"Controversial" is the second word in her report (when fracking shale is controversial mainly among her greenie friend activists), and she frames the report in her usual way:
The controversial new energy source has been given the backing of Government despite fears that pumping water into the ground or “fracking” to get out shale gas causes earthquakes and pollution.Note the base case is these baseless fears of her fellow campaigners. And as Louise's beat is the environment, her internet report has no space for economic benefits except this:
Ed Davey ... said the technology will not bring down fuel bills, but it could help to keep the lights on while meeting climate change targets.(This would be the climate change that has seen temperatures plateau for the past fifteen years, but we don't want to tell you that.)
The thrust of the report is that climate change is important, and that some geologists have said it is the job of drilling companies to assuage the concerns of the alarmist greenies - as if they want to listen to reason and would be willing to accept the word of oil and gas companies on anything at all. If tens of thousands of fracked wells in the States won't convince them, nothing will.
And indeed nothing will.
In short, we have the views of a global warming fantasist minister, and some geologists who seem not have an ounce of political nous between them.
All this with no account of the possibly huge economic benefits of fracking, headed by a picture showing the anti-frackers' message, with the government's support for fracking presented as an unexplained ignoring of "fears".
Typically biased Louise Gray.