Response to consultation - Talking "Fracking": A Consultation on Unconventional Oil and Gas

Citation

Baker K & Wood G (2017) Response to consultation - Talking "Fracking": A Consultation on Unconventional Oil and Gas. Talking "Fracking": A Consultation on Unconventional Oil and Gas Scottish Government, p. Response 288083450. https://consult.gov.scot/energy-and-climate-change-directorate/fracking-unconventional-oil-and-gas/consultation/view_respondent?show_all_questions=0&sort=submitted&order=ascending&_q__text=wood&uuId=288083450

Abstract
Answer to question 1: The evidence on the likely, and potentially significant, health impacts of fracking (where fracking sites are operational) comes largely from the USA, which has a much weaker regulatory environment than Scotland. However, should fracking be allowed in Scotland it would require significant new regulations and standards to reassure the public and other stakeholders that the mistakes made in the US would not be repeated here. Given the generally high level of scepticism amongst the public, including fears about the impact on house prices close to fracking sites, and the many concerns about the environmental and social impacts raised by stakeholder groups, this would need to be a significant undertaking involving a nationwide risk assessment of all potential sites, and so could easily become overly-burdensome and costly for SEPA. This needs to be set against the economic benefits of the likely 2% of the resource that could be economically extracted, and with this in mind the risks appear to far outweigh the limited potential economic benefits. Furthermore, given that the potential benefits of supplying fracked gas to Scottish households is minimal compared to other energy options, and that the co-benefits are minimal to non-existent, we do not support the lifting of the Scottish moratorium on fracking.

Keywords
Unconventional Oil & Gas; Scotland; Impacts; Consultation; Scottish Government;