Hydraulic Fracturing Independent Review
and Public Consultation
Verschuren Centre
CapeBreton University
1250 Grand Lake Road
Sydney, NS B1P 6L2
April 14, 2014
Dear Dr. Wheeler and Panel Members,
Responsible Energy Action (REA) is an education and action group centred in Antigonish, concerned with how Nova Scotians obtain and use energy. REA is a broad-based community group representing all ages and walks of life: we are rural and urban academics, business people, physicians, students, researchers, and people working in the agricultural, forestry, tourism, and cultural sectors. We all share a vision of a prosperous Nova Scotia not dependant on fossil fuels for its energy needs. REA appreciates this opportunity to make a submission to you concerning hydraulic fracturing. Specifically, we will discuss the importance of Treaty in thinking about resource extraction, and the possible socio-economic effects of the unconventional gas industry.
WHO WE ARE:
Responsible Energy Action formed in late 2011 as citizens came together out of concern at the prospect of development of the onshore petroleumindustry in Nova Scotia, in particular the development adjacent to Lake Ainslie. We quickly realized that our common concerns reached beyond this inciting issue, to include energy sustainability more broadly: we want to see the province move toward more sustainable energy sources, and actively promote ways to reduce energy consumption in homes, businesses, and industry. REA liaises and works with other local groups with related interests: The Antigonish Harbour Watershed Association, Sustainable Antigonish, The Antigonish Powering Down Committee, Antigonish Idle No More, and the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) Committee of the Municipality of the County of Antigonish. REA came to an understanding early on that Nova Scotia is part of unceded Mi’kmaq territory, and that we all have a duty tosee that the Peace and Friendship Treaties are implemented.
REA comprises 78 members from Antigonish and Guysborough, with a dedicated working group of about a dozen that has met twice a month since January 2012, when we set out to learn as much as we could about hydraulic fracturing, which was our initial focus. We invited speakers (environmentalists, industry people, academics and people knowledgeable about Indigenous rights and the Treaties); held film nights; and conducted self-education sessions similar to the kitchen-table meetings used during the early days of the Antigonish Movement. We learned about the science and technology of hydraulic fracturing; the regulatory environment in Nova Scotia; health issues associated with methane off-gassing and the leakage of chemicals used in the onshore oil and gas industry; corporate structures in the resource extraction industry; the government’s duty to consult with Indigenous Peoples before licensing resource extraction companies, the nature of the various eighteenth-century Treatiesas Peace and Friendship Treaties in which no territory was ever ceded,and other issues. We acknowledge that in all these areas of interest, we are not experts, but we have become informed laypeople actively engaged in an ongoing learning process.
REA calls itself an action group because we believe it is important to communicate to the public, government, and industry the results of our study, reflection, and discussions about energy. Accordingly, we have circulated petitions calling for bans or moratoria on hydraulic fracturing, the importation of wastewater into Nova Scotia, and the role that the development of offshore gas plays in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. We have met three times with our provincial MLAs; written to our Antigonish Town and County councillors; met with our County Council and its Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) Committee; written letters and articles in local media; maintained a website ( and have held twelve public events such as guest speaker events and film showings. Usually we see about seventy people attending our public events. People show their engagement with the issue of hydraulic fracturing by actively participating in these sessions with questions and comments.
In addition to academic sources, we will refer to reports from the media, environmental and labour groups, and governments. A detailed list of references follows this submission.
Despite the brief time frame provided by the Review for individuals and groups to make submissions, we welcome this opportunity to share our concerns, especially as the scope of the Review includes a study of social and economic impacts of hydraulic fracturing, as well as an added process of outreach and dialogue with the Mi’kmaq Chiefs and community. Most REA members are non-Aboriginal, so we feel it is important to remind fellow guests on Mi’kmaq territory of the important responsibility we have to uphold the Treaties.
THE TREATIES:
Among the first formal agreements between the Indigenous Peoples of what is now Canada and British colonizers were the “Peace and Friendship Treaties,” beginning with 1725, wherein both parties agreed to a more amicable relationship. This and later agreements also included the availability of unlimited fishing and hunting as Indigenous people thought necessary, that there should be no restrictions on their integration into Canadian society, that they must maintain a peaceful relationship with the government, and that in face of judicial court, Indigenous People would receive the equal punishment as any other statesmen. The Peace and Friendship Treaties were intended to end all hostility between the British Crown andIndigenous Peoples. In the case of the Mi’kmaq and the British Crown, subsequent peace and friendship treaties were signed in 1752, and 1760/61. In no case was Mi’kmaq territory ceded to the Crown.
