Into the Mouths of Babes
I prefer peace. But if trouble must come, let it come in my time, so that my children can live in peace.
~Thomas Paine
Canadian Awaits Verdict On Fracking Nightmare
Frackers are only obliged to monitor their gaseous waste stream for hydrogen sulfide and small hydrocarbons like methane, ethane and propane. The more toxic "BTEXs" - benzene, toluene, xylene and their aldehydes - go unreported.
By David Kattenburg, February 6, 2014, for Deutsche Welle
Diana Daunheimer still finds it hard to believe that big mining companies have started fracking practically in her backyard. The Canadian vegetable grower sees a court case as her only way out.
Diana Daunheimer and her husband Derek were a typical young couple pursuing their dreams. In the summer of 2002, they moved into a rambling old house just outside the village of Didsbury, an hour's drive north of Calgary, Alberta, in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains [Mountain View County].
With high hopes of raising kids and living the good life, Diana, 26 years old at the time, decided to grow organic produce on their 12 acres of land. High-end restaurants in Calgary and Banff would be sure customers. The short growing season would be a challenge, but the land had been free of chemicals since 1962. "I've always been a country girl at heart," Daunheimer recalls, "and wanted to raise our children in a peaceful, healthy and holistic way."
Things began well. By 2004, Daunheimer's greens, herbs and vegetables were certified transitional. Full certification would follow a year later. But in 2008, a nastier crop sprouted around her property: oil drilling rigs pounding at the earth, gouging out deep wells.
Each of the oil wells would be hydraulically fractured. By 2010 there were six in total, all within 500 meters (1,600 feet) of her home. At the height of activity, her home was pounded by deafening noise, bathed in light, and shrouded in diesel fumes and fracking gases.
Fracking since the 50s
Industry spokespeople are quick to point out that hydraulic fracturing has been around for years. Fracking - some prefer to call it "fracing" - was first practiced in Canada in the 1950s and decades earlier in the US. Over the past 20 years, however, something entirely new has become the norm: "Multistage, horizontal fracking" using a cocktail of chemicals to flush out stubborn oil and gas deposits.
"This fracking/ drilling facility is near Daunheimer's home"
... All this drilling and fracking generates lots of noise and occasionally earth tremors. Most critically, before a fracked well can enter production, the millions of liters of chemical-laced fluid pumped into it - now contaminated with a host of minerals (some possibly radioactive) - must then be flushed out and discarded. "Produced water" is disposed of in a variety of ways. Alberta farmers are paid to have frack fluids and muds spread on their fields. Some allege that waste frack fluids are spread on public roads.
A forgotten issue
Fracking activity in the foothills of southern Alberta has attracted far less media attention than oil sands mining around Fort McMurray - a place that reminds Canadian folk-rock icon Neil Young of Hiroshima. But fracking statistics are mind-boggling: According to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), the quasi-judicial agency mandated to ensure that Alberta's energy industry is environmentally safe and sustainable, Alberta frackers have drilled a quarter of a million wells since the mid-1990s, and 260,000 kilometers (160,000 miles) of vertical and horizontal shaft. That's five times the circumference of the earth. And in the course of preparing their wells for production, in 2012, the frackers burned off or vented 978 million cubic meters of gases into the atmosphere - a shade less than the annual natural gas consumption in Sweden.
A frack job goes on night and day. Dec. 2012 - Mountain View County, Alberta
Flared or vented frack gases are a great worry for Albertans like Diana Daunheimer. Frackers are only obliged to monitor their gaseous waste stream for hydrogen sulfide and small hydrocarbons like methane, ethane and propane. The more toxic "BTEXs" - benzene, toluene, xylene and their aldehydes - go unreported. Daunheimer and her two children have suffered a host of health problems that may well have arisen from exposure to these.
So have members of a group called Cochrane Area Under Siege, just outside the town of Cochrane, 20 minutes north of Calgary. In response to their complaints, Alberta Health Services compared medical billing records in the Cochrane district with a similar area where fracking is less intense. The results of the study were inconclusive.
