Fracking for shale gas has been the game changer in the global exploration of energy. Now, the discovery of shale gas in Lancashire and at Barton Moss has brought the subject right to our doorstep.
Some people see fracking as the answer to the UK’s energy needs, others claim it causes pollution, earthquakes and is a further use of carbon.
What do you think?
Discuss, the home of the intellectually curious in Manchester, will be hosting a debate at the Museum of Science & Industry on Tuesday 28th October. Joining the panel will be Happy Mondays band member, and aspiring Politician, Bez alongside two professors from the University of Manchester, on opposing sides of the debate as well as a leading Blackpool business woman.
For the motion
Ernie Rutter, Professor of Structural Geology at the University of Manchester
Professor Rutter has said: ‘The potential importance of the development of shale gas resources to the UK economy and for a politically secure energy resource have been well rehearsed for those who have listened. The facts of the American experience of falling energy prices coupled with security of supply, job creation and economic stimulation demonstrate this potential.
Claire Smith, president, Stay Blackpool
Claire Smith has said: “Shale gas could be the catalyst to get things moving. Horner Blackpool should be the engine driver for the Fylde Coast. We must not dither on this one. It’s a chance to make a step change.”
Against the motion
Bez, Happy Mondays and anti-fracking protestor
Bez told the Guardian: “I went along to the fracking protest at Barton Moss to lend my support because of the concerns I have about environmental issues. If we allow fracking to happen in Salford and Manchester, any idea of a permaculture society will end with it. I am standing as an MP to draw attention to the debate because I believe fracking is unsafe technology and the damage it could do to the environment is irreversible.”
Professor Kevin Anderson, Deputy Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at The University of Manchester
Professor Anderson has argued: “Shale gas is indisputably a high-carbon energy source. It is identical to natural gas – consequently when combusted it emits large quantities of carbon dioxide.
The science of global warming, the maths of our emissions and our pledge to limit temperature increases to below a 2°C rise lead to the conclusion that shale gas must remain in the ground if we are to avoid ‘dangerous climate change’.”