Groups and organizations from across Nova Scotia and beyond are indicating support for a 10-year legislated moratorium on fracking by endorsing a Joint Statement. The Statement will be presented to Premier Steven MacNeil after release of the Final Report of the Wheeler Review of Hydraulic Fracturing. The Final Report is expected to be released in mid-August. The government has indicated that there will be a short comment period, and then they will make a decision, including whether to lift the present moratorium.
The government still seems to doubt that the vast majority of Nova Scotians do not want fracking. The joint statement is one more way to indicate that support for a continued moratorium is strong and widespread. Groups and organizations, large and small, from all sectors are invited to add their voices to this statement.
Already, the Joint Statement for a Continued Fracking Moratorium has gathered the support of over 30 organizations, including the Anglican Dioscese of Nova Scotia and PEI, the Hants Federation of Agriculture, the Cape Breton Blacksmith’s Association, Nova Scotia Citizens Health Care Network, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, Eastern Shore Forest Watch, and many more.
The statement also notes that without Mi’kmaq consent for hydraulic fracturing, which does not exist, the moratorium on fracking must continue.
Please add your organizations’ name to the Joint Statement.
Contact Jennifer West, firstname.lastname@example.org.
Read the statement
List of groups and organizations endorsing the statement
K’JIPUKTUK (Halifax) — The panel reviewing hydraulic fracturing in Nova Scotia has completed its community information sessions across the province. Dr. Wheeler has been clear that much is still unknown about the risks and benefits to Nova Scotians.
During this review, the Native Council of Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Native Women’s Association have announced their official opposition to fracking.
• All three political parties have stated that the existing moratorium will remain until fracking is proven to be safe;
• The panel has not proven that there is common understanding of the full extent of risks associated with fracking;
• The panel has not proven that fracking can be done safely at this point in time; and that
• Members of the aboriginal community have indicated that they do not give their consent for hydraulic fracturing.
We, the undersigned organizations, call for a legislated moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in Nova Scotia for at least ten years.
We also recognize Indigenous title rights as upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada, and that a moratorium on fracking must remain in place until the Mi’kmaq community gives its consent.
Upcoming information sessions are being held around Nova Scotia. Attend and voice your concerns!!!
The review panel is hosting public meetings to present their draft recommendations for government. Plan to attend and share your concerns about the papers, the review process or about fracking! Click here to download a toolkit for the public sessions! A schedule of sessions is provided below.
This is a response to the draft paper titled “What are the interactions between unconventional gas resources and water resources? Input quality and quantity requirements and water treatment needs and impacts” (referred to as the “draft paper”). The draft paper does not provide a reasoned scientific evaluation of the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing on water resources. Overall, the draft paper offers superficial consideration of the risks.
The draft paper gives relatively little consideration to the risks of water contamination posed by the hydraulic fracturing industry from cradle to grave and beyond. The analysis of risks to water needs to include the risks: Read more
The Nova Scotia Fracking Resource and Action Coalition (NOFRAC) believes that the Hydraulic Fracturing Review Well Bore Integrity discussion paper (“discussion paper”) provides a thorough outline of problems and impacts from gas seepage behind the well casing system, including the scale and implications of the problems with aging and abandoned wells. This discussion paper echoes findings made by the Canadian Council of Academies (CCA) that much more needs to be known about the various risks of shale gas extraction. Read more
The most recent paper, “The Potential Oil and Gas Resource Base in Nova Scotia Accessible by Hydraulic Fracturing,” does not contain information to support a potential oil and gas base in Nova Scotia. The paper does not address resource quantification beyond existing wide-ranging estimates, and makes it difficult for a non-technical reader to follow the author’s logic in coming to the papers conclusion.
Response to Hydraulic Fracturing Review paper 2: Petrolelum Operations: Costs and Opportunities
Paper does not provide economic analysis of risks and benefits, does not meet standards for an evidence-based review
The second Nova Scotia Hydraulic Fracturing Review paper Petroleum Operations: Costs and Opportunities (May 2014) (Paper 2) does not provide an economic analysis of the risks and benefits of HF in Nova Scotia, although this is what lead author Michael Gardner was appointed to do. A full and objective assessment of costs, risks and benefits is required for informed decision making. Instead of providing an evidence-based, balanced assessment, this paper is weighted towards unrealistic promotion of the benefits of developing unconventional gas, while minimizing risks and costs and providing misleading assertions. Read more
Ken Summers lives in Minasville, within sight of the two drilling sites in Kennetcook NS. He has written numerous articles on fracking activities and fracking remnants.
Read his full submission here:
Ken Summers, Submission
“There is a pretty universal consensus that the civil service was unprepared for regulating this very new and still rapidly evolving form of hydrocarbon extraction. But as an explicit statement this is only made by government Ministers of the day, and has been delivered as damage control required by increasing scrutiny of questionable past actions. There is no evidence of examination of patterns, and implications for the future. Quite the opposite: unsubstantiated assurances are made of “lessons learned,” given with the same air of certainty that earlier had been given that matters had always been under control.”
Geoffrey May is an active environmentalist and resident of Margaree Harbour, Cape Breton.
Read his full submission here:
Geoffrey May, Submission
“It simply isn’t possible for me to present all the known reasons that shale gas
industry should not be allowed in Nova Scotia, or anywhere else. In the past three years of
studying the issue, the evidence against shale gas has increased, and absolutely no
information has emerged in support of any of the industry’s claims. Reassuring cartoons, and
other fantasy evidence presented by industry have been shown time and again to be nothing
but misleading propaganda. Shale gas is not a bridge fuel to a low carbon future, but sabotage against clean non emitting energy development. Shale gas, in almost every regard is the polar opposite of what it’s proponents claim. Rather than the truth lying somewhere between what proponents and opponents claim , it is worse than it’s strongest critics know. Between whatever arbitrary cut off date your panel uses , and the time of your reports release , new information will be published on shale gas, and that new information will add to the existing catalogue of horrors released.”
Alicia Pettis and her family live and grow their own food in Upper Stewiacke.
Her full submission:
Dear Wheeler Review Panel,
I’m not a great enough writer to submit a long letter filled with anti-fracking articles for you to review. I’m sure that you have received plenty of those already, as there is a mountain of research facts out there showing how destructive fracking can be.