Dr. Richard Musto, medical officer of health for Alberta Health Services, admits that local health complaints are "biologically plausible" and that further investigation is warranted. He also indicates that further studies would benefit from a more complete disclosure of the content of airborne emissions from southern Alberta's fracking operations.
Into the courts
Well-water quality is another concern for Albertans living in the vicinity of fracking operations. Leaks arise in the layers of casing surrounding well bores, critics argue, and gases and liquids can migrate through these into the surrounding water table.
Rosebud, Alberta landowner Jessica Ernst launched a $33 million (22 million euros) lawsuit against energy giant Encana Energy, the Alberta provincial government and the Alberta Energy Regulator for an incident of this sort, in which fracked methane migrated into her well water, rendering it flammable (an Alberta provincial judge ruled late last year that the AER is immune from prosecution).
Meanwhile, Diana Daunheimer has launched a suit of her own. She is seeking $13 million from the Calgary-based Bellatrix Corporation for violating provincial fracking guidelines and endangering her family's health. Her allegations have yet to be proven in court.
Daunheimer's claim has rattled nerves. Late last year, the company that fracked around her home sold out to Bellatrix Exploration. A week later, Bellatrix offered Daunheimer $50,000 to settle out-of-court. She declined. Bellatrix's defense statement is due in court on February 7. ... more.
Angle Energy Being Acquired By Calgary Company
The deal, which is worth about $576 million, will transfer all of Angle’s assets to Bellatrix.
By Kevin Vink, Nov 12, 2013, Mountain View Gazette
Angle Energy Inc., an oil and gas company with many well sites in the region and across the province, has recently signed on to an agreement that will allow Bellatrix Exploration, a West Central Alberta-based petroleum company, to acquire it and its assets, according to officials.
The deal, which is worth about $576 million, will transfer all of Angle’s assets to Bellatrix. Both companies run their operations out of Calgary.
Bellatrix officials also said the company has recently formed a $240-million joint venture with South Korea's Troika Resources Private Equity Fund to drill and develop oil and gas properties in the Ferrier-Cardium play of West Central Alberta.
The Korean fund will contribute $120 million to the joint venture, which is expected to drill 63 wells in the play by the end of 2014.
Angle CEO Gregg Fischbuch said the move will benefit shareholders, and is the best option that was available to the company. ... more.
Workshop Defines Oil And Cattle Concerns
The call to reduce emissions follows a report from the Alberta Research Council that claims the practice of flaring petroleum byproducts with no commercial value was damaging surrounding land. The report, which was released in December, said nearly 250 chemicals are released into the environment through the practice of flaring. It also identified benzene, a known cancer-causing agent, as one chemical released through flaring.
By Alberta Beef Magazine, 1997
The provincial government and the petroleum and cattle industries got together in April to discuss what can be done to reduce the potential impacts of petroleum development on beef production.
Reducing emissions from oil and gas developments and identifying any possible risks from petroleum production to cattle health emerged as priorities at the workshop. The workshop is one of a number of efforts that have occurred since the release of the Alberta Cattle Commission report on the impact of petroleum development last year.
The call to reduce emissions follows a report from the Alberta Research Council that claims the practice of flaring petroleum byproducts with no commercial value was damaging surrounding land. The report, which was released in December, said nearly 250 chemicals are released into the environment through the practice of flaring. It also identified benzene, a known cancer-causing agent, as one chemical released through flaring.
The study went on to say the land surrounding Alberta’s 5,300 flare sites is as polluted as any urban industrial site. It didn’t, however, comment on whether the pollution in the flaring areas was having any health effects on nearby cattle.
Petroleum industry representatives have acknowledged the need to reduce emissions and to reduce the practice of flaring. They say they are making progress on the issue but the problem isn’t going to be solved overnight.
The ACC’s report also acknowledges that inefficient flaring is the, "largest source of volatile contaminants that may effect cattle."
The issue of whether petroleum development is affecting cattle health remains unanswered. The ACC’s report says there has been little research done on the effects of petroleum contamination on cattle and that the amount of contaminants reaching cattle has never been measured. It called for more investigation on such topics as:
- cattle exposed to high concentrations of chemicals during disasters like blowouts
- the effect of low level contamination on the reproductive and immune systems in cattle
- expanded monitoring of ground water to cover situations where petroleum development may affect drinking water.
