Chief Medical Officer of Health’s

Recommendations Concerning Shale Gas Development in New Brunswick

September, 2012

CLICK HERE for the full report.

Click HERE and HERE for reactions to the report.

CLICK HERE for an interview with New Brunswick Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Eilish Cleary.

Excerpt from the Conclusions:

The shale gas industry is in its infancy in this province. If the industry is developed to its full potential, it has the ability to greatly positively and negatively impact the health of the people in New Brunswick, and so proper controls and mechanisms to protect and monitor health must be put in place to reduce the risk of spoiling the potential benefits from economic gains through adverse health outcomes. Action should be taken well in advance of any proposed expansion. Current infrastructure, capacity, processes and legislation are not adequate to meet the needs. The funding of these recommendations will not be insignificant; however there may be opportunity to have much of the costs absorbed by the industry.

Some of the key findings are summarized below and include a lack of participation from Public Health in other jurisdictions’ regulatory regimes where industry exists; lack of information needed to assess toxicity risks; lack of accurate exposure and health data; lack of standard methods for preventing and mitigating social impacts; lack of health status studies before and during gas development; and a lack of systematic health impact assessments. A lack of information about the extent, locations and rate of development makes it very difficult to forecast local effects of specific projects and to assess the potential for cumulative effects over time.

Taken together, the social and physical environments are the main influences on population health. In general, the lower a person’s (or community’s) social and economic position is, the worse their health, so addressing the social determinants of health is fundamental to achieving health equity. Government policy and law are the forces that provide an opportunity to achieve health equity and so these recommendations to government include ways to support the equitable and just distribution of the social and economic resources and conditions that give rise to the social determinants of health.

Although the public has voiced a preoccupation with health concerns, there has been a notable lack of participation by Public Health agencies in many of the ongoing initiatives to regulate the industry elsewhere. This may be due to a general lack of understanding about the potential impacts on health, little precedent to learn from, or plans that could be followed, a narrowing of the scope of what “health” means, and/or a belief that engineering controls and regulations can mitigate all of the potential impacts. Systematic and early inclusion of trained expertise would ensure that a public health lens was brought to bear which would certainly help identify and solve many potential issues. This complementary but targeted focus on human health is essential not only for shale gas but for most industrial development.

The public discussion on shale gas has been dominated to date by chemical toxicity concerns and has focused on water and hydraulic fracturing chemicals; while these are important, there is a risk of overlooking other potentially more problematic considerations, such as community health issues and the potential for physical injury. The scientific and medical literature has not widely reported or studied factors such as potential impacts to community health, mental health and socioeconomic wellbeing but rather also has been focused on issues surrounding potential environmental toxicants. The unbalanced discussion highlights the need for open and informed sharing of information and in particular good data to be produced through routine surveillance and targeted research. As many jurisdictions across Canada, the US, Europe and the world are facing similar concerns, significant advantages could be garnered by collaborating with others.

Potential for physical injury, both at the work site itself and in the vicinity of development is significant and warrants careful planning. Local government and community involvement in planning and development could help prevent morbidity and mortality:   for example, to reduce the potential for increased truck traffic accidents that could impact residents near development areas. Ensuring that there are appropriate mechanisms in place to look after workers’ and visitors’ health and safety both on and off site, and optimal emergency response capacity will also be important in reducing the consequences from physical threats.

In addition to knowledge gaps about toxicity of some of the known chemicals, this issue is greatly complicated because it can be difficult simply to identify which chemicals are in use at each location. Solid and liquid wastes for each gas well site are variable and not always fully characterized. As a result, a generic toxicological profile of wastes cannot be prepared. In order to address this gap, solid and liquid wastes for each gas well site should be characterized so that toxicological information can be obtained for exposure risk assessments and that appropriate waste treatment systems are used in all cases.