KM8 Fracking Application – How to object

10380311_10153157961381186_7353841016130655281_n[1]If you want to get started on your objection straight away, please click on this link for a downloadable letter you can customise and personalise.

Otherwise, please keep reading …

Third Energy have applied to frack their existing KM8 well at the company’s Kirby Misperton well-site. You can view the application documents on the NYCC Online Planning Register – Application No: NY/2015/0233/ENV.

What exactly have Third Energy applied to do?

The planning application consists of five separate phases:

1 Pre-stimulation Workover This is the preparation stage, where they get the existing KM8 well ready for fracking. Duration: 2 weeks (working 24 hours a day)

2 Hydraulic Fracture Stimulation/Well Test This is a ‘test-frac’, or ‘flow-test’, which involves fracking at five different depths to see if the Bowland Shale will produce gas in commercially viable quantities. Duration: 2 weeks (working 24 hours a day)

3 Production Test This will check gas flows over a longer period of time (up to 90 days), with the gas piped to Knapton Generating Station. Duration: 13 weeks (working 24 hours a day)

4 Production If the production test is successful, the KM8 well will be permanently hooked up to the existing production equipment and commercially produce gas. Duration: up to nine years.

5 Well Abandonment and Restoration When the well reaches the end of its life, it will be decommissioned and restored. Duration: 6 weeks

I thought they told us that the were only applying to do an eight-week test-frac, not nine years of production.

That’s an interesting point. You must have read Third Energy’s Residents’ Brochure or their Public Consultation Booklet, which were given to local residents earlier in the year – in which a nine-year production phase was never mentioned.

Hmm. That’s a bit odd. Is there anything else that’s different in the planning application?

11811385_10153067716248549_4123753168538365947_n[1]Actually, quite a lot of what they told us earlier in the year isn’t the same as what’s ended up in the planning application.

One very big difference is that they claimed there would only be 266 HGV movements during the first eight weeks, but in the Planning Application there are actually 910 HGV movements, plus 504 LGV/car movements – making a total of 1,414 traffic movements in total.

You can read a fully referenced analysis of the traffic movements on our KM8 Traffic Movements page.

That’s quite a big difference. Third Energy don’t sound like very good neighbours.

You might say that, we couldn’t possibly comment. However, you might like to see our analysis of the key differences between the consultation documents and the planning application on our Good Neighbours? page.

How can I object to this planning application?

Emails should be sent to:
Please put the application number in the subject line: NY/2015/0233/ENV
You can write your objection in the body of the email, or attach it as a Word Document.

VERY IMPORTANT – if you object by email, you must still include your full name and postal address. Objections without a postal address will not be considered.

You can also object by post. Please send your letter to:
Vicky Perkin, Planning Services, County Hall, Racecourse Lane, Northallerton, DL7 8AH.
Please put the application number in body of the letter: NY/2015/0233/ENV

Again, you must include your surname, first name/initials and full postal address, including postcode. Anonymous comments will not be considered.

Please ask for your comments to be included on the County Council Planning Register at the beginning or end of your objection.
You can also ask for your name, address, signature and other personal information to be removed before they post it on the website, so that these details are not available to be viewed by anyone else.

When’s the deadline for objections?

The official deadline has passed, but as the NYCC has asked Third Energy for more information, there is still no date for this to be decided. The council is legally obliged to consider all comments up to a week before the meeting itself, so you can still object to this application – but the sooner you do it, the better!

Better get on with it, then. How do I start?

You can either follow our guidelines by continuing to read this webpage, or you can download this guideline template letter, which includes the same information in a condensed form, which you can easily customise and personalise. Just click on the link below …


What can I say at the beginning of the objection?

We suggest you begin by saying that you are writing to object to the application, and add a couple of sentences about yourself, e.g. where you live, what you do for a living, what your interest is in the application, why you are concerned, your connection to Ryedale, etc.