Partial transcript from: Health scare over backyard fracking in Canada; Locals sue fracking companies in Alberta
By David Kattenburg, February 5, 2014 for Deutsche Welle - World in Progress
... "More are speaking out, and not just about their personal health.
Where are we Howard, what is this? Howard Hawkwood is another member of Cochrane Area Under Siege.
'Right now we're looking at a cow that has just passed away, during the evening, and I don't know why she died.'
Photo: David Kattenburg - Green Planet Monitor
18 of his cows have now died, with over a hundred fracked wells surrounding his property, there's no doubt in Hawkwood's mind what's killing his cattle.
'It is the oil and gas industry, they are responsible for all this stuff, and I'm just tired with the blatant attitude that the oil executives, the presidents, and the shareholders of these companies have towards the common people of Canada and Alberta, actually I'm appalled.'" ... more.
Gas Flaring Health Study Shelved
Alberta Health and Wellness, which had originally budgeted $2 million over two years for the human-health component, says now it’s not necessary.
Spokesman David Dear says the department already spends a considerable amount every year studying the effects of oilfield emissions on the public.
... The research has shown no health risk to the public from oilfield emissions, he noted.
By Mark Lowey - Business Edge, Published: January 24, 2002 - Vol. 2, No. 4
An Alberta-led $19.3-million western Canada study into the health effects of oilfield gas flaring on people and livestock has run short of money – and the human health portion has been shelved.
Alberta will be taking a huge step backward in trying to resolve the flaring issue if money isn’t found to complete the three years of research, including the human health work, says Tee Guidotti, co-chair of the study’s science advisory panel.
“The issue will resurface, there’s no question about it,” said Guidotti, a former University of Alberta scientist and now a professor at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. “The whole history of this type of study in Alberta has been one of dodging the problem and having it come back to bite them.”
The study is being managed, independent of government and industry, by the not-for-profit Western Interprovincial Scientific Studies Association.
It expects to make an announcement as early as this week on the study’s funding shortfall.
When the Alberta government announced the study more than a year ago, it said the research would finally provide some answers to a controversy that has raged in the province for 40 years.
Many rural landowners – including convicted northern Alberta oilfield saboteur Wiebo Ludwig – blame flaring for causing health problems in people and livestock. The complaints range from flu-like symptoms to spontaneous abortions and cancer.
Studies have shown that flaring – the burning of unwanted or uneconomical natural gas – releases low concentrations of hundreds of chemical compounds, many of them toxic and some cancer-causing.
The oil and gas industry has always insisted there is no scientific research that proves flaring harms people or livestock.
The Western Canada Study on Animal and Human Health Effects Associated with Exposure to Emissions from Oil and Natural Gas Field Facilities was supposed to provide some answers.
Guidotti said the work done so far has been “world class.”
It compares the productivity and disease resistance of beef cattle herds in areas where flaring occurs to the health of herds where there are no oilfield emissions.
The research, although preliminary, looks likely to answer the question of whether flaring is causing a widespread health problem affecting beef cattle in Alberta and other western provinces, Guidotti said.
But researchers still require about $8.3 million over two years to analyse the information they’re collecting and gather air-monitoring data for the study areas.
Alberta Environment says it has already contributed $11 million toward the animal-health research.
The department has asked the petroleum industry and the other provinces to put some money on the table. “We’ve put a lot of resources into it already,” said Alberta Environment spokesman Mark Cooper. “It would be a horrible shame if we’re not able to complete it.”
The department has asked the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the regulatory Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, and British Columbia and Saskatchewan to come up with funding. B.C. had earlier contributed $20,000, but the other stakeholders have yet to put any money in.
Alberta oil and gas companies have voluntarily reduced flaring from oilfield batteries – small facilities that separate liquids from oil and gas – by 38 per cent since 1996. But that still leaves well over one billion cubic metres of gas flared and vented (released unburned) across the province each year.
David Pryce, manager of environment and operations for CAPP, says it intends to make up part of the study’s $8.3-million shortfall.
