Thank You, Premier Gallant

Huge news! Today, the New Brunswick government introduced legislation for a moratorium on fracking for shale gas.

The Conservation Council of New Brunswick thanks Premier Brian Gallant's government for listening to our voices and putting the brakes on the risky business of shale gas fracking.

Let's thank the Gallant government for supporting drinkable water, breathable air and healthy communities with this moratorium.

 

Today's great news would not have been possible without all of you. Let's take a moment to recognize the folks across this province who worked tirelessly to protect our water, lands and people from shale gas fracking. We researched, educated, organized, talked to our neighbours and our elected representatives, put up signs, built strong coalitions and mobilized New Brunswickers against fracking for shale gas. Our collective actions have resulted in a fracking moratorium in New Brunswick and we should be proud.

 

In the coming months, we will work hard to ensure that the moratorium is a strong one and that those in our province who are currently affected by gas development are protected through stringent monitoring and enforcement. Today, we renew our calls for environmental quality monitoring stations in Penobsquis, a rural farming community that is the site of Corridor's gas development and other industrial development.

It's the start of something big! With extreme energy projects on our doorstep like the proposed Energy East pipeline and oil and gas development, a fracking moratorium signals that New Brunswick is moving away from the dirty fossil fuels of the past and towards a clean energy future -- one that protects our precious freshwater, one that generates meaningful employment and one that supports a green economy and healthy communities.

Sign up for updates from us on shale gas and the proposed Energy East pipeline.Together, we can blaze a path for a clean energy future in New Brunswick.
Conservation Council of New Brunswick /
Conseil de conservation du Nouveau-Brunswick
180 Saint John St.,
Fredericton, NB
E3B 4A9
Tel: 506 458-8747

www.conservationcouncil.ca
Facebook / Twitter

Assessing the shale gas study

Jim Emberger  ::  Telegraph Journal  ::  14 May 2014

The Council of Canadian Academies report on shale gas has recently reignited the debate in New Brunswick, with all sides spinning the commentary about the report. However, much of the body of research in the report is beyond spin, and just means what is says.

   • The modern shale gas industry, including the type of hydro-fracturing it employs,is a recent development,about which there is little research on potentially serious,long-lasting effects on public health and the environment.

   • The existing research raises many red flags,from contamination of groundwater,to the nearly total absence of knowledge about the health and environmental effects of fracking chemicals,to the amount of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Little has been done to address those concerns or systematically monitor them.

   • As a consequence,the regulations designed to control the industry have little basis in science.The report states, “The Canadian regulatory framework governing shale gas development is evolving and remains untested.The research needed to provide the framework for improved science-based decisions concerning cumulative environmental impacts has barely begun”

Given those facts, most people using common sense would decide to halt the development of the industry until research can be conducted,realistic risk assessments made,and mitigation processes perfected.

However, the Alward government is instead taking the position that the report recommends ‘going-slow’, meaning business as usual, just slower. It has also reached the incomprehensible conclusion that the report urges us to develop this dangerous industry here in New Brunswick so we can then study it,rather than study it where it already exists.

In fact, the report makes no recommendations, and says so up front. The phrase ‘go-slow’ is mentioned only twice in the nearly 300 page document, and only in the context of acknowledging the common sense advice that caution is recommended if proceeding into an area of great and dangerous unknowns.

‘Going slow’ is not defined or suggested as a plan of action. The sentence following ‘go slow’ acknowledges that “there may also be some negative impacts of development that cannot be eliminated, and the scientific basis for identifying areas that are particularly vulnerable has not been established” Not exactly an endorsement for pushing ahead, regardless of speed.

But what might ‘go slow’ mean in the context of the report itself? The report states that, “Some of the possible environmental and health effects of shale gas development may take decades to become apparent.” It adds, “Most research projects conducted in Canada are planned for the relatively short term — five to ten years or less. To address some of the most important questions about shale gas, longer-term research will be needed.” The report even notes that some problems associated with the industry may be unsolvable.

It is unlikely that Mr. Leonard views 10 years as short-term, or can conceive of research timeframes in decades. Yet, to simply test the health and environmental effects of 650 plus fracking chemicals will take many, many years.