If you live near the KM8 well-site, please state what it is about the application that you are concerned about, e.g. the impact on your village, traffic, the impact on local roads/landscape, effect and the local economy, etc. You could also say something about how worried you are about how this work will impact on your daily life.

If you live elsewhere in Ryedale or North Yorkshire, you can mention the wider effects of fracking would have on the region, particularly on its reputation as a top tourist destination and the effect extra traffic would have on the road system.

If you live in another part of the UK (or in another country) you can mention any connection you have with North Yorkshire – for example, you might visit the area regularly on holiday, or because you have family or friends in the area. You can also consider the precedent this may set throughout the rest of the country should this be approved, and whether or not it would make you more or less likely to visit the area on holiday if the proposals are approved and developed.

How important is it that I personalise my objection?

10959324_10153157961336186_3133042089873757444_n[1]Very important – personal objections that are individually written will gain more consideration from planning authorities. So please try to put things in your own words if possible. And a hand-written letter still makes an impact if you are the kind of person who likes writing letters with pen and paper!

Local knowledge and experience are also very important when campaigning against a planning application. So if you have any experiences to relate regarding living near a gas well-site (such as noxious smells, previous disruption, a negative affect on your health, work going on outside permitted hours, or anything else that has had any impact on your daily life, no matter how large or small), please include this in your objection. This sort of information is vital to help the Planning Officer make her recommendation.

Also, if you have had any other direct experience or problems when dealing with Third Energy – for example, you have been to any of their consultations or talks, or have had any direct contact with the company and its employees, then please include this in your objection.

Equally important are any instances that have occurred where you have not been kept informed about the development of the site. Alternatively, you may be aware of differing information being distributed by the company, either verbally or in print, such as those listed in the Good Neighbours? page. Please include any documentation – e.g. emails, leaflets, photographs, etc. – that can back up your comments, as this sort of information is helpful for the Planning Officer to decide whether or not the company can be trusted to undertake the work that it has applied for.

Finally, if you have researched any of the many facts, or read any interesting reports on fracking, or can cite any practices or instances where fracking has harmed communities that has caused you concern, please include these in your objection too.

What are the key points I can include in the main body of my objection?

You can then make some or all of the following points. If possible, please put them in your own words, perhaps by rephrasing the points in your own way or using the information in the bullet points to form a paragraph. You can also change the order of the points if you prefer, or choose the ones that you feel most concerned about. You don’t have to include all the points, and please make additional points you feel would support your objection, as described above.


  • There are to be 910 HGV movements and 510 LGV/car movements in the first eight weeks.
  • This means 1,414 traffic movements in total (compared to just 266 HGV movements promised in Third Energy’s Residents’ Brochure and Public Consultation Booklet.)
  • This traffic will travel along country roads and directly through Kirby Misperton village.
  • This will result in increased noise pollution, air pollution from traffic fumes, vibration damage to homes and other buildings and damage to verges and pavements.
  • There will be a greater risk of traffic accidents – children, pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders are particularly vulnerable.


  • The levels of noise at the site during the first two stages will be very much higher than would normally occur in this quiet rural location (up to 90 dB on site – as loud as a nightclub).
  • Noise will be clearly audible within the village and nearby properties, caravan parks and camp sites.
  • Noise will also carry across country for many miles in all directions, disturbing people in neighbouring villages and properties.

11813324_879164612168629_3517059492379632931_n[1]NIGHT-TIME DISTURBANCE

  • Work will take place 24 hours a day for the first five months, and will be particularly noisy during the first two months.
  • Local residents will be subjected to excessive and unreasonable disturbance in what is a quiet part of the countryside.
  • The bright lights from the site during darkness hours will be intrusive and disturbing to residents, particularly during the autumn/winter months.


