Blog Categories: Europe

We, a coalition of environment and health NGOs, have grave concerns about hydraulic fracturing (fracking) of shale gas, shale oil, and coal bed methane (CBM) in Europe. In particular, because of its impacts in the following areas:

 Climate: there is no scientific agreement that unconventional gas (such as shale and CBM) will have significantly lower total greenhouse gas emissions compared to other conventional fossil fuels (e.g. coal);

 Energy: development of shale gas and CBM will be at the expense of cheaper and safer policies to save energy and speed up the transition to renewable energy and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions;

 Water pollution: fracking could cause the contamination of surface and groundwater (including drinking water) with toxic chemicals used in fracking fluids,* and increasing the concentration in such water of methane and hazardous and radioactive materials that naturally occur in shale and coal;

 Water use: fracking involves pumping vast amounts of freshwater underground, much of which becomes irretrievable and / or contaminated; because vast quantities of fresh water are required in fracking operations, this will create significant social and environmental pressures at least at a local and regional level, and particularly in regions suffering from water scarcity;

 Air pollution: Unconventional gas drilling/operations produces soot and smog precursors, particulate matter, methane and natural gas;

 Soil pollution: fracking carries the risk of leakages from polluted tailing ponds, wastewater and well blowouts;

 Land use: fracking disrupts the landscape and impacts upon rural and conservation areas;

 Noise: shale gas development generates noise pollution from equipment and transport that affects local residents, agricultural livestock and wildlife;

 Seismic activity: fracking increases the risks of earthquakes, which in turn increases the risk of damage to, and leakages from, gas wells;

 Cumulative and combined health and environmental impacts on communities and workers in the unconventional gas industry: for example, fracking causes additional exposure to toxic chemicals;

 Socio-economic impacts on communities: fracking can drive “boom and bust” cycles in local economies, undermining more sustainable agricultural and tourism economies.

All of these effects have direct and indirect impacts on individual and public health. Many of these impacts are not only local, but can be felt regionally and even globally. Without a comprehensive scientific assessment of the impacts of fracking, an unconventional gas boom would be an enormous experiment on the environment and human health.

We further note the following:

1. In order to limit global warming below 1,5 degrees Celsius, and thereby prevent dangerous climate change, fossil fuels must be phased out as quickly as possible. We believe renewable energy, energy savings and a significant reduction of CO2 emissions provide the only viable path to an environmentally sustainable and healthy future. Exploiting unconventional fossil fuels such as shale gas, shale oil and coal bed methane will increase total greenhouse gas emissions since further development of these fuels will increase the world’s dependency on fossil fuels and consequently slow down the large-scale deployment of clean energy renewables and energy savings.

2. Fracking is a high-risk activity that impacts human health and the wider environment. Fracking for unconventional fuels runs counter to the EU’s commitment to achieving a high level of environmental protection, as enshrined in Article 37 of the Charter on Fundamental Rights. Also article 35 of the Treaty commits the EU to ensuring a high level of human health protection in all of the Union’s policies and activities. The EU is tasked with developing environmental policies based on “the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay” (Article 191, Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). We therefore believe that the development of unconventional gas within the EU runs counter to EU Treaty obligations.

3. We believe the above mentioned principles are violated due to the absence of:

– A comprehensive and detailed analysis by an independent entity of the EU regulatory framework, as it applies to both exploration and exploitation phases;

– Sections in the Water Framework Directive or any relevant subsidiary laws (e.g. groundwater, EQS) covering fracking specificities;

– A scientific study of fracking-related air pollution and the long term health impacts;

– A scientific study of fracking-related water contamination and the long term health impacts (both from contamination by the naturally occurring hazardous and radioactive materials released in the fracking process, and from methane and other fracking fluid contaminants interacting with water disinfectant products, etc.);

– A full assessment of the capacity of all relevant water treatment plants, in all affected countries, to handle flow back waste water, and of water treatment costs, based on the polluter pays principle;

– A full assessment of the monitoring and enforcement capacities of Member State authorities across all the different impact areas;

– A scientific assessment of cross-border risks of water contamination and air pollution, with public input;

– A European Commission Green paper with full public participation of all relevant stakeholders, on the areas pertaining to the impacts of fracking activities that are not covered by existing EU regulations;

– A clear and binding set of European Best Available Technology Reference Standards (Brefs) for fracking operators.

