Fracking Risks Compared to Asbestos and Other Environmental

[Oscar]

Fracking Risks Compared to Asbestos and Other Environmental and Health Dangers

[ http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/28/fracking ... e-85909581 ]

Anastasia Pantsios | November 28, 2014 12:12 pm | Comments

While the title of the new British government report Innovation: Managing Risk, Not Avoiding It [ http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/ ] sounds cheery, the news it contained about fracking, among other environmentally dubious technologies, was anything but.

The annual report of the government chief scientific advisor featured a lot of “better living through science”-type happy talk about scientific and technological advances, but warned, “Competition is becoming ever more fierce, vital global resources are dwindling and environmental problems are mounting, making innovation an ever-present challenge.” [ https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... idence.pdf ]

It’s a case that University of Sussex professor Andy Stirling makes strongly in a chapter entitled “Making Choices in the Face of Uncertainty: Strengthening Innovation Democracy,” using fracking and the fossil fuel industry in general as an example. [ http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/co ... pollution/ ]

“History presents plenty of examples of innovation trajectories that later proved to be problematic—for instance, involving asbestos, benzene, thalidomide, dioxins, lead in petrol, tobacco, many pesticides, mercury, chlorine and endocrine-disrupting compounds, as well as CFCs, high-sulphur fuels and fossil fuels in general,” he writes. “In all these and many other cases, delayed recognition of adverse effects incurred not only serious environmental or health impacts, but massive expense and reductions in competitiveness for firms and economies persisting in the wrong path. Innovations reinforcing fossil fuel energy strategies—such as hydraulic fracturing—arguably offer a contemporary prospective example.”

Saying that “a rich array of renewable energy technologies [http://ecowatch.com/business/renewables/ ] is available for addressing climate change in a diversity of radically different distributed or centralized ways,” [ http://ecowatch.com/climate-change-news/ ] he points out that “One of the main obstacles lies in high-profile self-fulfilling assertions to the contrary, including by authoritative policy figures. Amongst the most potent of these political obstructions are claims from partisan interests—such as incumbent nuclear or fossil fuel industries—that there is no alternative to their favoured innovations and policies.”

He says, “It is remarkable how many major global industries are building around once marginal technologies like wind turbines, ecological farming, super energy-efficient buildings or green chemistry. All of these owe key elements in their pioneering origins to early development by grassroots social movements.”

Yet earlier this year, one of those “authoritative policy figures,” British prime minister David Cameron, said that the country was “going all out for shale,” and he has proved it with aggressive actions strongly opposed by environmental groups.

A section in the report “High Level Case Study: Hydraulic Fracking” featured contrasting views—the “industry perspective,” the “NGO perspective” and the “science and engineering perspective”—that present a mixed and cautionary picture.

Not surprisingly, the industry perspective is as enthusiastic as Cameron’s.

MORE:

[ http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/28/fracking ... e-85909581 ]