“It’s a multi-province-sponsored project, so we’d be looking to (governments) to review what further funding they’re prepared to put into this,” he said.
If government is contemplating new policy or regulations on flaring because of concerns about impacts on human health, “then that component of the study should be going forward as well,” Pryce said.
But Alberta Health and Wellness, which had originally budgeted $2 million over two years for the human-health component, says now it’s not necessary.
Spokesman David Dear says the department already spends a considerable amount every year studying the effects of oilfield emissions on the public.
Alberta Health contributed one-third of a recent $2-million study on oilsands emissions in the Fort McMurray area, Dear said. Suncor and Syncrude paid the rest.
The department also is contributing $180,000 toward an ongoing study with industry of refinery and other industrial emissions in Fort Saskatchewan east of Edmonton.
Alberta Health’s experts “are quite confident that the information we’re getting from (those studies) is excellent,” he said.
The research has shown no health risk to the public from oilfield emissions, he noted.
Dear said that if the Western Canada study’s animal-health findings do show any cause for concern, then Alberta Health would reconsider doing a follow-up study on human health.
Even if the animal health portion is completed, some farmers, ranchers and environmentalists are sure to question its results.
Rocky Mountain House veterinarian and environmentalist Martha Kostuch, a longtime critic of flaring, said the study’s scientists rejected the advice from an expert committee on how to design the research.
As a result, the work on beef cattle won’t include any laboratory tests on the animals as they’re being exposed to flaring emissions, she said.
“If they don’t find effects, (all it means is) they don’t know whether there would have been effects if you had been doing acute monitoring,” Kostuch said.
But science adviser Guidotti insists the advisory committee’s input was considered, although not all of it was incorporated in the study.
And while he’s confident the research will help answer questions about flaring’s impact on beef cattle, he stressed that without doing the human-health component, “the issue of human health effects is still wide open.”
Determinants Of Airborne Benzene Concentrations In Rural Areas Of Western Canada
Our results suggest that there is a detectable impact of primary oil and gas industry on quality of rural air.
By Igor Burstyn, Xiaoqing (Isabelle) You, Nicola Cherry, Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan
Department of Public Health Sciences, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta., Canada, Community and Occupational Medicine Program, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, The University of Alberta, 13-103E Clinical Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alta., Canada
Received 2 November 2006; received in revised form 1 June 2007; accepted 9 June 2007
Abstract
This study estimated the level and determinants of airborne benzene concentrations in rural western Canada.
A multisite, multi-month unbalanced two-factorial design was used to collect air samples at 1206 fixed sites across a geographic area associated with primary oil and gas industry in Canadian provinces of Alberta, north-eastern British Columbia, and central and southern Saskatchewan from April 2001 to December 2002.
Benzene concentrations integrated over 1 calendar month were determined using passive organic vapour monitors. Linear mixed effects models were applied to identify the determinants of airborne benzene concentrations, in particular the proximity to oil and gas facilities.
The observed geometric mean of benzene concentrations was 158 ngm3, with large geometric standard deviation: 4.9. Benzene concentrations showed a seasonal variation with maxima in winter and minima in summer.
Emissions from oil well (within 2 km) and compressor influenced monthly airborne benzene concentrations. However, in our study, being located in the general area of a gas plant seems to be the most important in determining monthly airborne benzene concentrations.
These findings support the need for investigation of the impact of oil and gas industry on quality of rural air.
... This project is the only large-scale study into determinants of environmental benzene concentrations in rural area with diverse and numerous primary oil and gas industry.
Our results suggest that there is a detectable impact of primary oil and gas industry on quality of rural air.
Given the recognized toxicity of benzene, any possible human exposures due to modifiable sources, as appears to be the case when oil and gas infrastructure intermingles with farmland, should be carefully investigated with a view towards conducting rigorous risk assessment. ... more.
Flaring of Gas Waste on Rise
Low prices blamed as Alberta companies flare or vent more gas
By Dan Healing, Calgary Herald September 28, 2012
Low natural gas prices and a boom in oil drilling in 2011 led to an additional five billion cubic feet of solution gas being burned or vented in Alberta, a report shows.
