• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (7)
  •  

Group urges ministers to move carefully on fracking

Frank Gale
Published on March 23, 2013
Published on March 22, 2013
Frank Gale  RSS Feed

BOSWARLOS  Katherine Hoskins is concerned about recent public statements by two provincial government ministers regarding fracking for oil and gas in Western Newfoundland.

Topics :
Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board , Provincial Department of Environment and Conservation , Port au Port , Boswarlos , Western Newfoundland

The co-chair of the Port au Port/Bay St. George Fracking Awareness Group, and a resident of Boswarlos near the Shoal Point drilling site, said her group is asking Environment Minister Tom Hedderson and Natural Resources Minister Tom Marshall to take a precautionary approach pending an independent, science-based review of hydraulic fracturing.

She said this review should adequately consider the impacts of hundreds of wells being drilled in the Green Point Shale formation, which extends from the Port au Port Peninsula to Daniel's Harbour in Western Newfoundland.  

Fracking involves injecting water, which can contain toxic chemicals or other liquids under high pressure underground through horizontal wells — to break shale rock formations to extract oil and natural gas.

Hoskins said fracking is becoming an increasingly controversial issue due to potential negative impacts on the environment and possible negative health effects.

Hydraulic fracturing has come under scrutiny in some areas, and some jurisdictions have suspended or banned it. Hedderson recently stated that the Shoal Point fracking proposal would trigger a conjoint environmental assessment by two regulators, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB) and the Provincial Department of Environment and Conservation. In regards to Hedderson’s announcement that his Environment Department will be doing an assessment concurrently and conjointly with the CNLOPB, Hoskins has concerns about the objectivity and credibility of such an arrangement.

Hedderson said in a telephone interview on Thursday that there are two aspects to this, which would be onshore as well as offshore. That’s the rationale for his department going in tandem with the CNLOPB.

He said their environmental assessment is their precautionary approach and this doesn’t only involve his department; but meeting petroleum regulations, worker and equipment safety down to the disposal of drilling and waste fluids.

Hedderson said where fracking would be involved government will be paying particular attention to acquifers and drilling through them. He said if the proponent gets the go ahead, there will be lots of checks and balances in place to cover all aspects of their activity, including how it could affect groundwater.

“To date, the proponent hasn’t even registered a drilling program,” he added.

Once a proposed program is registered the time begins to tick on a 45-day environmental assessment period and there will be 30 days for the company and the public to put forward any information on the project.

Once the 45-day period is up, Hedderson can reject it, accept it as it is or accept it with conditions, meaning the project wouldn’t start until those conditions were met.

In relation to a drilling program involving hydraulic fracturing, he said the fracking fluid that would be used would have to be clearly outlined for his department as well as how it would be retrieved and disposed of to constitute a friendly material.

Hedderson said right now his department is just waiting for the proponent to come forward and that his department will put the assessment into place. He said the people with the department have become very skilled with project and have assessed many big projects during the past three decades.

“It’s important that people understand that in order to be approved, this is not some fly-by-night operation and the proponent will have to give us the information we need, including bonding, or it won’t go ahead.”

Hoskins said regarding Shoal Point Energy's plans to frack for oil on the west coast, the Fracking Awareness Group is recommending that the provincial government should follow Nova Scotia's lead and wait for the completion of a federal government review of the hydraulic fracturing process which is to be completed in the spring of 2014.

She said her group agrees with the recommendation of Judge Robert Wells, in his report on offshore safety in the oil industry, that there should be a separate independent regulatory agency for worker safety and environmental protection.

Hoskins said she believes that the CNLOPB, as part of the conjoint regulatory body, should not be both a facilitator of oil and gas development and a regulator for worker safety and environmental health.

Marshall stated in the House of Assembly last week that government supports the proposal by Shoal Point Energy, and it has legislation to govern the project. He points to the Petroleum Act, environmental assessments, and the CNLOPB.

But Hoskins said her group understands that, unlike New Brunswick — which recently announced new regulations specifically governing horizontal hydraulic fracturing — the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador does not have similar regulations in place.

She said Marshall's statement indicating provincial government support for a fracking project that has yet to undergo his own government's review and assessment process is premature and inappropriate.

