• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Sir Richard
    August 28, 2014 - 14:59

    No to Fracking There are chemicals, like corrosion inhibitors and biocides in particular, that are being used in reasonably high concentrations that could potentially have adverse effects. Biocides, for example, are designed to kill bacteria—it’s not a benign material. employ toxic chemical cocktails5 that can contaminate the water and air, including methanol, benzene, naphthalene and trimethylbenzene. Many of those chemicals are listed as hazardous to human health Worksites investigations conducted at fracking sites have documented unsafe levels of silica exposure, which causes a degenerative and irreversible lung disease, due to the use of silica sand in fracking operations.6 Fracking can expose people, crops, and wildlife to harm from the fracking chemicals, as well as naturally occurring arsenic, boron, and radioactivity that can be brought back to the surface with fracking flowback fluid. Because DOGGR never regulated fracking, water quality impacts and human health impacts have gone unmeasured, but fracking shows that fracking is a human health hazard for both oil and gas field workers and people living near oil and gas fields. Notably, acidizing may involve the injection of large volumes of hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. Hydrofluoric acid is extremely toxic and exposure to it can be life threatening,Oil and gas companies are already injecting tens of thousands of gallons of hydrofluoric and other acids into wells in Western Canada. Wastewater from oil and gas development has already resulted in ground water contamination

  • Henry Jefford
    August 19, 2014 - 07:12

    I wonder what fracking would do to the water table a lot of people on this island is still using dug or drilled wells? And a lot of people don"t know what or how much this fracking will do to their water supply? I seen a program an TV of people where fracking took place ! turning on their water tap and lighting what cane out of their taps with a match! I don,t think Tumbs will core their GAS ! Those homes are time bombs with those homes built on gas tanks. ? is this the Future!

  • Robert Hiscock
    August 18, 2014 - 16:57

    People in the oilfield spell it "fraccing". Also note that the process only became "controversial" in the last couple years. I am a Newfoundlander living in Alberta. Alberta has been fraccing for decades. And the only thing that Alberta has that the rest of Canada doesn't is a vibrant economy. Go figure.

  • RANDY from the ROCK
    August 17, 2014 - 18:30

    No, I love Newfoundland and Labrador more than money.

  • Just wondering
    August 17, 2014 - 09:13

    randy if you.re not ready to join the rest of the world, then perhaps Newfoundland should try again to grow cucumbers in greenhouses.

  • Just wondering
    August 17, 2014 - 09:12

    randy if you.re not ready to join the rest of the world, then perhaps Newfoundland should try again to grow cucumbers in greenhouses.

  • just wondering
    August 17, 2014 - 06:38

    randy, soon fracking will be done all over the world when oil cannot be drilled in the conventional way. if Newfoundland is not ready to come into the modern world, then perhaps the government should go back to growing cucumbers in greenhouses. i,m sure there have been some improvements in this industry since Joey Smallwood built the first one.

  • Nichol
    August 16, 2014 - 13:17

    The answer to your question is, yes, of course we need to get in the game. And yes, it can be done safely. In the first paragraph of your opinion piece, you should clarify what 95% of the material used in fracking a well actually is. It is plain water, either fresh, or salt. Most of the other 5% is proppant, basically small granules of sand or ceramic material used to keep the fissures open. Other chemicals are used to keep the oil flowing properly, but in very small amounts in comparison, with most of these being very commonly available materials.There are so many misconceptions about fracking around, that most people do not understand that salt water can actually be used for fracking. The North Sea has many fracked wells producing today. Several companies, including Schlumberger have had large, purpose built well stimulation ships operating in this environment for years. The water used is filtered and cleaned before being discharged. The new frontier for fracking is deep water well production. The size of the off shore well stimulation (fracking) fleet has increased by 31% since 2007, with operations expanding offshore to Brazil, and Africa. The US will become a net exporter of oil and gas soon, because of fracking. There have been well publicized mistakes made in the past, which are relatively few, in comparison. People need to stop the emotion, and start looking at facts. We don't need to re-invent the wheel. The world will depend on hydrocarbons for many, many years. California has some of the most stringent environmental regulations in the world, and there is lots of fracking going on in that State. We can adapt regulation from other jurisdictions to suit our conditions, without taking years to do it. My question is, how long do we have to play this pass the buck political game, before the west coast of NL can derive some economic benefit from oil and gas exploration and production? BTW, I am neither employed, or paid by any oil company or lobby, just a retired person who knows something about the business, and is sick and tired of our Government not having the courage to take a stand. They fall all over themselves to support the offshore developments.....ever notice there are no protests about that exploration? Does anyone think for a moment that there is no risk inherent in deep, cold water drilling?

  • Dennis
    August 16, 2014 - 12:58

    I agree. This Review has the potential to be a circus if you let every Tom, Dick and Harry showing up and presenting to the panel what they learned on the internet searches, from watching "Promised Land" or from an anti-fracking "educational" session. Only expose the scientific panel to original scientific evidence and not the sensationalized propaganda and conjecture that those that already have their minds made up constantly bring forth. If you don't want a circus, don't invite the clowns.