NEW research that will determine whether fracking will be allowed out in Scotland must be conducted by independent experts and not based on findings from consultants funded by the oil and gas industry, experts have warned.
The co-author of a new paper, published today, argues that Scotland can lead the global debate on unconventional gas extraction but concerns have been raised that government agencies may not have the staff or resources to conduct a truly independent probe into safety or potential impacts on public health.
The SNP has imposed a moratorium on fracking and other controversial energy extraction methods, including a technique of burning underground coal seams and siphoning off gas, while more research including a public health impact assessment is carried out. Environmental campaigners have said allowing unconventional gas extraction risks causing contamination and harming the health of members of nearly local communities.
While a public consultation will also take place, the Scottish Government has committed to taking an "evidence-based" approach when it finally takes a decision in 2017 at the earliest.
Professor Andrew Watterson, head of the Occupational and Environment Health Research Group at Stirling University, said the research could allow Scotland to become "world leaders" in the field, with no other country carrying out a thorough nationwide assessment, but said that agencies would have to hire new staff and increase expertise.
Health Protection Scotland (HPS) has been commissioned to carry out a Public Health Impact Assessment, but the academic said that until recently, the only information it provided on its website about unconventional gas extraction was a Public Health England report he said had been widely criticised. He said that quangos, such as the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, may not have the appropriate staff with public health expertise to effectively feed into the process.
Professor Watterson added: "The majority of previous assessments have been conducted on behalf of the unconventional gas extraction (UGE) industry by paid commercial consultants. This presents a serious scientific, technical, legal, ethical and democratic challenge for governments. Communities can rarely afford to commission these assessments and may consider them biased when commissioned by vested interests.
"The challenges will be to ensure the conduct of the HIA is transparent, rigorous, complete, impartial and, whilst wide stakeholder input and information will be important, it should be demonstrably independent of all vested interests, and technically well informed.
"HPS will need to have increased its staff and expertise in the field to ensure they at least meet the standard of the extensive New York State Public Health review of fracking impacts if not exceed it. It cannot rely on the recent Scottish government expert group report on UGE as this contained no public health experts, no experts on industry practice and no independent experts on the effective regulation of UGE."
The paper, published in the health policy journal New Solutions, states that a precautionary principle should become a "lodestar" for governments deciding on whether to allow unconventional gas extraction.
It warned that some studies in America which had found no health impacts of fracking had later been found to have a conflict of interests after receiving funding from hugely profitable industries in the sector. It warned that Government agencies often had very limited resources and expertise.
Dr Will Dinan, a lecturer in communications and the paper's co-author, said: "It is vital any assessment is independent, rigorous and transparent. Hiring experts to influence planning and regulation is a well-tried tactic and structural advantage exploited by the oil and gas industry in seeking license to operate."
A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government said: "Health Protection Scotland is coordinating a Public Health Assessment on unconventional oil and gas as part of the Scottish Government’s extensive research programme. This will be an independent and critical assessment drawing on the expertise of NHS Health Scotland and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency."
An HPS spokeswoman said: “We have a wide range of public health information available on the HPS website. We make available links to reports by other organisations for information purposes only. No endorsement is expressed or implied by the presence of a link on our website.”
Asked whether the agency would be conducting new research, she replied: “HPS will be conducting a wide ranging review of existing published research. We will also be seeking views of stakeholders through targeted workshops in line with standard practice.”
A spokesman from SEPA said: “We’re providing technical expertise to Health Protection Scotland who are coordinating the Public Health Impact Assessment on unconventional oil and gas. No public health experts are currently employed by SEPA. We do not plan to hire any public health experts to carry out work on fracking/ unconventional gas. We will continue to work in partnership with Health Protection Scotland on this issue.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel