museum
Vlad by the way this is all about polluting the ground water supply so that then these private equity mofos can sell you bottled water for the rest of your life on top of taxing the crap out of you with the carbon credits scheme.

True Blue's picture

No problem anyway.

Remember, Americans were supposed to have the inalienable Right to keep and bear arms forever also.

'Forever' is never further than the next election cycle.

logicalman's picture

Depends whose 'evidence' you believe.

I'm sure injecting carcinogenic chemicals into underground aquifers has no effect.


DFCtomm's picture

it's not injected into the aquifier. It's injected deeper, and it's mostly water, so we're injecting fresh water so deeply underground that it's virtually unrecoverable.

MeBizarro's picture

Since we still have no idea what chemicals are included in any of the fracking injected materials, that is a spurious claim and the issue is going to be when the cement well casings (who have lives that I have seen varying from 20-50 years depending upon who is sourcing it) begin to fail. 

DFCtomm's picture

We do have an idea. If I remember correctly Halliburton's new chemical is actually food grade. I wouldn't want to eat it, but can't be any worse than McDonald's french fries.

WTFUD's picture

Let's hang you naked upside-down , stick a pipe in your ass and drip-feed those fracking chems. If there are no side effects after, let's say 12 months then we'll continue till there are.

Manthong's picture

Regardless of the flaming or cancer tap water, there is little doubt about this side effect:

legalize's picture

Wait... your source for science is the New York Times?!?  BWUAHAHAHAHA!


But still, even if fracking is causing little earthquakes, that's actually a good thing.  Little earthquakes release built-up pressure that if not released results in big earthquakes.  The San Andreas fault would not be the source of disaster movies if we could find a way to regularly and reliably release the built-up pressure in miniquakes.

DFCtomm's picture

I hate to break it to you, but methane has been in the ground for a very, very long time. Ask some miners about it. When you drill a well for water you also get whatever else is down there, and sometimes that's methane. The tap water was flaming before fracing came along, but hell it looks scary, and if someone is a dumbass then they'll fall for it.

DFCtomm's picture

Solar works in Arizona, but not so much in Wasington state. Can you figure out why?

algol_dog's picture

Imagine that - A country that cares about its citizens health over corporate greed.

logicalman's picture

Unfortunately, imagining that is all you can do, in most cases.


SimpleJackBlack's picture
SimpleJackBlack (not verified) Jun 5, 2016 3:58 PM

What the frack? 

Captain Chlamydia's picture

They have big balls. Respect. 

DFCtomm's picture

Every body has big balls till the lights go out. When that happens we'll actually see how big their balls are. I'm betting not that big.

iClaudius's picture

"They have big balls. Respect." but no brains.

cheech_wizard's picture

Thankfully, the majority of the Earth’s peatlands remain undisturbed. Jean-Yves Daigle, outgoing chair of the Canadian National Committee of the International Peat Society, estimates that there are around 1.5 million square miles of peatland on Earth. This figure only scratches the surface: Square miles measure surface area, but peat deposits can be up to 60 feet deep. (Neuzil reported this anecdotal figure in a stage whisper, as if it were a shamefully tasty rumor.) So, Daigle says, call that between 5 trillion and 6 trillion tons. He reckons that we are using about 0.05 percent of this resource every year. If the trend holds, and if the incidence of peatland fires—such as one that burned uncontrollably in Minnesota last year—doesn’t increase dramatically, that works out to another 2,000 years of Scotch.

However, Neuzil told me that if peat were used only to make Scotch, its most noble purpose (my words, not hers), the supply would never run out. Accumulation would keep pace with consumption, and from now until the end of time there would be Scotch on Earth.

Standard Disclaimer: There is a silver lining to this story after all.

Solio's picture

Good for Scotland! There is no life without water. So, why not treat it with the respect that it deserves.
Our children will thank you!

blue51's picture

There is no smooth Scotch wiskey, or McEwans Ale, without clean water either. Jean-claude Juncker likes both , from the looks of him , so maybe it prevails?

adanata's picture


The Scots fell down on independence but stood up against fracking. Well done. Look how close the vote was though. Smaller countries can squeak by on a lot more stuff like the Swiss recently refusing auto income for all. Wouldn't fly in 'Merica. Propaganda rules.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

That should be a tell but appears you're too slow witted to get it.  They got both wrong.

JAFAH's picture

From wiki

As of 2012, 2.5 million hydraulic fracturing jobs have been performed on oil and gas wells. 

I know you can visulize that number



Sudden Debt's picture

At least there's one government that cares about it's own people and not the bribes from lobbyists.

brushhog's picture

Good for Scotland. Fuck the frackers.

bruno_the's picture


Scottish Labour’s environment spokesperson, Claudia Beamish, who tabled the amendment, immediately called on the SNP government to clarify its position after the vote, which does not create binding policy, but represents a significant defeat for the SNP so soon into this new parliamentary term.

Beamish said: “The SNP government must now clarify whether or not they will respect the will of parliament and introduce an outright ban on fracking. It would be outrageous for this important vote to be ignored.

viator's picture

Scotland, a ripe plum of a future failed state.

logicalman's picture

How would you describe a succeeding state?


Niall Of The Nine Hostages's picture

Two words come to mind. Israel and Russia.

MeBizarro's picture

Better than in PA where their agenda still dominates.  Wolf got elected and they still avoided any kind of real excise tax and the pipeline folks quietly got eminent domain rights over nearly 3% of all of the land in PA over the next 20 years.  It was a mind-boggingly giveaway behind closed doors with no open hearings to the public or public period for commentary.

As for natural gas being being for 'American energy independence' that is a gigantic load of BS too. The Mariner 2 pipelines that Sunoco is being laying down is utlimately going to be utilized to ship the Marcellus Shale gas in PA overseas where it will command a better price. It is why they dredged the main channel to the Philly port and are now looking where the LNG loaded facility should be located (likely somewhere off Chester because the residents are dirt poor and there will be little organized resistance). 

You couldn't pay me enough money to live within a mile of where the LNG tankers are actually going to loaded.  If they have a serious accident or are the victims of a terrorist attack, it will vaporize everything within at least a 1/2 mile if not even a bit more. 

Bytor325's picture

So for another hundred years Scotland will lead the world in sheep fucked per capita and nothing else

Skiprrrdog's picture

When groomed properly, sheep are very attractive...

Last of the Middle Class's picture

The illiterate PC crowd is smokin' on this post tonight.

Skiprrrdog's picture

Frickin fruckin frackers...

adampeart's picture

I love comment sections. They confirm neither "side" of the argument actually know what the fuck they're talking about.

TrumanShow's picture

Scotland being a fabulously wealthy country, straining at the leash to be freed from the shackles of England to flourish as never before, can easily turn their backs on any potential revenue earner if it is deemed even slightly undesirable. Oh to be in such a position, even the Swiss are smarting with jealousy.

TrumanShow's picture

Scotland being a fabulously wealthy country, straining at the leash to be freed from the shackles of England to flourish as never before, can easily turn their backs on any potential revenue earner if it is deemed even slightly undesirable. Oh to be in such a position, even the Swiss are smarting with jealousy.