The most well-known epic saga in the English language is Paradise Lost by John Milton, written before any had any grasp of geology. The saga of Friends of the Earth over fracking is a longer epic and from FoE’s side is a fact-free as is Milton’s
The saga began in 2011 when Andy Atkins of FoE felt called to make anti-fracking a centre-piece of FoE activity and to encourage anti-fracking in Lancashire.
Since the publication of their leaflet in September 2015 the saga has become long and drawn-out and came to a sort of conclusion, which was no conclusion, when FoE agreed to withdraw their leaflet earlier this month. The response of FoE in the media was extraordinary as they claimed none of the facts or arguments were wrong result in a statement from the ASA,
https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2016/Opinion-piece-A-fractious-debate-but-a-clear-outcome.aspx#.WHyjY_mLSUlFOE to which Craig Bennett replied in a blog.
Though FoE only want to deal with Cuadrilla’s complaint to the ASA, making it appear that it is only a “money-making industry” complaint and thus the complaint from the two pensioners was ignored. However the ASA result was dealing with both complaints as one. Exactly what went on between ASA and Cuadrilla we do not know, but from our end it was a never-ending saga of epic proportions, but we are not at liberty to release the correspondence.
BUT, as FoE has a charitable
arm tentacle a complaint also went to the now defunct Fund Raising Standards Board, which gives an indication of how FoE might just have possibly replied to the ASA. The two documents make an interesting read and could give some idea of what transpired between the ASA, FoE and the TWO sets of complainants. So here goes;
Here is the Friends of the Earth letter sent to me after I complained to the now defunct Fund Raising Standards Board. I guessed this would be same as they would have sent to the Advertising Standards people, so I used it to inform my additional information for the complaint.
The FoE letter
- shows a lack of understanding of basic words like risk/hazard/toxic.
- fails to take into account any of the UK regulations.
- mentions chemicals that are not permitted in the UK.
- erroneously confuses fluid leaks and surface well leak problems with fracking.
- ignores data on health from Public Health England.
- fails to take full account of the recommendations of the Royal Academy of Engineering.
You can read it in this link
My response goes into details
As sand is the great toxic material according to Tony Bosworth
This is the letter from the HSE stating that sand, although it is a hazard(it does present a danger), is not a risk (as exposure is controlled).
We rest our case here and wonder why FoE and Bennett are so stubborn in not admitting to their shortcomings
-Oh dear, methane has no smell!!