Spatial imaginaries refer to collective understandings of socio-spatial relations that encompass three types: imaginaries about specific places in the world, generic types of space (e.g. a rural village), and transformations to space (e.g. industrialisation). The concept has been applied in diverse fields, notably city and regional planning, yet significant gaps remain in terms of understanding interdependencies between types of spatial imaginary at multiple scales, and of the fairness and justice implications of contested imaginaries, particularly in contexts of low carbon energy transitions. To address these gaps, we draw on qualitative data from 45 interviews with residents in two UK communities—Great Altcar and Woodsetts— to analyse arguments about proposals for local shale gas exploration. We highlight three key findings. First, objections are underpinned by the three types of spatial imaginary, which are used relationally to contest local proposals. We demonstrate the distinction, consistencies and contradictions across the types of spatial imaginaries in practice. Second, the spatial imaginaries create particular sets of ‘othering’, in terms of where residents believe fracking should or should not occur, which build upon distinctions between city and countryside, locals and ‘outsiders’, the north and south of England, and internationally between Great Britain and other countries. Finally, concerns with fairness and justice underpin how spatial imaginaries are used to object to local fracking proposals. By recognising community-level concerns with energy infrastructure projects, in the form of diverse spatial imaginaries at multiple scales, we can move toward more inclusive approaches to sustainable energy transitions.