Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on October 31, 2013
Shale Gas Represents ‘Low Risk’ to Public Health
The UK Onshore Operators Group (UKOOG) announced Thursday that it welcomes a report by Public Health England that has concluded that shale gas extraction emissions represent a “low” risk to public health.
The report, published Thursday, focuses on the potential impact of chemicals and radioactive material from all stages of shale gas extraction, including hydraulic fracturing. It is based on information from countries where shale gas extraction is already taking place.
The report states that the risks to public health from exposure to emissions from shale gas extraction are low if operations are properly run and regulated.
“Where potential risks have been identified in other countries, the reported problems are typically due to operational failure,” Dr. John Harrison, the director of Public Health England’s Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, said in a statement.
“Good on-site management and appropriate regulation of all aspects of exploratory drilling, gas capture as well as the use and storage of fracking fluid is essential to minimize the risks to the environment and health.”
Meanwhile, the report finds that most evidence from other countries suggests that any contamination of groundwater, if it occurs, is likely to be caused by leakage through the vertical borehole. So, good well construction and maintenance is essential to reduce the risks of groundwater contamination. It adds that contamination of groundwater from the underground fracking process itself is unlikely because of the depth at which it occurs.
Commenting on Public Health England’s report, UKOOG Chief Executive Ken Cronin said:
“We welcome the report from Public Health England that shows that there is a low risk to public health of properly run and regulated shale gas extraction. As the UK has among the highest standards for onshore oil and gas extraction in the world, backed up by the industry’s own stringent shale gas well guidelines, we hope that the Public Health England findings will reassure communities up and down the country that shale gas can be extracted with minimal risk to their well-being.”
16 Comments on "Shale Gas Represents ‘Low Risk’ to Public Health"
bobinget on Thu, 31st Oct 2013 11:59 pm
I’ll bet electricity when first introduced invoked
similar fears and misgivings.
As a matter of fact most people haven’t the faintest idea how electricity works but have grown up with it and take it for granted. We trust others to regulate, manage our power. (electricity has been known to kill folks but we learned to respect it).
Should we permit gasoline powered internal combustion engines? Last year 220,000 automobile fires were reported.. that’s one year.
A Gasoline bomb under your car.. I don’t think so!
Have you ever watched a gasoline powered automobile or inboard motor vessel burn? You will never forget it.
While we are at it we should ban meat, GMO, cloning,
human stem cell research, birth control and abortion.
Mike999 on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 12:32 am
Ha. Low risk, unless it’s in your backyard.
Industry studies say it’s much more dangerous, only you’re not supposed to know.
BillT on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 12:52 am
bobinget is just deluded. When his tap water flares up and singes his eyebrows, he may think different.
Ignorance is now much more common than intelligence. Greed has replaced common sense. And, yes, I have watched my car burn because the mechanic did not properly replace the filter in the gas line. No one was hurt, but it was a big fire.
Arthur on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 1:53 am
Britain is continuing were it left of with the world famous pittoresque smog.
GregT on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 2:28 am
I guess.
If you consider global mass extinction to be a “low risk to public health”.
Airwicky on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 8:45 am
They should say it’s a “slow risk” because it will eventually catch up with us and certainly be a risk. It’s common sense I would think, you can’t keep on polluting and expect no effects
Arthur on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 8:51 am
I don’t think many people are going to die as a result of fracking. It will just add to a long list of environmental degradation.
Luke on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 11:09 am
“As the UK has among the highest standards for onshore oil and gas extraction in the world, backed up by the industry’s own stringent shale gas well guidelines”
The industry own guidelines means no real independent control on health and environmental harm. In any case the British government is not willing to, neoliberal Cameron c.s. do support the fracking industry unscrupulously. So e.g. a list of fracking chemicals will never be published. And so the public can be lied to.
rockman on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 11:23 am
“So e.g. a list of fracking chemicals will never be published.” Of course they could. Anyone can buy the frac chemicals from the suppliers. And then for a few $thousand have them analyzed and publish what’s in them to their heart’s content. Easily affordable by any one of the MSM companies. Which make you wonder why it hasn’t been done given how much space those same companies fill with frac’ng stories.
rollin on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 1:32 pm
There are hundreds of compounds in fracking fluid and they vary across the industry. No full analysis seems available. A full analysis of each fluid would be an extremely daunting and expensive task, so the only way to deal with this is to legally demand full disclosure on any chemical that comes into contact with the soil and rock or has potential to come in contact with water.
http://www.allenstewart.com/practice-areas/gas-property-damage/chemicals-used-in-fracking/
A partial list of chemicals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_additives_for_hydraulic_fracturing
bobinget on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 2:09 pm
Living on a farm on hills of Southern Oregon in 34 years our well never ceases to surprise. One year we get ultra fine black ‘moon dust’ people here call manganese. Once, we too had methane and a long list of minerals over the years. Our well is only 300 feet.
Here’s a link to a local web page.. not mine.
http://www.541water.com/default.asp?pg=local
There is no mining or fracturing in the state to my knowledge.
bobinget on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 2:11 pm
(no mining for minerals other then gold, usually
along water-ways)
J-Gav on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 3:18 pm
“Problems are typically due to operational failure.” But of course that could never happen to a British company – just ask BP!…
bobinget on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 3:37 pm
Good point J-Galv..
One reason BP’s refineries, oil rigs keep exploding could be BP is trying to save money cutting corners, keeping inspections at bay with gifts and pussy.
I don’t see responsible companies calling for deregulation al la bankers.
Can you imagine what big home builders would do if there were no inspectors?
Ghung on Fri, 1st Nov 2013 5:26 pm
GB is just being presented with the same Faustian bargains most societies are facing: Risk choking on the air; risk poisoning their water; risk freezing to death (or burning up). All of the above are likely consequences, going forward.
rockman on Sat, 2nd Nov 2013 7:18 pm
“There are hundreds of compounds in fracking fluid and they vary across the industry. No full analysis seems available. A full analysis of each fluid would be an extremely daunting and expensive task”. Actually there are just a few components of frac fluids that have proven toxicity. In fact the total number of components in any frac fluid is rather small even though the different combination possibilities can be measured in the hundreds. It would cost very little to test for their presence in any particular frac mixtures used. Again, the frac companies don’t want to publish their particular formulas but the analysis of all the various chemicals already exist.
And just to stir things up a bit I would be interested in seeing any of the concerned list links to documented and independently proven cases of any frac’ng op that damaged a shallow aquifer or water well. Not saying it hasn’t happened…I’ve seen it happen a couple of times first hand. But given the ten’s of thousands of frac’d jobs there should be a large data base of documented problems.
And no: anecdotal claims from land owners looking to sue don’t count any more than an exec saying his oil company has never caused a problem by frac’ng.
Facts, gentlemen, facts.