With two liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities scheduled to come online in the next two years and three more under development, British Columbia is poised to become a major exporter of gas to Asia. Well-drilling is likewise forecasted to massively increase in B.C.’s northeastern Peace River region to supply these facilities, with plans to construct dozens of pipelines to transport the increased gas volumes to the coast.
Almost all gas in B.C. these days is extracted through a process called “fracking.”
Last month, we published a study in the Canadian Journal of Public Health reviewing the results of more than 50 studies on health outcomes of people living close to this industrial activity. The results are concerning.
Fracking became widely adopted in the mid-2000s. The technique involves drilling vertically for several kilometres under fresh and saline water aquifers and then horizontally for several more kilometres. Because the gas is trapped in shale or “tight” rock formations, millions of litres of water mixed with chemicals and other substances are then forced down the well with enough pressure to produce micro-ruptures (hence, the name “fracking”) in the rock to release the gas.
These fracking chemicals can escape into the environment through spills, evaporation or leakage of wastewater. Exhaust fumes from diesel engines and gas flaring are other sources of chemical exposure.
Half of the studies included in our review focused on pregnant people and their newborns. Of these, the large majority reported harmful effects from living near these sites, including impaired fetal growth, premature birth and congenital malformations. Other studies found that living close to fracking sites may lead to a higher risk of asthma flares, heart disease, childhood cancers and overall mortality.
A number of reviewed studies showed a pattern called “dose-response” where an increase in exposure levels was associated with increasing risks of preterm birth, congenital birth defects and childhood leukemia.
Studies were also set in multiple jurisdictions across the U.S., and one each in B.C. and Alberta, suggesting the findings of harmful outcomes were not restricted to one location, a characteristic referred to as “consistency” in the scientific literature.
There was also evidence of “biological plausibility,” meaning that the observed relationship between fracking exposures and harmful health outcomes makes biological sense. At least 14 chemicals used in fracking fluid (for example, benzene) are known carcinogens.
A systematic evaluation demonstrated that of the chemicals for which toxicological data were available, 43 per cent and 40 per cent were potential reproductive and developmental toxicants, respectively. Other chemicals and substances used in fracking fluid can induce inflammation and/or disrupt hormonal activity in human cells, suggesting a number of pathways to explain the outcomes found by researchers.
In biomonitoring research, Canadian researchers have reported higher levels of fracking-implicated toxicants in the urine, hair, home tap water and air of pregnant people in northeastern B.C. living close to fracking compared to the general Canadian population. Some of these toxicants were also significantly higher in Indigenous participants compared to non-Indigenous participants.
When fracking for gas became widespread in the mid-2000s, there were no studies on human health impacts. By 2014, when the B.C. government commissioned its first and only report on human health and fracking, three-quarters of the studies in our review hadn’t even come out. A re-examination of this new knowledge and evidence by the B.C. government is clearly necessary.
The fracking industry is disproportionately located in rural and remote regions of the province that are home to many First Nations communities whose health is already compromised by structural and systemic inequities — including the over six-fold lower life expectancy of First Nations people compared to other B.C. residents recently reported by the First Nations Health Authority.
In this context, the decision to double down on the expansion of this industrial activity without taking pause to review the health evidence is especially surprising, and calls into question commitments to righting the health harms of anti-Indigenous racism and colonization highlighted in B.C.’s DRIPA legislation, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and In Plain Sight report.
The “precautionary principle” is a term in public health decision-making that elevates preventive action when there is credible evidence of significant harms to human health — even when the study quality and data remain imperfect. Applying the precautionary principle, perhaps it is time to reconsider our policy direction based on the available evidence.
Margaret McGregor is a health policy researcher and clinical associate professor with the UBC Department of Family Practice.
Ulrike Meyer is a family physician working in Dawson Creek, an area heavily impacted by fracking.
Amira Aker is a postdoctoral fellow in environmental epidemiology at the Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec and Université Laval.
Élyse Caron-Beaudoin is an assistant professor in environmental health at the University of Toronto in the Department of Health and Society.
What fracking does to us
11
0
18.04.2024
With two liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities scheduled to come online in the next two years and three more under development, British Columbia is poised to become a major exporter of gas to Asia. Well-drilling is likewise forecasted to massively increase in B.C.’s northeastern Peace River region to supply these facilities, with plans to construct dozens of pipelines to transport the increased gas volumes to the coast.
Almost all gas in B.C. these days is extracted through a process called “fracking.”
Last month, we published a study in the Canadian Journal of Public Health reviewing the results of more than 50 studies on health outcomes of people living close to this industrial activity. The results are concerning.
Fracking became widely adopted in the mid-2000s. The technique involves drilling vertically for several kilometres under fresh and saline water aquifers and then horizontally for several more kilometres. Because the gas is trapped in shale or “tight” rock formations, millions of litres of water mixed with chemicals and other substances are then forced down the well with enough pressure to produce micro-ruptures (hence, the name “fracking”) in the rock to release the gas.
These fracking chemicals can escape into the environment through spills, evaporation or leakage of........
© National Observer
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