The volume of wasted gas increased 22 per cent in 2011 to nearly 28 billion cubic feet from 23 billion in 2010, the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board said in a yearly report released this week.
... Severson-Baker said there are also possible new health issues arising because of the popularity of hydraulic fracture stimulating or 'fracking' wells, where water or other liquids and substances are injected under high pressure to break up the tight formation underground and allow oil and gas to flow.
He said he’s heard from landowners concerned that fracked wells may be emitting substances into the solution gas stream that are dangerous or prevent complete combustion in the flare stack.... more.
The New Threat From Shale
The total volume of flared and vented gas in Alberta is huge, too. The Alberta Energy Regulator found that the volumes in 2012 rose 24.6% over the previous year, to 34.8 billion cubic feet.
By Eric Reguly, January 30, 2014, The Globe and Mail
... The flaring alone is a massive problem. The shale revolution, as it is billed, is turning the U.S. Midwest, Texas and other states into pincushions, as drilling rigs arrive by the hundreds. (Residents in many states own the mineral rights to their properties, so they have an overwhelming incentive to invite drillers onto their land in exchange for a cut of production revenues.) Satellite imagery makes it impossible to hide the flaring, much to the drillers’ embarrassment.
A 2013 report by Ceres, an American non-profit group that works with investors to encourage sustainable economies, estimated that in the two years up to last May, the amount of natural gas flared in North Dakota alone grew 2.5 times, to 266 million cubic feet a day, thrusting the United States into the top 10 flaring countries, and putting it in the same club as enviro-rogues Russia and Nigeria. In 2012 alone, the North Dakota flaring emitted as much GHG as a million cars, Ceres said.
Gas venting and seeping (which is also known as fugitive emissions) from the shale gas wells are serious problems, too, because they release pure methane into the atmosphere. Burning those emissions would emit carbon dioxide. The Cornell study determined that, over the lifetime of an average well, 3.6% to 7.9% of total production is emitted as methane. That range, the authors said, would make a shale gas well up to twice as damaging as a conventional one. ... more.
Angle Energy Moves to Quell Fracking Fears
'We take the concerns very seriously. Certainly there has been some very high profile stories in the news,' said Heather Christie-Burns, Angle Energy’s president and chief operating officer
By Johnnie Bachusky, Mountain View Gazette, June 12, 2012
With a goal to counter increasing media attention on the potential dangers of horizontal fracking, Calgary-based Angle Energy Inc. resumed its own aggressive public relations campaign last week with an open house and dinner for dozens of county residents and stakeholders.
“We take the concerns very seriously. Certainly there has been some very high profile stories in the news,” said Heather Christie-Burns, Angle Energy’s president and chief operating officer who attended the June 5 open house at the Didsbury Agricultural Society Grounds.
“We are hoping for questions. Our goal is to understand whatever everyone is wondering, what they are thinking. The press is certainly a big driver of information that causes concerns and questions.”
Angle Energy, a publicly traded company whose operations are solely in Alberta, has been conducting horizontal fracking operations west and north of Didsbury in what is known as the Harmattan field since 2005. There are currently up to 70 well sites in this area and about 130 kilometres of pipeline.
Company representatives made a fracking presentation to Didsbury town council in April. Last week it was time to reach out to residents and stakeholders, many of them currently leasing out sites to Angle for horizontal fracking operations, which generate the same amount of production as eight old-style vertical sites while leaving less of a surface foot print.
And while the open house and dinner attracted up to 75 area residents the mood was more upbeat than one of concern over fracking, a controversial hydraulic process that blasts open tight oil, gas and coal formations with high pressurized amounts of water, sand and chemical to release methane or light oil.
“There are no fears. It is safe. When there are that many miles down it is not hurting us,” said county resident Margaret Hosegood, who recently had four wells drilled on her property and attended the open house last week. “They can come and punch all the wells they want to on there and frack them.”
The issue came to full public attention last January when an oil well blowout from a hydraulic fracking operation on a farmer’s field west of Innisfail resulted in the messy release of fracturing fluid and some crude oil. Alberta’s Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) was forced to launch an investigation.
