by Jim Emberger, Telegraph Journal and Daily Gleaner, Aug. 7, 2019
The rapidly unfolding climate crisis, as recently reported in Brunswick News publications has climatologists describing the speed and extent of recent record-shattering climate events as ‘unprecedented’ and ‘insane’. Given this frightening new reality, Canadians can be thankful that at least one governing institution understands the seriousness and immediacy of the climate emergency.
by Sam Arnold, Daily Gleaner, 18 July 2019
Climate change is now widely recognized as a planetary emergency that is having both health impacts and economic costs caused by extreme weather events. These events, linked to global warming, now include prolonged droughts, increased forest fires, massive rainfalls, floods, polar ice melting, sea level rise, and severe storms around the world. This is an emergency that if not checked, is on track to severely impact human health and economic life. The effects of this emergency are already being felt in New Brunswick.
Commentary by Jim Emberger, Telegraph Journal, 13 Sept 2018
The freshly released Progressive Conservatives platform contains only a single sentence on shale gas, and leaves “regional social license” – mooted by leader Blaine Higgs in April – entirely unexplained.
Even without adequate detail in the platform, the very concept is a clear case of putting the cart before the horse.
The shale gas moratorium’s first condition sensibly dictates that, before social license can be granted, citizens must receive “clear and credible information about the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on public health, the environment and water.”
par Denise Melanson, L’acadie nouvelle, 9 juillet 2018
Récemment, Colleen Mitchell, la présidente du groupe Atlantica Centre for Energy, a uni sa voix à celle de Blaine Higgs le chef du parti Progressiste Conservateur pour réclamer la fin du moratoire sur la fracturation. Elle prétend que le gouvernement libéral ne fait pas le travail nécessaire pour se conformer aux conditions menant à sa levée. Elle se limite toutefois à ne mentionner que deux des cinq conditions, soit le renforcement de la règlementation portant sur la fracturation et l’élaboration d’une structure pour les redevances.
Fait étrange, les conditions primordiales portant sur l’impact de la fracturation sur la santé publique et sur l’environnement ainsi que la nécessité d’un traitement acceptable des eaux usées sont passées sous silence.
The following letter was sent to New Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant and members of the Liberal Caucus on 22 February 2016.
Dear Premier Gallant:
The Commission on Hydrofracking will soon submit its report and the government will make its decision on the future of shale gas in the province. We have to ask: “After 5 years of examining the pros and cons, what evidence has accumulated to support each side?”
To answer this question we have put together a short summary of the latest news and scientific information on a few of the major issues at the heart of the discussion. We hope you will take the ten minutes necessary to read the attached document.
The executive summary follows.
Video of Dr. John Cherry’s ‘Shale Gas Experiment” presentation in Fredericton, November 17, 2015. See our previous post for details, written statements and press coverage of Dr. Cherry’s visit. Thanks to Rob Turgeon (Apple Hill Video), who enabled us to provide the full presentation online.
“From my hydrogeological perspective, shale gas development should be viewed as a big experiment for which we have minimal scientific basis for predicting the outcome for impacts on groundwater quality of stray gas.”
~Dr. John Cherry
In recent years, New Brunswick media have been filled with the opinions and scientific claims of both opponents and supporters of shale gas development. To provide clarity about some of these claims and to continue its efforts to bring objective science on the issue of shale gas to the citizens of New Brunswick, the New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance invited respected hydrogeologist, Dr. John Cherry to Fredericton.
JIM EMBERGER COMMENTARY
The Daily Gleaner, October 31, 2015
In its letter to the New Brunswick Commission on Hydrofracturing (reference “‘Social license’ needs definition, say Tories”, by Adam Huras, Telegraph Journal, 17 October 2015, ), the Progressive Conservative party asks for an explanation on how “clear and credible information about the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on health, environment, and water can be obtained without hydraulic fracturing occurring in New Brunswick.”
It’s amazing that educated people would ask such a nonsensical question. When confronting a high-risk situation only a fool would ignore the experiences of others who have faced and studied those risks.
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.
New Brunswickers who are looking for the facts about shale gas are not getting them from the current political debate. They are often being deliberately misled or else are confused by politicians who don’t understand the issues, themselves. And they are definitely missing out on critical information.