The document also reveals a list of fracking chemicals and the quantities to be used near the picturesque town of Canonbie.
Dart, via its subsidiary Greenpark Energy, intends to inject 1,100,000 litres of fracking fluid into the ground from its site at Broadmeadows, Canonbie along with 500,000 litres of chemical-laden rinse water.
Fracking fluids include more than two tons (2800 kg) of Hydrochloric acid, 248 kg of Isopropanol, 46 kg of Caustic Soda, 33 kg of Alkyl Amine Salt, 23 kg of Potassium Chloride and 3.6 kg of Heavy Aromatic Naptha, all of which are toxic.
Greenpark intend to frack between 562m and 1015m underground. A recent study at Durham University showed fracture lengths can exceed 580m. In Wyoming in the US an entire village to be permanently evacuated after similar gas process caused gas to jet from the main road and water sources.
Greenpark is exploring coal seams for gas, a process known as Coal Bed Methane (CBM). The fracking process, however, is identical to that of Cuadrilla in Lancashire, who are exploring deeper shale seams. As the Greenpark’s report puts it: “fracture fluids will be injected at high pressure …the fracture fluids will deliver sand (and chemicals) into the fractures to maintin the flow and extraction of methane”
Gas from coal seams has long been associated with gas leaks, In Australia the threat of CBM has stimulated the creation of the Lock the Gate Alliance a large-scale protest movement of landowners and farmers committed to halting CBM operations in the country.
Greenpark intend to frack at a pressure of 3000 psi. Lancashire fracker Cuadrilla caused two earthquakes with pressures of 8100 psi; Greenpark are 3-6 times closer to the surface and fresh water aquifers.
Greenpark Energy commissioned a hydrological risk assessment from by Enzygo Environmental Consultants. The copy of the report was obtained by Frack Off Scotland.
Despite the extraordinary detail contained in the document, the picture is far from complete. As commentator Paul Mobbs states: “It contains no detail or quantified assessment of how the pollutants will, over a long period of time, interact with the environment. The arguments used to support their claims are not backed up with detailed hydrogeological modelling of pollution dispersion, nor is there any detailed geological analysis to demonstrate that the existing or manufactured cracks and fissures in the rocks will not create avenues for pollution transport from the coal seams to the water aquifer above.”
“The basic flaw in the … evaluation of fracking is that they see the target shale/coal seam as an “impermeable” rock strata; and to a certain extent, that is correct. The issue is that hydraulic fracturing by its nature breaks-up the rock to create new paths for water migration – and that has the potential to turn a low permeability rock strata into a more permeable strata which is capable of leaching any pollutants it contains into the surrounding rocks.”