“Fracking isn’t new. It has just hit the media more. We are trying to explain ourselves on how we are protecting ground water and what procedures we follow to make sure we follow regulations,” said Graham Cormack, Angle’s vice president of operations, who was at last week’s open house.
“Because always, the fear is the unknown. That is human nature – fear of the unknown.
When people think of fracturing, they don’t know about it. They have fear about it. We want people to know what fracturing is all about.” ... more.
Area Family Suing Oil Company For $13 Million
A Didsbury-area family is suing Angle Energy Incorporated for more than $13,000,000, according to court documents.
By Dan Singleton, December 17, 2013, Mountain View Gazette
... The 11-page statement of claim filed on Dec. 6 contends that on "numerous occasions throughout the company’s five year operating history, occurring in close proximity to the Daunheimer residence, reasonable care was not exercised by Angle’s employees and executives alike, resulting in chronic and acute operations that have harmed the plaintiff’s property, personal health, mental well being, financial status, personal safety and compromised the environment they rely on to exist.
"Any reasonable person in our situation would have been damaged by Angle Energy’s breach in duty. Angle Energy continues to breach this duty by causing and continuing to allow hazardous chemicals to remain in the ground surrounding and beneath the plaintiff’s property and in the Daunheimer residence water supply and allow the continual emissions from venting and instrument operations."
The statement outlines particular allegations of company negligence, including the following:
• failure to comply with the directives pertaining to
public notifications and concerns.
• shoddy, incomplete or entirely absent record
keeping that violates the minimum data requirements
and other numerous mandates set out in the
regulatory directives.
• non-compliant venting that put the health and
safety of the plaintiff and her family at risk.
• non-compliant incineration of waste gases that
put the health and safety of the Daunheimer family
at risk.
• refusal to provide public documentation and
request for meetings when the plaintiff frequently
requested.
• not using reasonable care during operations to
prevent contamination of the source aquifer for the
Daunheimer property.
• Not using reasonable care in protecting well sites
and associated above ground piping from strikes.
• failure to conduct reasonably diligent daily
inspections and take appropriate measures to mitigate
deficiencies on various well sites.
• failure to report known releases to the environment.
The suit also contends that "in most of the dealings the plaintiff had with Angle they demonstrated disgraceful conduct and engaged in reckless and intentional acts of exclusion and transgressions when interacting with the plaintiff. Company executives and employees operated outside of the natural boundary of civilized decency and this caused distress and emotional harm to the Daunheimer family.” ... more.
Children's talent to endure stems from their ignorance of alternatives.
~Maya Angelou
Reckless Pollution of Our Environment
By Robert Griebel MD, December 31, 2013, Letter to the Editor Mountain View Gazette
Barry Brace’s letter of Dec. 17 “No explosions in fracturing process” would have us believe that fracturing our underground geology with chemical laced solutions is a perfectly benign and harmless procedure.
I would refer him therefore, to an article recently published in the medical journal Endocrinology, the prestigious journal of the American Endocrine Society.
This study reports that a group of American scientists analyzed surface and groundwater samples from Garfield County, Colo.–a hotbed of fracking activity–and compared these to samples drawn from a region with little such activity.
Water samples near the fracking sites contained ‘moderate to high’ levels of 12 different chemicals used in fracking that have known endocrine disrupting activity and have been shown to play a role in causing infertility, cancer, birth defects and other diseases.
Children are particularly sensitive to the effects of these chemicals. Samples taken from the Colorado River, which collects drainage from fracking sites also had moderate levels of these same chemicals. By comparison little activity was found in sites remote from drilling.
More than 700 chemicals are used in the fracking process, and the health dangers of many of these are well established. I believe it is naïve and irresponsible to think that tons of these chemicals can be pumped into our environment and that there will not be eventual contamination of our underground and surface water reservoirs.
The fact that apparently so little contamination has been found in Alberta may well indicate a lack of sufficiently broad and rigorous monitoring.
My concern is that our children and grandchildren will pay the price for this reckless pollution of our environment.