4. To date, there is no consistent process in Europe that properly includes citizens and communities in decision-making related to shale gas, shale oil or coal bed methane. Free and fully-informed consent of local communities is not applied for most fracking projects prior to both exploration and exploitation phases, while they should be placed at the heart of the discussions.

5. Companies involved in fracking are not disclosing an exhaustive and detailed list of the chemicals used for each project, thus making it impossible to assess the environmental and health risks from exploitation and exploration (including full life cycle impacts). Currently the different deadlines and requirements in the REACH legislation mean that the information about chemicals is not automatically available to the public, and REACH controls on fracking may not come into force for a long time.

Until all these problems are adequately addressed, we believe that no further shale gas, shale oil and coal bed methane activities should proceed. We call on all Member States to suspend all ongoing activities, to abrogate permits, and to place a ban on any new projects, whether exploration or exploitation.

The Commission, as guardian of the treaties, should ensure timely and full legal compliance of Member States with all EU laws that pertain to shale gas, shale oil and coal bed methane, and bring forward legal proposals to cover those aspects not yet effectively addressed in EU law.

We also call on the EU, its Member States and European Financial Institutions to cease providing financial or political support to shale gas, oil and coal bed methane development projects. Any financial and political assistance provided to shale gas projects in countries of the Global South should be redirected towards the production and promotion of renewable energy sources and energy savings, in line with the Millennium Development Goals.

For more information please contact:

Antoine Simon, Friends of the Earth Europe

Tel: +32 (0) 2 893 10 18, Mob: +32 (0) 486 685 664, email: antoine.simon(at)foeeurope.(dot)org

Geert De Cock, Food and Water Europe

Tel: +32 (0) 2 893 10 45, Mob: +32 (0) 484 629 491, email: gdecock(at)fweurope(dot)org

Lisette van Vliet, Health and Environment Alliance

Tel: +32 (0) 2 234 36 45, Mob: +32 (0) 484 614 528, email: lisette(at)env-health(dot)org

Tara Connolly, Greenpeace

Tel: +32 (0) 2 274 19 21, Mob: +32 (0) 477 790 416, email: tara.connolly(at)greenpeace(dot)org

• Download a copy of this statement.
• Read in French.
• Read in Spanish.
• Read in Bulgarian.
• Read in Dutch.
• Read statement in Polish.

Civil society groups call on member states to suspend existing ‘fracking’ projects and ban new ones

Brussels, April 24, 2012 – A coalition of environmental and health NGOs warned the European Parliament today that hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’) of shale gas, shale oil, and coal bed methane represent an dangerous experiment on the environment and human health.

The warning comes following a draft report on shale gas published on the 11th of April by MEP Boguslaw Sonik for the parliamentary committee working on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. The draft, which promotes the expansion of shale gas developments in Europe, will be presented in front of the ENVI Committee tomorrow. It will influence Europe’s position on shale gas, potentially steering Europe’s energy policy in completely the wrong direction. The report ignores the risks and negative impacts of fracking, while presenting overly optimistic industry interests.

Antoine Simon, shale gas campaigner for Friends of the Earth Europe said: “Europe must not fall into the shale gas trap – it threatens the health of local communities, the environment, locks Europe into fossil fuel dependency, and undermines renewable energy developments.”

“European politicians must resist industry rhetoric and take account of the very real dangers of shale gas. Member states must suspend ongoing activities, and ban new projects – we must put a stop to this socially and environmentally damaging technology before it spreads across Europe.”

Exploiting shale gas, shale oil and coal bed methane in Europe will increase greenhouse gas emissions and ensure fossil fuel dependency at the expense of renewable energy or cheaper and safer policies to save energy. Additionally, loopholes in European legislation allow companies to remain secretive about chemicals used during fracking, making it impossible to assess the environmental and health risks.

Lisette van Vliet, Senior policy officer for Health and Environment Alliance said: “Getting natural gas from shale is a mark of desperate addiction to fossil fuels and threatens our public health by polluting the environment. Toxic chemicals used in fracking can contaminate groundwater, and subsequently drinking water, and fracking worsens our air quality. We call on Parliament to take a strong stand, and not to feed this addiction!”