 

fgale@thewesternstar.com

Comments

  • Username
    Fort Mac, Alberta
    - March 24, 2013 at 08:51:09

    To compare the Fracking from 1947 to the High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing that started around 10 years ago with only around 20,000 wells fracked using HVHF is like comparing a Ferrari to a Model T. It is misleading at best and lying at worst. The only people who are wrong about Fracking are those who think Fracking is the single component of natural gas production that is damaging water, air, and the beauty of the land. The entire extraction process is dirtier than coal....and studies NOT produced at the expense of the industry demonstrate this clearly. Anyone who writes articles like this has clearly not delved beyond the industry propaganda. Those economic benefits will be useless if water becomes scarce and global warming revs up the killing of masses of population. (And you do know the industry counts prostitution and drug trade as some of those "jobs" areas see when that company invades a community, right?) Of course, those tricked into leasing their land were told this was all about patriotism -- I see nothing patriotic about enabling internationally owned corporations to dig out our mountains and then export the product through places like Alberta , Tarsands, forcing Canadians to pay higher prices for that product. I suggest you do the journalism profession a service and research thoroughly before spouting off about a subject on which you clearly know nothing. Poor Newfies are in for a disaster

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    Lourdes Mr. Smith
    - March 24, 2013 at 08:34:53

    Why would this Government want to help assist with in Hydraulic fracturing that wants to produce shale Gas that would have environmental affects. Also That would be counteractive with the Muskrat Falls in the future, The people is already putting there tax dollars Muskrat Falls.. Do this Government want Muskrat Falls to work If so don’t support Fracking. It will take away from it in the future.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    Jack
    - March 24, 2013 at 07:37:42

    In an effort to grow Western Newfoundland's economy, I believe that hydraulic fracturing and other forms of oil exploration should go ahead with some strict guidelines similar to New Brunswick, Germany, and Great Britain. These conditions include a $25,000 deposit for each exploratory well, require Shoal Point Energy and Canadian Imperial Venture to have $10,000,000 liability insurance, wells must be double cased, and waste water must be stored in a holding tank and not tailings ponds. If oil and gas exploration doesn't go ahead due to fracking rejected, Western Newfoundland will pay the price for it like Nova Scotia's Cape Breton Island did when the planning oil and gas exploration project for Lake Ainslie area was cancelled due to frequent disruptive protests.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    DCarr
    - March 24, 2013 at 02:32:22

    Please note that New Brunswick plans to proceed against the wishes of the people: a petition with 20,000 signatures, 31 community groups and dozens of associations, medical personnel and municipalities have all called for moratoriums or bans. And Government did not put new regulations, in place. They released 'rules' not backed by legislation. They are actually a list of 'conditions' that 'may' be added to approvals to operate. These are misleading to the public. Setbacks are not even aligned with recent research data.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    Aiden Mahoney
    - March 23, 2013 at 11:36:54

    A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY The Government of Newfoundland & Labrador and the regulator/facilitator C-NLOPB are considering allowing a junior oil company Shoal Point Energy to do hydraulic fracturing (fracking) using dangerous chemicals under the seabed of Port au Port Bay. The federal and provincial governments are pushing for energy development and give full control of offshore drilling activities with include both promoting and regulation of oil companies (conflict of interest) to unelected Petroleum Boards which are tipped in favour of the oil and gas industry. The citizens of Western NL. demand that their government do the 'right thing' and not sell the unparalleled beauty of a pristine coast for so-called short term gain.

    Submit a comment

    • Username
      Jack
      - March 24, 2013 at 07:39:08

      If the wells are double cased and waste water is stored in a holding tank based on guidelines similar to New Brunswick, the problems related to fracking will be minimized.

  • Username
    owen roberts
    - March 23, 2013 at 09:30:13

    It would be TOTAL INSANITY to let this go ahead!!!!!! Watch the documentary on fracking on THE NATURE OF THINGS most of the US eastern seaboard as banned this even Quebec and New Brunswick This causes earthquakes and the chemicals they use are highly cancerous not including the amount of fresh water it pollutes that they can't get rid of.. You will destroy your way of life forever Just watch the Nature of things and see for yourselves!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Submit a comment

Submit a comment

Submit a comment (we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Business Directory


Milestones Moving Up

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts

Advertising