Source: BBC Radio 4: Today Programme
URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9719000/9719272.stm
Date: 08/05/2012
Event: Lord Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, on fracking
People:
James Naughtie: The Environment Agency has a vast agenda, dealing with all manner of threats, from floods to Japanese knotweed. But it's also interested in how we provide energy for ourselves, how the mix between renewable resources and, for instance, nuclear power can be managed without adversely affecting the environment. So where does the Agency stand on the hot energy topic of the moment - fracking, the process of driving gas from rocks deep underground or deep under the sea bed, which has been very controversial but economically remarkably successful in the United States and Canada. Well, Lord Smith, former cabinet minister, is Chairman of the Agency and joins us now. Good morning.
Lord Smith: Good morning.
James Naughtie: Most people seem to believe that fracking, if it were found to be safe, might be an answer to some of our most intractable energy problems. Do you agree?
Lord Smith: It could be part of the answer. The source of a domestically available gas supply would, of course, be potentially very beneficial for our energy needs. It would provide energy security, which we don't necessarily have -
James Naughtie: Cheaper gas.
Lord Smith: - when we have to import gas from abroad, it could be affordable. However, there are two ver, very big "ifs". The first "if" is that it has to be drawn out of the ground effectively and safely, and that means worrying about the way in which the drilling takes place. It means worrying about making sure the methane is captured, rather than discharged to the air, and it means making sure that none of the contaminated water gets into the groundwater that sometimes can fill our water supplies.
James Naughtie: That's absolutely true, but are you saying that if those assurances satisfied you and the Environment Agency, the Agency wouldn't feel that it had to stand in the way?
Lord Smith: We wouldn't just go on the basis of assurances. We would want to monitor and regulate those processes very rigorously. And we will, wherever it happens. However, there's a second big "if". And that is whilst gas is better than coal, in terms of its impact on greenhouse gases and climate change, nonetheless it's still a carbon-intensive fuel. And if we end up going for a dash for gas in a few years' time, which I suspect we may do anyway, because nuclear and renewables won't be sufficient to enable us to keep all the lights on, if we do go for a dash for gas, we have to have carbon capture and storage for gas-fired power stations, to capture the carbon rather than just release it into the [air?]
James Naughtie: And stick it away somewhere where it doesn't do any damage. Now, you've put your finger on the huge problem there, which is that renewables - with all the developments in tide power and solar, and we know about the arguments about wind power - are not going to - well, to put it bluntly, they're not going to reach the predictions of what they could provide for that energy. Nuclear - I mean, the government was talking about the 40% of our energy produced by nuclear by 2030, that just is not going to happen, is it?
Lord Smith: Building nuclear power stations is a long and difficult process -
James Naughtie: The answer is yes.
Lord Smith: - and that means that 40% is probably going to be -
James Naughtie: And you're looking at what's happening to the cost and the fact that some companies are pulling out of the building - it's not going to happen.
Lord Smith: Yes, but I would say that nuclear has to be part of the overall landscape of -
James Naughtie: Well, that's something that you personally have changed your own mind, as you've said, over the last 20 years.
Lord Smith: Twenty years ago, I've have said "over my dead body", for nuclear power. Now climate change has made a realist of many of us, and I have to say, it has to be part of the mix.
James Naughtie: Which brings us back to fracking. Do you believe, on balance, that the problems will be solved, or at least, those who are involved in developments will be able to show that they can proceed with this technique safely, until we know more about how it works?
Lord Smith: We need to do all the tests, we need to be very careful about how we do them. My expectation is yes, we will be able to do it safely. And if they can, it could provide a useful addition to our energy mix. But it has to be done safely and we have to develop carbon capture and storage to enable us to reduce the greenhouse gas impact that it will have.
James Naughtie: With those assurances, it's a yes from you?
Lord Smith: It is. But it's a yes with a big "if" attached.