Geert De Cock, policy officer for Food and Water Europe said: “Detailed analysis of how European water legislation covers, or fails to cover, the impacts of fracking on the water quality, is dangerously absent.”

“Fracking for shale gas has led to thousands of water contamination cases in the US – leaks, spills, blowouts, and improper treatment of wastewater – yet Europe is turning a blind eye. We must take heed, and suspend all ongoing shale gas developments in Europe”.Civil society calls on member states to suspend ongoing activities, to abrogate permits, and to place a ban on any new projects, and urges the European Parliament not to promote further development of shale gas.

For more information, please contact:

Antoine Simon, shale gas campaigner for Friends of the Earth Europe, Tel: +32 (0) 2 893 10 18, Mob: +32 (0) 486 685 664, email: [email protected]

Lisette van Vliet, Senior policy officer for Health and Environment Alliance, Tel: +32 (0) 2 234 3645 Mob: +32 (0) 484 614 528, email: [email protected]

Geert De Cock, policy officer for Food and Water Europe, Tel: +32 (0) 2 893 10 45, Mob: +32 (0) 484 629 491, email: [email protected]

 

 

• Original joint press release
• Read in Spanish
• Read in French
• Read in Dutch
• Read in Bulgarian

Statement of Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter

Washington, D.C.—“On this day when millions of Americans pay their dues to Uncle Sam, it is especially ironic to hear that the oil and gas industry, already a major beneficiary of federal tax breaks, has been granted another gift at taxpayers expense. Yesterday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission gave final approval for plans to export liquefied natural gas, which will allow the industry to fetch higher prices for American gas in European and Asian markets. This move promises to raise natural gas prices for American consumers and to accelerate the pace of drilling and fracking for natural gas.

“Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass natural gas liquefaction plant is a poster child for the misleading nature of the oil and gas industry’s promise that shale gas fracking will help U.S. energy independence. How does sending American gas overseas deliver energy independence here at home? The only thing it does is ensure future profits for the oil and gas industry and its financial underwriters.

“Analysis by Food & Water Watch finds that while U.S. natural gas consumption is actually expected to decline through 2015, it is expected to increase overseas—as much as 44 percent by 2035, with China and India leading that demand.

“While the oil & gas industry profits from extracting and selling natural gas as rapidly as possible to thirsty foreign markets, Americans will be the ones left with the public health and environmental consequences of widespread drilling and fracking and the higher costs to heat their homes next winter.”

Contact: Kate Fried, Food & Water Watch, (202) 683-2500, kfried(at)fwwatch(dot)org.

Statement by Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Europe

Brussels – “Food & Water Europe is deeply alarmed by MEP Boguslaw Sonik’s draft report on the environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction. Mr. Sonik papers over the genuine risks that fracking poses to our water, our climate and our quality of life. Doing so serves the corporate agenda of fossil fuel companies, not the general interest of European citizens. We urge MEPs to vote against this report in its current form.

“Apart from the contents, the defensive tone of the report is problematic. Mr. Sonik dismisses significant new peer-reviewed scientific research that exposes the environmental pollution that has accompanied shale gas and shale oil development in the United States as ‘ideologically-biased’. This pollution directly endangers human and animal health, creates significant waste treatment and disposal challenges, and will only accelerate global climate change.

“Mr. Sonik fundamentally misunderstands the precautionary principle: the notion that the onus of the burden of proof of technological safety is on the user of the technology, not those concerned about their safety. He claims it is essential to apply it ‘to any future development of resources in Europe’, yet he fails to acknowledge that there is no systematic public health study of the cumulative impacts of shale development. Fracking for shale gas in Europe would be an uncontrolled public health experiment”.

“Mr. Sonik’s report begins under the assumption that shale gas is a ‘very important new source of supply,’ conveniently dropping the key word “potential” from this direct quote out of the Commission’s 2050 Energy Roadmap. Yet, just as in the United States, the shale gas and shale oil resource potential in Europe is extremely uncertain. Poland’s own potential shale gas reserves were recently estimated to be just a tenth of what had been claimed just a few years ago.

“Food & Water Europe advocates for aggressive investment in the deployment of existing energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. Under no circumstances should European taxpayer contributions instead be offered to the oil and gas industry to stimulate shale development. Yet, Mr. Sonik proposes to do just that. His report is out of touch with public opinion and the current political debates within the European Parliament.