While Mr.Leonard is at the Legislature saying we are going slowly, the newspapers report the Alward government is on the road promoting plans to export gas to Asia and Europe, develop gas-based manufacturing in New Brunswick sell gas to the Irvings for a tarsands refinery, and run our electrical grid on gas, all while supplying cheap gas to New Brunswick citizens. His administration has apparently figured out the miracle of the loaves and fishes, as Mr. Leonard says it will do all of this while going slowly and drilling only 50 wells a year.

The report from the Academies is pretty clear, do the science first! It recounts examples of previous resource development tragedies, where problems were unnoticed until too late, or even worse, were known, but were ignored by governments swooning over imagined economic benefits. Sound familiar?

JIM EMBERGER is the spokesman for the New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance. 

SWN notifies Kent County of exploratory drilling

Galloway residents still have questions

CBC News  ::  May 07, 2014 

SWN Resources Canada plans to drill exploratory wells in Kent County. (SWN Resources Canada)

Some Kent County residents have questions after SWN Resources sent them a letter letting them know it plans to drill an exploratory well in their area.

Residents of Galloway, near Rexton, say they have questions the company hasn’t answered.

Maurice Albert and his wife say they were notified by SWN last week.

Not only is their home nearby, the Alberts also own land next to the well site.

“We're planning on passing down our land to our kids. What are they going to have to deal with? The resources that we have, the clean water, the clean air. It's a beautiful place to live and I'd hate to see it be ruined,” said Kim.

SWN says it’s trying to reassure residents that won't happen.

The company says it's doing an environmental impact assessment "to identify steps to avoid or mitigate environmental impacts."

It says the exploratory well will be drilled to gather rock samples, but there will be no hydraulic fracturing.

Long-term concerns

Albert says if gas is found in the shale, he's worried for his family's farm.

“It's extremely important to the cranberry farmers because water management is a big thing. They need water for irrigation. And they need it for flooding in the winter time. So they really need good water. If they lose their water their whole investment is gone,” he said.

People who both oppose and support fracking told CBC they want more details from SWN.

Rosella Richard's home is one kilometre from the proposed test well site.

“We never had any conversations with any of them. They mostly talk on TV, but not face to face,” she said.

SWN says it has made copies of its 98-page assessment available at municipal offices.

Richard says the company doesn't understand the community.

“Even though we read that, we don't understand everything, you know what I mean, because we don't have any education,” she said.

In an email, SWN wrote it’s open to meet with groups and organizations that invite the company to speak.

But the company won't say whether it plans to organize a meeting with all affected residents.

Folks, shale gas and SWN are officially in back yards of Kent County.  Our hearts go out to those who are in or near the "Kill Zone".  If not for yourselves, speak up for the children and grandchildren and future generations of Kent County.

Kent South NO SHALE GAS Kent Sud

Anti-shale gas group (NBASGA) calls for 10-year moratorium

Binding legislation needed, campaign promises not enough, spokesperson says

CBC News  ::  Mar 06, 2014

The New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance says 10 years is the minimum time necessary to do the required long-term scientific studies on all the aspects of shale gas.

A group opposed to shale gas development and production in the province is calling on political parties to stand behind a legislated 10-year moratorium.

The New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance says 10 years is the minimum time required for the provincial government to review the industry and the impacts on health and the environment.

Meanwhile, it wants all existing leases cancelled and no new leases granted.

"A 10-year moratorium, rather than a ban, recognizes that there may still be New Brunswickers have doubts about shale gas, but who are not yet convinced that an absolute ban is warranted," the group said in a statement issued on Thursday.

"NBASGA  is confident that after 10 years, shale gas will be permanently banned as a result of what is learned during the moratorium," said spokesperson Jim Emberger.

But the moratorium must be enacted by binding legislation, he said. "Campaign promises, executive actions and vague intentions are not good enough."

The group has timed its announcement to line up with this year's provincial election, said Emberger. He believes the shale gas debate could weigh heavily on how New Brunswickers choose to vote on Sept. 22.

"We want [the political parties] to all take it into consideration when they draw up the party platform because certainly, you know, we'll be reporting back to the public as much as we can about what each candidate thinks about this. And so it gives them a standard," he said.