Dear Verschuren Centre for Sustainability in Energy and the Environment at Cape Breton University,
I've been reading the discussion papers that have been posted online and have felt they are generally well researched, unbiased, and factual until I read the most recent paper, Discussion Paper: Environmental Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing in Nova Scotia - A public participatory approach.
The negativetone of the paper is very apparent from the beginning,and even uses"wicked" problems in the introduction title (which is later explained but should be removed from the title). Most of the literature is based off opinions from public submissions, Council of Canadian Academies and provides very little factual information. In fact, the paper uses fiction in several places, especiallyby having Figure 2 in the paper.The title of this paper should be changed to "NS Public's Perception of Hydraulic Fracturing", not "Environmental Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing".I could go on about what is incorrect in this paper but I wantto focus on what was left out of this paper.
There is no mention of the positives of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing.

  • The fact that a well that takes less of an environmental footprint of a windturbine, can produce 100 times more energy.
  • The fact that you could have 10 horizontal wells that takes up the same footprint of 1 wind turbine or would require football fields of solar panels to produce the same energy.
  • The fact that New York City and places all over theworld are experiencing cleaner air quality, largely due to the switch to Natural Gas.
  • The fact that Natural Gas is one of the cleanest fuels and local, instead of relying on foreign, less efficientfuels.
  • The fact that waste water can be treated and/or reused.
  • The fact that the Natural Gas/Hydraulic Fracturing industry works hand in hand with forestry, agriculture, and tourism and that land value often increases (not decreases as suggested in this paper) (For example:Saskatchewan,Alberta and BC).
  • The fact that the well pad can be restored to it's natural state shortly after being fracture stimulated.
  • The fact that there as never been contamination of groundwater caused by the shale hydraulic fracture stimulation process (almost all contamination have been caused by drilling too close to water wells, spills on location or very poor cement jobs - the fact this is reducedto 0in Canada due to strict cement regulations, vacuum trucks on locations that clean up spills immediately and regulations that do NOT allow to drillor fracknear water wells).
  • The fact that "green" additives can be and are often used.
  • The fact that revenue from this technology is often used to thebenefit cultural and environmental initiatives.
  • The fact that this technology has been around for over 60 years. It can be done safely and it works!

I applaud the use of several forms of energy production in this province. Ibelieve natural gas (onshore andoffshore)is one form that will benefit this province greatly.
The paper discussedis a very biased, one sided paper and is notof the quality of the Verschuren Centre for Sustainability in Energy and the Environment at Cape Breton University.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at anytime.

Stephan MacLellan
Presently living:Halifax, NS,Canada
1-902-240-6508

"Nobody is interested in something you didn't do" - The Hip