  • The site is very visible from the public footpath that runs along the edge of the site.
  • The shipping containers (which will be multi-coloured) and drilling rigs will be out of keeping in this landscape and will spoil the quiet use and enjoyment of the footpath.
  • Although not in a National Park or an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the countryside is still highly valued and is often the reason why many people chose to move to the area.
  • Views into and out of the site should also be considered to identify whether they would be affected.


  • There is a wide range of wildlife in the immediate area and many are protected species.
  • All wildlife will be adversely affected by light pollution, noise and vibration.
  • Depending on the time of year, this can also cause problems with breeding and hibernation. Vibration will impact adversely on certain species such as owls and other small mammals.
  • This disturbance to their habitat could lead to some species leaving the area permanently, which would affect the delicate ecological balance of the area.


  • There is little detail in the planning application about the Production phase, which lasts nine years.
  • It is extremely unlikely that this small test frack will be able to release enough gas to produce commercially viable quantities of gas for nine years.
  • This means that the company may need to re-frack the well a number of times to continue production. However, there is nothing in the planning application about this phase.
  • The applicant must therefore be asked to provide extensive details of this production phase before the application is considered.


  • Third Energy say in its Public Consultation Brochure that they have a longer term development plan which “will require three or four more wells – probably a combination of our existing and new well-sites. We will need to drill lateral wells and hydraulically fracture the Bowland section.”
  • The Application should also be asked to clarify its long-term plans for the well-site, including how many new wells are to be drilled and how much more fracking would be required.

POSTER - Keep Ryedale Rural - no frackingACCIDENTS

  • Toxic waste water containing NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials) and dangerous chemicals in concentrated form (such as sulphuric acid) will be transported through Kirby Misperton village and stored on-site.
  • Any accident where a spillage occurs could be extremely damaging to the environment.
  • This presents an unacceptable risk to the local community.


  • If any fluids used for fracking, such as sulphuric acid, escape from the site they could contaminate the surrounding area, groundwater and local farmland.
  • The pollutants could contaminate the local becks and rivers, killing fish and other aquatic species.
  • Pollutants could also enter the local water network via the site drainage system.


  • There should be a 12-month monitoring period of methane in groundwater before fracking, which is a requirement under the Infrastructure Act 2015.
  • However, the applicant does not intend to monitor the groundwater for 12 months prior to fracking.
  • Inadequate monitoring of fluctuating groundwater conditions will result in a lack of baseline data, meaning that the risk of pollution to water, the environment and public health cannot be correctly monitored and assessed.


  • The exhaust emissions from HGV traffic, compressors and diesel generators will create increased air pollution near the site.
  • These will expose local people (and workers at the site) to substances that are harmful to health and increase their risk of developing serious health problems in the future.
  • There is also a significant health risk due from silicosis due to the large quantities of sand used in the fracking process.


  • Recently Thirsk and Malton MP Kevin Hollinrake went to Pennsylvania to investigate fracking, and returned with a number of demands for the fracking industry, including that no fracking site should be within one mile of a home or school.
  • The centre of Kirby Misperton village is only half a mile from the KM8 well-site an therefore does not meet Mr Hollinrake’s criteria.
Local residents protesting against fracking during a rally in Malton in March

Local residents protesting against fracking during a rally in Malton in March


  • The application at Kirby Misperton does not create a single new job.
  • If fracking is allowed in Ryedale, it could threaten the jobs of thousands of hard-working people in the key local industries of tourism and agriculture.
  • People will be less likely to come and visit the area if they feel that their peace and quiet will be compromised by fracking wells, their health is threatened by pollution, or that they will have to cope with large increases in HGV traffic on country roads.
  • This is confirmed in the Draft DEFRA Report “Shale Gas Rural Economy Impacts Paper”, which says: Fracking “may reduce the number of visitors and tourists in the rural area, with an associated reduction in spend in the local tourism economy.”


  • The Draft DEFRA Shale Gas Rural Economy Impacts Paper states that “House prices in close proximity to the drilling operations are likely to fall. There could be a 7% reduction in property values within one mile of an extraction site.”
  • Who will compensate local residents if they suffer losses on their properties, or they are unable to sell their house because it is too close to the well-site?