Canada’s Environment Commissioner On Frac’ing and Chemical Non-Disclosure
By Ernst Environmental Services: Brief Review of Threats to Canada's Groundwater from the Oil and Gas Industry's Methane Migration and Hydraulic Fracturing
"February 8, 2013, a final report by Canada’s Environment Commissioner, Mr. Scott Vaughan, was tabled in Parliament.
The report includes a bracing chapter on hydraulic fracturing, critical highlights include:
'On average, fracturing a shale gas well requires 11 million litres of water. The chemicals make up between 0.5 percent and 2 percent of the fluid, or between 55,000 and 220,000 litres of chemicals per well. ...
Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999), Health Canada and Environment Canada share the mandate for assessing whether substances used in Canada are toxic to human health or the environment. According to CEPA 1999, a substance is toxic if it is entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that
(a) have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity,
(b) constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends, or
(c) constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.
CEPA 1999 requires Environment Canada and Health Canada to develop control measures for substances determined to be toxic or capable of becoming toxic.
Environment Canada also maintains the National Pollutant Release Inventory, which, as stated earlier, is a legislated, publicly accessible inventory of pollutant releases, disposals, and transfers for recycling. In addition, under the Pest Control Products Act, Health canada has the mandate to prevent unacceptable risks to people and the environment from the use of pest control products, such as biocides and antimicrobials. These chemicals are also used in fracturing fluid. ...
We asked Environment Canada for an update on the status of its review of the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) that the Department said was under way in October 2011. According to Environment Canada, the NPRI is a “major starting point for identifying and monitoring sources of pollution in Canada and in developing indicators for the quality of our air, land, and water. NPRI information also helps to determine if regulatory or other action is necessary to ensure pollution reductions, and if so, the form that action should take.”
The Minister of the Environment has discretion regarding industry reporting requirements.
Environment Canada told us that oil and gas exploration and drilling activities are exempt from reporting to the NPRI. According to Environment Canada, in order to consider whether changes to NPRI reporting requirements are warranted, the Department needs to know specifically what substances are used for hydraulic fracturing as well as their volumes and concentrations.
Environment Canada and Health Canada told us that while a partial list of substances that are likely to be used in hydraulic fracturing has been developed, a complete list of substances used in Canada is not known.
Environment Canada informed us that it has initiated internal discussions on the NPRI review, but that official stakeholder engagement and consultations have not been initiated. Both Environment Canada and Health Canada told us that they consider hydraulic fracturing to be an emerging global issue that they are beginning to investigate. Environment Canada told us that it expects to complete the review and determine whether changes are warranted by March 2014.
We asked Environment Canada and Health Canada what they have done to identify and assess the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing substances. They told us that under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999), they are able to consider new information and, if appropriate, assess and manage identified risks to protect human health and the environment.
The departments informed us that they are following a three-step approach for responding to emerging issues, such as hydraulic fracturing:
identifying the substances being used,
assessing risks to the environment or human health, and
establishing control measures to manage the risks posed by substances determined to be toxic or capable of becoming toxic.
Environment Canada and Health Canada indicated that they are currently gathering information to develop a path forward for hydraulic fracturing substances, which may or may not include proceeding with risk assessments and risk management.
The departments told us that they are considering a voluntary survey of companies engaged in hydraulic fracturing to gather information on the substances and how they are being used. ...
The departments have developed a partial list of more than 800 substances known to be used or suspected to be used for hydraulic fracturing in the United states and parts of Canada. Officials told us that although the departments have not carried out risk assessments on the use of these substances for hydraulic fracturing, 33 of the substances on the list had previously been assessed as toxic in other applications (for example, benzene in gasoline). ...
However, the departments have not yet decided whether to carry out risk assessments of the substances when used for hydraulic fracturing.
The departments informed us that a risk assessment typically requires a minimum of 18 months per substance, assuming that sufficient data is available and the necessary methodologies exist.
Under CEPA 1999, Environment Canada and Health canada are required to develop control measures for substances determined to be toxic or capable of becoming toxic.
Control measures, such as regulations and pollution prevention plans, are intended to reduce the risks associated with the use and release of toxic substances.
Environment Canada informed us that it takes about three years to establish control measures. ...