“Finally, in his public statements to defend the environmental reputation of shale gas, Mr. Sonik has resorted to the use of Cold War rhetoric, accusing Russia’s Gazprom of spreading fears about shale gas. While Poland’s history with Russia has been problematic, Food & Water Europe emphasizes that, for an EU of 27 Member States with a focus on 2050, such rhetoric only complicates the challenge of developing 21^st century policies to ensure clean and renewable energy solutions.”

Contact: Geert De Cock tel. +32 (0)2 893 10 45, mobile +32 (0)484 629.491, gdecock(at)fweurope.org

Statement from Food & Water Europe Executive Director Wenonah Hauter

Brussels – “Two and a half months earlier than last year’s dry spell, as new areas of England are joining regions already suffering from drought issues this week, it is disappointing to see that once again the emphasis has been placed on household users and hosepipe bans instead of focusing on the role of water management in the country.

“One of the best ways to ensure that water is managed as a common resource, and that both farmers and householders get what they need in dry spells, is to look at water use holistically through public management. Water should not be commoditized for private gain, but stewarded for the long-term public good, in good times and bad.

“Private water companies cannot wait for droughts to happen before saying they will fix leaks. The idea that household consumers are largely responsible for water use is a myth. In fact, consumer use accounts for only 10 percent of our global water supply. In reality, the problem lies in aging infrastructure systems and unsustainable agricultural and industrial practices that squander precious water resources.

“Furthermore, the government should not allow industries to use and contaminate millions of litres of water through activities such as shale gas extraction, which will only lead to further abuses on already fragile groundwater resources.

“The solution to our collective water woes lies in adopting an integrated approach to the management of our watersheds, less water intensive agricultural practices and methods of renewable energy production that do not cause more environmental harm.

“While climate change is indeed a problem, we cannot simply use it as a catch all excuse for inaction, especially when modernizing and better maintaining the country’s water infrastructure systems could address many of the water scarcity issues from which England suffers. In failing to address the health of these water systems, the private companies that currently oversee these essential systems are doing their customers and the nation’s water resources a grave disservice.”

Contact: Gabriella Zanzanaini, gzanzanaini(at)fweurope.org, +32 488 409 662

Statement from Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter

Brussels – “Food & Water Europe welcomes the stated intention of politicians discussing revisions to EU fisheries policy to end the shameful practice of discards, but in many ways this was the easy part. Now they need to get on with the job and tackle the heart of the problems in European fishing.

“Discards are an obvious place to start, but they are a symptom of far bigger problems underlying fisheries policy. Fixing what’s wrong with EU fisheries means any reform of the Common Fisheries Policy must tackle much more difficult issues like privatising public resources through Individual Transferable Quotas (IFQ’s) and ensuring that limits on overall catch are based on reliable science instead of politics. Furthermore, without considerably improved enforcement, a notional end to discards, or any other revisions, would be little more than hot air.

“There is ample evidence in the U.S. and the EU showing privatised fishing quotas concentrates control into fewer, bigger hands, often the ‘slipper skippers’ who do not actually fish, while driving smaller, often community-based boats out of the water. This must be replaced with policies aimed at managing fish stocks as a public good to ensure fishing communities and the long-term jobs they support are healthy and strong rather than a resource for creating individual profit.

“The farcical routine of EU Member States negotiating their ‘share’ of the catch, far above scientific advice, must be stopped. As authors of the recent University of York study clearly say, ‘Competitive bargaining doesn’t work.’ We need to improve both the science behind stock assessments and respect for those assessments, but politicians cannot continue to talk sustainability and ignore it in negotiations if they expect to have any meaningful fishing industry in Europe in the medium to long term. Iconic species like cod and Bluefin tuna exemplify where this approach leads, and it’s a fair guess others will follow without fundamental change.

“Policies are of little use if limits are not enforced. Sanctions must be harsher for both fishers and Member States flouting agreements.

“These changes will be difficult and will require politicians to take on entrenched ways of thinking to work with vested interests in new ways, but it must be done. Ending discards is a good start, but without significant change in these other areas it will achieve little.”

Contact: Eve Mitchell – emitchell(at)fweurope.org, tel + 44 (0)1381 610 740)