A Freedom of Information Request has forced Government to publish a report on the risks of fracking to rural communities, economies and the environment. The report is a draft literature review, and a covering note emphasises that it is incomplete and doesn’t take the UK regulatory context into account.
Nonetheless, some of the report’s findings, based in part on empirical evidence from the existing shale gas industry in the US, are interesting.
Crucially the report finds that the impacts on ecosystems and water sources are ‘uncertain’.
It also notes that fracking could result in fossil fuels currently being burned in the UK being displaced and burned elsewhere. This risks a global increase in emissions, making climate change worse.
Given that it isn’t clear how a growing fracking industry can be compatible with the need to keep emissions and climate change within globally safe limits, and that it could put nature at risk, the RSPB does not support fracking and would rather see money invested in renewable energy technologies that deliver genuine emissions reductions.
Much like the ‘Are we fit to frack?’ reports that RSPB helped to publish last year, this document draws on existing evidence from the US shale industry and finds that there could be risks to the natural environment.
If the industry is to expand, then any sensible Government will take the uncertainty over risks to the natural environment seriously. They should err on the side of caution and introduce further strict regulations to protect nature and wildlife.
The ‘Are we fit to frack?’ reports lay out a number of recommendations for stronger regulation, including ruling out fracking within or beneath protected areas. We’d like to see all ten of these recommendations fully adopted before we could be convinced that fracking could be safe in the short term, and that would still not deal with our concerns about the risks to the climate.
Matt Williams, Assistant Warden, RSPB Snape.