Over the past 500 years, conflict has arisen over the European desire to exploit natural resources. In the case of natural gas in Nova Scotia, companies seek permission from provincial governments to extracta resource from unceded territory. The federal government has a duty “to enable First Nations, Inuit, and Metis to obtain full recognition of their rights under treaties or as the original inhabitants of what is now Canada. Treaties are constitutionally protected, mutually binding, agreements” (Canadian Encyclopedia). Supreme Court decisions that affirm Indigenous rights to resources and lands must be heeded. The federal government is responsible to ensure that the Peace and Friendship Treaties of 1725, 1752, and 1760/61 are adhered to, and Indigenous rights upheld.
It is evident that efforts at education about the treaties must continue in Nova Scotia. To introduce hydraulic fracturing without full and meaningful consultation with the Mi’kmaq would be to break agreements that havebeen made at the national level, and affirmed at the international level.
U.N. DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES:
After dragging their heels for four years, the Canadian government in 2010 signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Many of its forty-six articles are applicable to the possible introduction of fracking in Nova Scotia. Article 19indicates that “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous Peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them” (United Nations, 2008, p. 8). In the past, this “duty to consult” has often been complied with only at a minimal level: typically, sending a brief letter to local Band Councils stating what a resource extraction company intends to do. In REA’s opinion, this does not constitute meaningful consultation (Responsible Energy Action, 2012). Perhaps your panel’s extended outreach work with Mi’kmaq Chiefs and community members will serve as a model for better future consultation processes in Nova Scotia.
In Article 28 of the Declaration, the UN states that any land, territories, and/or resources that are abused without the consent of the Indigenous Peoples must be fully compensated in either a replacement of what was taken or monetary compensation. Finally, article 29 says “Indigenous People have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programmes for Indigenous Peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination” (United Nations, 2008, p. 11).
The Crown’s duty to consult with the Mi’kmaq before introducing a new resource extraction industry on their territory is clear. So is the duty to compensate for any abuse of territory or resources, and the duty to conserve and protect the environment. Consultations with Indigenous Peoples must embody integrity and authenticity, with an understanding of the effects of colonialism on leadership. Consultation must be broad-based; include voices at the grassroots; and take into account the historical context of state silencing and punishment to those who have spoken out.
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE:
Many environmental concerns are linked to hydraulic fracturing: the industry’s use of huge amounts of water, the potential for highway spills of wastewater as occurred in PEI in 2007 and New Brunswick in 2009, communication between well bores, methane leaks into the atmosphere (contributing to climate change),unsatisfactory industry practices for disposing of wastewater, etc. Many unexpected problems and issues appear only after some time has elapsed, as we have seen in Kennetcook, where naturally-occurring radioactive materials (NORMS) were discovered only after produced water had been sitting in exposed ponds for years. Your panel will undoubtedly read many submissions centered on these concerns. The potential impacts of these environmental problems on the Mi’kmaq way of life, and the quality of life of all Nova Scotians, is alarming.
It is useful to remember the precautionary approach. In 1992 the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development’s Rio Declaration on Environment and Developmentoutlinedtwenty-seven principles by which member countries can be mindful of the environment as well as the methods they use to introduce development. “In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” (United Nations, 1992, principle 15). Only with an increased effort at meaningful, respectful communication between the municipal, provincial and federal governments and the Mi’kmaq, will it be possible for all levels of government to discern the environmental impacts as well as the social and economic changes that would take place if hydraulic fracturing is permitted in Nova Scotia. REA urges the use of the precautionary approach: What’s the rush? Is it worth the risk?
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONCERNS:
Across Canada and many parts of the world, the practice of hydraulic fracturing has been on the rise in the wake of new combinations of technology in the past decade:high-volume slickwater hydraulic fracturing with multiple horizontal well bores. Advocates have pointed to the potential for economic stimulation and job creation in areas where it is practiced. However, the panel should consider whether the benefits in this sector will be great enough to offset the sacrifices in terms of human health and the environment. These have been well-documented. In the areas of the social and economic consequences of unconventional gas mining, on the other hand, new scholarship, particularly in Canadian contexts, is only beginning to emerge. In addition to peer-reviewed studies in these areas, the testimonials of groups and individuals who have voiced their apprehensions and experiences should be taken into account. They serve as examples, and indeed warnings, of the social and economic risks of fracking. A Corporate Research Associates poll released in April 2013 indicated that 53% of Nova Scotians oppose fracking, even if stringent regulations were in place (Alberstat, 2013). Demonstrations in New Brunswick and at the Canso causeway have already revealed a significant opposition to fracking, by both grassroots Mi’kmaq peoples and non-Natives.
