TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 7 °C Tuesday 18 June, 2013

Calls to exclude fossil fuel industry from all fracking research

However, the Environmental Protection Agency has said it would be unlikely that somebody with no links to the fossil fuel industry could produce a report on fracking processes.

Image: Mike Groll/AP/Press Association Images

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Agency has said that is would be unlikely that anybody commissioned to write a thorough report on fracking in Ireland would not have some knowledge or experience of the fossil fuel industries.

The statement comes after calls from environmentalists that Ireland should follow Germany and introduce a rule to exclude researchers with any links to the hydrocarbon industry from all future studies.

A spokesperson for the EPA told TheJournal.ie that she could not confirm if such a move would be considered, adding that it seemed unlikely. The matter would fall under the remit of the report commissioning body.

Last year, the EPA put out a tender to find a suitable author for a report into current knowledge about the environmental considerations and impacts of shale gas exploration and extraction, and in particular the use of hydraulic fracturing technology. It was published as the first part of a wider study in May 2012. Dr David Healy of the University of Aberdeen was chosen for the project, during which he identified potential risks to groundwater purity and tremors or earthquakes as possible environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing. The importance of well integrity and knowledge of local geology were also highlighted by his research.

Friends of the Earth has questioned the choice of author, noting that he has received funding from Total E&P UK and BG International. Dr Healy discloses this information on his staff page on the University of Aberdeen website. Although the group does not accuse Dr Healy of bias, it questions whether his impartiality can be assured.

The EPA stood behind its choice, describing Dr Healy as a “senior lecturer in a long established academic institution” who is a “balanced and thorough researcher”.

A spokesperson continued: “It could be argued that in order to respond to a research call of this nature, the report author would need to have had some sort of experience with the fossil fuel industry in order to have the necessary knowledge and background to write a thorough and balanced report.

The content of the report did not indicate any bias towards industry. It is also worth nothing that the report received a very thorough peer-review from a UCD professor.

In a statement, Dr Healy said that while he does have some research projects funded by the hydrocarbon industry, he also noted other funding sources, including national research councils and charitable bodies.

“My work is published, peer-reviewed (including the report for the EPA), and centres on improving our scientific understanding of rock fracture and fluid flow,” he continued. “There is no bias.”

A second study into fracking in Ireland is currently at the preparatory stages. The EPA has noted recent European Commission requests for tenders on related projects and is working to ensure that there is no unnecessary overlap between the two bodies. Although Friends of the Earth have called for more than €6,000 (the cost of Dr Healy’s report) to be spent on the second study, the EPA has said the budget is yet to be confirmed.

Author of pro-fracking study failed to disclose gas interests – watchdog>

EPA fracking study reveals potential impact on groundwater and earthquakes>

Everything you ever needed to know about fracking>

Read next:

Comments (17 Comments)

  • Did any of you actually read the article? It seems like you’ve just blindly picked sides so far. He’s an academic researcher who is completely open about his funding sources. That is an excellent start. Better than many irish politicians.

    The very first part of his report has identified potential problems with fracking. That’s another good sign.

    He works in a field directly relevant to fracking. Three for three.

    The fact he has won grants from the industry means they acknowledge his expertise, but winning a grant is not the same as being bankrolled. They gave him some money to do a specific piece of work. That’s what a grant is. It’s basically independent contracter work.

    The EPA got someone who seems competent and qualified to do this work and people are questioning his impartiality because he did the academic equivalent of a temp job for the industry.

    I think the guy seems legit. He’s open and honest and qualified.

    Reply
  • Yep just frack away regardless, see what happens, then complain about it

    Reply
  • Good idea but a tad unrealistic, how are we going to stop these concerns from taking over the Industry like they have done so with everything else. They simply buy everything that threatens their monopoly.

    Reply
  • If the fossil fuel industry is not to be allowed contribute then there should be no contributions from tree huggers either
    Sauce for the goose…….

    Reply
  • Do Germans bring their cars to butchers instead of car mechanics to get fixed, because the latter have links to the oil industry?

    Reply
    • False analogy. If you’re in the market for a new car one thing you’ll do is check with people who have experience of the car … either directly or through surveys.. to check if the marketing blurb on the model is also correct. You will also test drive it..and probably get an independent status check if second hand to ensure no outstanding finance..not nicked rather than taking salesmans word.

      Reply

Add New Comment