If shale gas development is so safe, why so many bans?

by Jim Emberger
OP-ED – The Fredericton Gleaner June 6, 2015

The Opposition Energy Critic says that the discontinuation of the Energy Institute will stop the examination of the science surrounding shale gas. Energy Minister Arsenault says that New Brunswick’s shale commission could approve development. Neither of these two political smokescreens reflects the actual rigorous scientific examinations of shale gas occurring elsewhere.

Lengthy and exhaustive reviews have recently been completed in four jurisdictions. All those jurisdictions then enacted bans or moratoria.

Read More…

NBASBA urges new fracking commission to be transparent

Recommends consultation with Chief Medical Health Officer

The New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance (NBASGA) welcomes the government’s announcement of a commission to evaluate the impacts of hydraulic fracturing. A year may be sufficient time to allow the review of all the current science and medical research. However, it must be noted that such research has only begun in earnest over the last couple of years. It is accelerating rapidly, it is increasingly identifying new health threats, and it is raising new issues that will require years of further study before they can be resolved.

Read More…

What Really Happened in Rexton?

As with all stories, there is always an underside. The following three-part series by journalist and communications strategist/consultant, Dallas MacQuarrie, presents a very different viewpoint than you may have read in the newspapers about the events of October 17, 2013 when police stormed the protest camp set up outside the SWN compound in Rexton, and catapulted New Brunswick into the international spotlight.

Read More…

Shale Gas Lobbyists ignore implications for public health, ethics and will of the people

Tory MLA shamelessly urges breaking of campaign promise

MONCTON, NB (18 March 2015) – The supporters of the shale gas industry – the industry itself, the PC-Opposition energy and various editorialists – have lately been calling for the lifting of the moratorium. Their sole, well-worn and questionable economic argument for this demonstrates a lack of understanding of the two basic reasons for a moratorium in the first place.

The primary reason for a moratorium is concern for public health. Increasingly numerous peer-reviewed studies have now associated shale gas extraction with a host of serious health problems from cancer to congenital heart defects, which is cause enough for alarm. More importantly, each study points out how much more we need to know.

Read More…

Bill C-51: A Threat to Democracy

Bill C-51 and the RCMP intelligence report on the “Anti-petroleum” movement in Canada

The Canadian Government’s anti-terrorism bill, C-51, and a recent intelligence report from the RCMP about the “anti-petroleum” movement in Canada come dangerously close to equating dissent with terrorism and opposition to economic policies as extremism.

Read More…

What the heck is ‘social license’?

by Donna McLellan

The New Brunswick government’s introduction of a moratorium on shale gas development, confirming its pre-election commitment, was a great relief to the thousands of NB residents who are opposed to the industry.  People are relieved, but skeptical.

Those who are familiar with New Brunswick’s political and economic history know that the province has been, for many decades, a fierce supporter of the oil and gas industry… and that resource development – from forestry to oil and gas exploration – has never been questioned.  Until now.

Read More…

NBers should have no regrets about moratorium

by Jim Emberger

While Premier Gallant develops the government’s moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, shale gas supporters continue to voice their same one-theme message that we are losing out on an economic miracle. Recent events provide a good lens through which to examine that claim. As our Premiere announced our moratorium, the leaders of both Quebec and New York announced similar decisions.

Read More…