ECONOMIC COSTS:
In the absence of closely examined cases in Canada, we must turn to studies of settings in the United States. Emerging studies have shown that fracking projects rarely come close to approaching the promised economic benefits. For example, fracking in the Marcellus shale formation, located mostly in the geographical area of Pennsylvania, will take $73.5 million in taxes out of the pockets of Pennsylvanians in 2014, which will be directed towards subsidization of the project (Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, 2013). While this may not be the course of action taken by the Nova Scotian government, the factors in the industry leading to the need for subsidies (such as high start-up costs and unstable price of natural gas) must be taken into consideration. Pennsylvania’s economy, unlike Nova Scotia’s, is currently burgeoning, and as a result, may be better equipped to cope with the significant costs associated with the introductory stages of hydraulic fracturing.
Costs to counties or towns are not exempt from this trend. Expenditures by municipalities where the unconventional gas (UG) industry exists are on the rise, 300% in one case, due to “street construction/repair/paving, construction of and upgrades to water and sewer systems, land acquisition, and increases to solid waste facilities” (Ecosystem Research Group, 2008, p. 37). An examination of the Pennsylvania municipalities affected by the Marcellus shale projects showed that 28% of municipalities observed an increase in their expenditures, compared to only 18% experiencing reduced expenditures (Marcellus Shale Education and Training Center, 2011). In November 2013, municipalities in Nova Scotia passed a resolution supporting “a province-wide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing until provincial and federal reviews have been completed that include extensive public consultation and full consideration of the potential human and environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing”(Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities, 2013). It is worth noting that the UNSM also called for “dialogue between First Nations, federal, provincial and municipal governments on the impacts of hydraulic fracturing.” REA sees this step as essential.
EMPLOYMENT:
There are many economic benefits claimed by the UG industry. Even more prevalent are the economic issues to which it can give rise, for example, the creation of a significant income disparity between “industry-related jobs and other employment sectors,” particularly in rural areas (Ecosystem Research Group, 2008, p. 24). Not only does this produce a flight from these other sectors, but it has also led to a rise in cost of living due to localized inflation in areas where hydraulic fracturing mining is occurring.
Once again, with the current economic downswing in Nova Scotia, it seems impetuous to lift the Ministerial hold on issuing new licenses for fracking. In a 2014 report concerning the economic well-being of Nova Scotia, produced by a panel not dissimilar to your own, immediate action resulting in economic growth was called for, but not at risk of environmental degradation. Further, a study undertaken on behalf of that Commission concluded that "There is a widely held belief that some natural resources cannot be developed in an environmentally safe manner and even the strictest regulations will not overcome public resistance to the development of natural resources such as shale gas" (Nova Scotia Commission on Building Our New Economy, 2014, p. 222).
Perhaps the most attractive argument for bringing hydraulic fracturing to Nova Scotia, especially given the current employment environment present in our province, is the claim of a job influx. Out-migration fromNova Scotia has increased in recent history, largely due to the pull of employment in the prairie provinces. However, peer-reviewed studies have shown that often figures associated with employment in the UG industry are inflated, especially when reported in industry-funded studies. Jannette M. Barth (2013) examines a report outlining the effects of the Marcellus shale deposit for the various affected American states. In one instance, it was found that industry over-reported the number of jobs by over 40,000 employment opportunities. This has been seen in New York State as well, where projected job creation was inflated tenfold, from 6,656 to 62,620 (Food & Water Watch, 2011, p. 1).
REA questions not only the quantity of jobs projected, but also their quality. The “boom and bust” tendencies associated with the resource extraction industry are concerning. According to a report from Deloitte (2013), a projected 21.3 full-time employment (FTE) jobs would be created per well. The majority of these jobs would be created during the drilling phase, which lasts approximately 4-6 months. For the remainder of the project, which lasts as long as gas remains, only 1.72 FTE jobs are created (p. 59).
SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES:
Hydraulic fracturing may promise small benefits in the realms of economic growth and employment, albeit far from those claimed by its advocates; however, when we examine emerging scholarship and materials pertaining to the social ramifications of hydraulic fracturing, there are few positives to draw upon. REA’s focus on these aspects stems from its nature as a community-based and -led group of people, who want to protect themselves, their neighbours, and their Indigenous hosts on Mi’kmaki, from an industry which may not consider the small-scale societal consequences of its practices. While such a perspective may be based less on scholarship than are the economic, health, and environmental perspectives, which have been more thoroughly studied, we believe it is of equal importance to examine, for the possible consequences could come to exert themselves on the lives of Nova Scotians every day.