  • There are already several gas wells in the area, including three on the Kirby Misperton site, and fracking would have a negative cumulative impact on what is a rural and peaceful area.
  • Third Energy have already been given permission to produce gas at Ebberston Moor, which will involve extra traffic and other disruption involved in the pipeline construction.
  • They are also applying to expand their operations in nearby Pickering. T
  • here are also other major projects in the area, such as the Potash Mine, which will generate extra traffic.
  • Approving fracking at Kirby Misperton will increase the creeping industrialisation of the area, which will affect the tourist industry in the region.
  • The cumulative effect of all developments in the area must be taken into consideration.


  • If fracking is allowed in Ryedale, it will have a negative effect on other key industries in the area, threatening thousands of hard-working people’s jobs and livelihoods.
  • This is confirmed in the government’s Draft DEFRA Shale Gas Rural Economy Impacts Paper, which says “Shale gas may transform a previously pristine and quiet natural region, bringing increased industrialisation. As a result, rural economy business that rely on clean air, land and water and/or a tranquil environment may suffer losses from this change, such as agriculture, tourism, organic farming, hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation.”


  • If this application is approved, it may be harder for the Council to reject future fracking applications as a precedent will have been set.
  • This could result in hundreds of fracking wells across Ryedale and North Yorkshire.
  • Third Energy stated on 10th March that they were planning to establish 19 well-sites across Ryedale, with between 10 and 50 wells per site.
  • There are now new PEDL licences all across North Yorkshire, all of which could have multiple fracking sites.
  • Allowing fracking at Kirby Misperton could open the door to this damaging and destructive industry across the rest of Yorkshire and other parts of the UK.


  • Shale gas is a fossil fuel and the UK urgently needs to reduce our CO2 emissions to combat climate change.
  • A new fracking industry will lock us into using fossil fuels for decades to come, and also delay the move to clean renewable energy.
  • The Council has a duty to take climate change into account when ruling on planning applications. The gas generated from this application will not be used as gas to heat people’s homes, but will be sent Knapton Generating Station to produce electricity. There are other, greener, cleaner ways to generate electricity that will not cause climate change.


  • The Ryedale District Council voted for a 5-year moratorium on fracking on 8th October, which the NYCC should take into consideration and respect the views of local people.
  • Also nearby Town Councils at Malton, Norton and Kirkbymoorside have passed anti-fracking motions, as have a number of Parish Councils in the area.
  • It is clear that the majority of people in the area don’t want fracking, and the council should reject the application on the grounds that there is no social licence for the development.


  • The current Minerals and Waste for North Yorkshire does not include any guidelines whatsoever about fracking in the area, so it would be inappropriate for the NYCC to even consider any such applications, at least until a new Waste and Minerals Plan has been approved and put in place.


  • There is no mention of fracking in the Ryedale Plan, which is the blueprint for development in the area and includes such things as housing, roads and other developments. This proposed development is therefore in direct contravention of the Ryedale Plan and should be rejected.

If there are other fracking-related issues you want to mention, then please do so, particularly any first-hand experience you have had of fracking, gas production or dealing with Third Energy, and any information on the dangers of fracking that you would like to share with the Planning Committee. The more personalised your objection is, the more powerful it will be.

And at the end of your objection, please remember to ask the County Council to reject the application.

Done. Anything else I can do to help?

fracking_barclays_313[1]Third Energy are 97% owned by Barclays Bank. Please email Barclays Chairman John McFarlane to ask him to divest from fracking by going to this Friends of the Earth action page. If you can personalise the email, it will have more impact.

We are also raising money to hire expert consultants to fight the application. Please donate via our KM8 fighting fund page.

And if you haven’t heard about the 14th round of PEDL Licences, which will open up most of Yorkshire, Lancashire and many other parts of the country to potential fracking, then check out our PEDL Licences page.

