SCOTLAND is a world leader with its comprehensive approach to assessing the hazards and public health implications of fracking, according to experts.
And in the first study of its type, the team at Stirling University says our “comprehensive” approach sets a precedent for other countries.
They studied how the Scottish Government analysed the potential impact of unconventional oil and gas extraction (UOGE), which includes hydraulic fracturing – fracking – for shale gas, coalbed methane extraction, and underground coal gasification.
The team compared Scotland’s approach with 14 assessments around the world, including in the US, Australia, and Germany, and found that the most extensive assessment was carried out here.
This focussed on key factors including public health, climate change and economic impact.
The report concludes: “In terms of breadth, depth and scale, this approach appears more detailed than any undertaken to date globally.”
Supporters of UOGE believe it is a major source of global energy that can boost economies and generate greater tax revenues without posing a risk to public health.
However, opponents argue it is an immediate and long-term threat to global, national and regional public health and climate, and highlight the potential for air, water and soil pollution; seismic activity; noise and radiation hazards; and risks to wellbeing and mental health.
Professor Andrew Watterson in the Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, and Dr William Dinan, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, carried out the research, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, "Public Health and Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction Including Fracking: Global Lessons from a Scottish Government Review".
Professor Watterson, head of the Occupational and Environmental Health Research Group, said: “Scotland is the only country to produce such a nation-wide assessment. The findings indicate that the Scottish Government approach was one of the most thorough, if not the most thorough, conducted globally.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel