Last updated: July 2016
Research conducted by Ethical Consumer has found that Barclays, HSBC and Lloyds all offer banking services to companies with licenses to test new potential fracking sites in the UK.
The table below lays out which bank is used by which fracking company and for what purpose.
Previous research on banks and fracking
The ‘Frack Off’ network list Barclays and HSBC as major players pushing fracking in the UK.
Third Energy, with Barclays as its ultimate parent company, was given planning permission in May 2016 to frack for shale gas in Ryedale, North Yorkshire. Actual fracking has not taken place in the UK since 2011. HSBC is also listed as a shareholder in fracking firm Dart Energy, to which it has lent £63 million. HSBC also helped BG Group raise €1 billion.
Move Your Money listed the position on fracking of the ‘big five’ UK banks, which revealed that Lloyds had also raised and loaned money for fracking companies, and is a shareholder in them. RBS has said that it is committed to finance fracking. Santander said its energy policy is not public.
What can be done?
You may want to look at closing any accounts you have with the banks that support fracking and to write to them telling them why.
The Petroleum Exploration Development Licences (PEDLs) given out in December 2015 don’t, in themselves, give a company the right to begin fracking. If the initial exploration finds what they are looking for, a company still has to go through many stages of surveys, land acquisition, planning applications and consultation. All the currently active exploration sites in the UK have the community mobilising against them.
And according to Frack Off, if a license has been given in your area, “The sooner you start raising awareness and get people to take action, the better your chance of slowing them down and stopping them...The single most significant factor in what happens next is the community response in your area”.
See if fracking is planned near you.
What’s wrong with fracking?
"At a time when we should be rejecting the use of fossil fuels (coal, gas and oil), a UK-wide ‘dash for gas’ makes no sense”, says the extreme energy action network Frack Off. Fracking has also been accused of distracting energy firms and governments from investing in renewable energy.
As well as concerns around climate change, there are worries about the safety of fracking. In the USA, where fracking is well underway, there have been thousands of cases of water contamination; increased air pollution has been recorded in five states, and there are even reports of radioactive contamination and earthquakes.
Communities have been told by government and industry that we can avoid the dangers of fracking experienced by other countries if we regulate it properly. But the Guardian reported in April 2016 that the UK Government’s legal definition of fracking contains a loophole that would allow companies to bypass safety regulations. According to a leading geologist, between 2000-2010 43% of US wells fracked for gas, and 89% fracked for oil would not be defined as fracking under UK rules.
Even with the best regulation in the world, say Friends of the Earth, we can only make fracking “safer but not safe. And, for climate change reasons, fracking would still not be the answer to the UK’s energy problems.”