Finally, please share this page on Facebook and Twitter using the links below.



  1. H Christopher
    September 17, 2015 at 11:35


  2. Lisa Cuthbert
    September 17, 2015 at 15:06

    I have relatives who live in the Rydale area and I am personally strongly against fracking I am concerned about the long term effects to the environment and I don’t believe there are any long term benefits .

  3. Megan Eden Coyne
    September 18, 2015 at 20:25


  4. christine ryan
    September 24, 2015 at 07:17

    I have only one question to ask. WHAT IS WRONG WITH WIND ENERGY?

  5. Abi Pollock
    October 3, 2015 at 11:17

    sent my objection letter. lets hope they reject it

  6. Michael & Wendy Fielding
    October 5, 2015 at 10:09

    We strongly object to any fracking in Ryedale, particularly at the KM8 site near Kirby Misperton. We are keen cyclists, and use these quiet lanes to keep us off the very busy main roads in the area. The number of lorry movements will ensure that we will not be able to use these lanes if this application is approved. where will we cycle then? We are also extremely concerned about the affect on water supplies, the detrimental affect on Ryedale’s second largest industry, tourism, which will seriously affect employment in the area. Please reject all fracking applications, until the necessary safeguards are put in place. The experiences of other countries, particularly the USA and Australia, are frightening.
    Michael & Wendy Fielding.

  7. Elaine leach
    October 6, 2015 at 20:14

    I live in hull, if I send a letter of objection with they throw it out as I am not local ?

    • Chris Redston
      October 6, 2015 at 20:59

      No, not at all. Councils are obliged to consider all objections, wherever they are from. If you live outside the immediate area, there are many things that you can mention apart from the obvious local problems of noise, traffic, etc. see above for ideas. This is a high interest application that has implications for the rest of the country, so I would imagine that they are getting objections from everywhere – and you are in Yorkshire, and this is a Yorkshire issue. And of course in Hull you aren’t too far away from West Newton well, and all the problems that has caused. If you have been affected by the gas developments in West Newton, then please mention them.

      • Susan Swire
        October 10, 2015 at 08:36


        a) HEALTH : Bright lights, traffic, noise, pPollution risks (air, water, accidental spillage)
        b) HOME OWNERSHIP : Difficulty in selling, house price devaluation, potential increased insurance.

        a) DETRIMENT TO WILDLIFE (including protected species) and visual nightmare

        3. PRECECEDENT
        a). Further locking us into fossil fuels
        b) Postponing research into and application of renewable energy.

        Please, County Council, PLEASE REJECT THIS APPLICATION.

        Susan Swire – Resident of North Yorkshire

  8. Karina Shaw
    October 7, 2015 at 13:32

    I strongly object to any proposal to frack in Ryedale. It is an area rich in biodiversity and local culture and the long term effects of fracking on the environment are unknown. The tourism industry is vital for the local economy, with many of Rydale’s residents being employed seasonally. Fracking in the area could put this in jeopardy. Having first hand experience of the tourist industry in this area the majority of holiday makers I have met are environmentally conscious and choose Ryedale for the unspoilt natural heritage. Fracking could potentially reduce house prices, which would have a detrimental impact on the finances of residents.

  9. Adam Harper
    October 11, 2015 at 22:07

    Keep up the very important work, and remember you are not alone. There was a large group of people protesting, giving out leaflets and getting people to sign petitions outside Barclays in harrogate on Saturday.

    I can’t see a direct link the NYCC page to submit our objections? Sorry if I’ve missed this, if not can a direct link be added before Wednesday?

    • Chris Redston
      October 11, 2015 at 22:23

      Hi Adam, the best way to submit your objection is to email it to:
      Please put the application number in the subject line: NY/2015/0233/ENV
      You can write your objection in the body of the email, or attach it as a Word Document.