Environment Canada and Health Canada told us that they are still working toward gaining a better understanding of the substances contained in hydraulic fracturing fluid and the risks associated with the hydraulic fracturing process.'" ... more.
Fundamental Chemical Toxicology with Exposure Related to Shale Gas Development (2013) - David Brown, ScD
“The major problem is the mixture problem. And I can’t overemphasize how serious that is in trying to understand what’s going on. … The presence of one agent can increase the toxicity of another agent by several fold.” ... more.
Researchers Find Cancer Risks Double When Two Carcinogens Present at 'Safe' Levels
By John Davis, June 28, 2013, Texas Tech Today
... “The majority of cancers are caused by environmental influences,” Singh said.
“Only about 5 to 10 percent of cancers are due to genetic predisposition.
Science has looked at these chemicals, such as arsenic, and tested them in a lab to find the amounts that may cause cancer. But that’s just a single chemical in a single test.
In the real world, we are getting exposed to many chemicals at once.” ... more.
Cancer Explosion Forecast for Next 20 Years
GENEVA, Switzerland, February 4, 2014 (ENS)
"Cancer cases are forecast to rise over the next 20 years. (Photo by Mathew Crawford)"Cancer is now the world’s biggest killer, and the number of cases will explode over the next 20 years, warns a new global report compiled by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an agency of the World Health Organization.
The “World Cancer Report,” released on World Cancer Day, finds that there were 8.2 million deaths from cancer in 2012. It predicts that cancer cases worldwide will rise by 75 percent and reach close to 25 million over next two decades.
“The rise of cancer worldwide is a major obstacle to human development and well-being,” says IARC Director Dr. Christopher Wild.
“These new figures and projections send a strong signal that immediate action is needed to confront this human disaster, which touches every community worldwide, without exception.” ... more.
Partial transcript from: Health scare over backyard fracking in Canada; Locals sue fracking companies in Alberta
By David Kattenburg, February 5, 2014, for Deutsche Welle
"Walking up the driveway of a rural homestead an hour north of Calgary, Alberta, the oil-rich foothills of Canada's western rockies. I'm here to visit Diana Daunheimer, a 39-year old mother of 2. Daunheimer is suing the Calgary based Bellatrix Corporation for violating provincial fracking guidelines and endangering her family's health. Her allegations have yet to be proven in court.
'They fractured this particular well with liquid propane and assorted frack fluids, and then they had to burn off their liquid propane that came up to surface. So, for 20 days, there were 2 incinerators there that just lit up the landscape, the house all night was just bathed in orange light, just undulating and roaring.'
Between 2008 and 2010, 6 oil wells were fracked within 500 metres of Diana's home, diesel and frac fumes shrouded her house.
In 2010 health problems cropped up.
'Unfortunately, when my daughter was 7 she developed a tumour in her neck.
My son has a chronic throat clearing, longstanding irritated sinus infections.
Myself, I kept getting the flu, I had these ferocious headaches.
Low and behold I haven't had any since they've shut in all their venting.'
... Sitting in her home in Didsbury, Alberta, Diana Daunheimer isn't waiting for the Alberta Government to launch a study of its own, she's going to court.
'This was the non-compliance flare, or incinerator, off the site to the northwest of us, there's my legal file right here.'
Her $13 million dollar claim ... has rattled nerves. Late last year, the company that fracked around her home sold out to Bellatrix Exploration. A week later, Bellatrix offered Daunheimer $50,000 dollars to settle out of court, she declined.
Victory in court will be small compensation for the anguish her family has suffered - and Daunheimer predicts the worst is yet to come.
'The frack fluid that's left in ground is under constant pressure, it's going to find its way into the upper echelon of our environment at some point and time. There's just no long term benefit to this.'
Diana Daunheimer takes each day as it comes, it's a juggling act."
Listen to full audio clip: Health scare over backyard fracking in Canada; Locals sue fracking companies in Alberta - Feb. 5, 2014
Photo: David Kattenburg
Mommy, farmer, scientist, researcher, very limited to this scope of hydraulic fracturing right now, but it has been a very, very steep learning curve - but one that I feel has been necessary.
~Diana Daunheimer