      There is an online comments facility at the NYCC website, but it is limited to 1,000 words, so we have not advised people to use this, as when you get into it, 1,000 words isn’t very much and it would confuse some people. By objecting by letter or email / attachment, you can say as much as you want.

  10. Robert
    October 13, 2015 at 21:35

    Please check out this website which reports on recent SCIENCE on the ACTUAL dangers and risks to health of fracking in the US. The UK is working with hugely outdated science which is now overwhelming – see New York State and Maryland which have now BANNED fracking altogether.

  11. Ruth Tott
    October 14, 2015 at 14:12

    Dear Sir/Madam

    With reference to the plan for fracking in Ryedale district I object on several grounds. I urge you not to discount my objection because I am not from the area. We, in Lancashire, are facing the same threat and I believe that once this industry and it’s backers have ridden over the objections in any one area it’s a foot in the door for the rest of us. It’s important, therefore, that we all stick together as a united front. I ask that my comments are included in the County Council Planning Register.

    To summarise. My main grounds for objecting are:

    1. Water is not an infinite commodity yet the amount of water each frack uses will substantially drain resources. The argument used by the industry is that the water used is tantamount to a number of golf courses – ironic as planning permission for a large number of golf courses in one area would not be given planning permission.
    2. Fracking is a dirty and old fashioned energy source. Yorkshire, by association, will be viewed as equally dirty and old fashioned and therefore lose its valuable tourist trade.
    3. What happens when the fracking industry realises that the already low level profit margins do not stack up and pull out – go bankrupt. How can the area recover and who will pay that bill?
    4. It is suggested that supermarkets, possibly responding to public pressure, will not buy products from fracked areas – especially any which have had problems. Is it really worth risking local agriculture for a handful of jobs (at best!)
    5. Fracking is NOT the solution to our energy problems. It is short term and costly. Given the reported and documented risks associated with this industry it remains incredulous that the council is even considering imposing this on the land and the community.

    Yours Faithfully

  12. Chrissie
    May 2, 2016 at 12:41

    Thousands of holes drilled in the earth can NEVER be reinstated.
    Through aquifiers, noise, pollution, added traffic
    Go and see the Archimedes screw at Howsham Mill ……every weir should have one
    Thank you x

  13. magenta
    May 2, 2016 at 12:48

    my email:Dear Sir,
    I am writing to you to register my objections to fracking and test-drilling occuring North Yorkshire. As a resident I am deeply concerned about the negative impact it would have in the area in terms of tourism and public health. I have widely read studies and information on this issue and find only negative results. It would be exteremely fool hardy to go ahead. Would you like to be remembered in history as the ignorant fools who destroyed this beautiful place? Once the damage is done it is irreversible and the entire county will be up in arms and at your door. The dangers are clear and well documented, anyone can find them easily in the internet so you cannot claim ignorance. This is not america, this is a higly populated county and the cost of fracking here would be devastating, financially for tourism and businesses and property owners, and healthwise with both air and water pollution. The governement pledged to reduce carbon output- fracking increases it massively. The largest growth industry is in Green energy, let us invest in that, create jobs and industry through forward thinking technology and stop all this embarrasing, dangerous, regressive, fool-hardy idiocy. Send third energy and their ilk packing and make a positive legacy for yourselves and the county by leading the way in green, renewable energy, make us proud!
    yrs faithfully

    • Chris Redston
      May 7, 2016 at 21:39

      A very well-argued case, Magenta. We hope you have sent this to the NYCC too, not just to FFR! If you haven’t, please send it to as soon as possible!

  14. Mrs Scott
    November 1, 2016 at 20:27

    Just adding my voice to the debate, trying to sell my house in Ryedale no where near the proposed fracking site. 15 miles away however potential buyers stated they were put off by all the anti fracking posters around the villages which made them look into fracking. Fracking or the thought of it and highlighting it clearly puts some people off moving into Ryedale even if the area is miles away.


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.