0 Gas fracking: do we understand the potential health consequences?

UNEP has just released a new bulletin on Hydrological fracturing (fracking). The document introduces the topic, and then analyses it in the context of climate change and energy consumption needs.  Among the  aspects addressed there are a few very relevant for HIA and public health practitioners. There is also a bibliography for those interested in further information.

Environmental and health concerns
UG exploitation and production may have unavoidable environmental impacts (see Figure 4). Some risks result if the technology is not used adequately, but others will occur despite proper use of technology (EU, 2011). UG production has the potential to generate considerable GHG emissions, can strain water resources, result in water contamination, may have negative impacts on public health (through air and soil contaminants; noise pollution), on biodiversity (through land clearance), food supply (through competition for land and water resources), as well as on soil (pollution, crusting). The sections below further outline the potential environmental and health impacts

Risk on public health

When occurring in densely populated areas, UG production raises several specific threats to well-being. The most direct concern is the risk of explosion from the construction of new pipelines (Rahm, 2011). Other consequences have a slower onset, such as release of toxic substances into air, soil and water. In Texas, emissions from shale gas operations are being checked for contaminants after blood and urine samples taken from household residents near shale wells revealed that toluene was present in 65% of those tested and xylene present in 53% (Rahm 2011). Both of these chemicals are commonly present in fracking fluid and known for being toxic. The biocide substances which are also contained in fracking fluid, and may be released during surface water leaks, can lead to serious damage to the surrounding habitat (IEA, 2012).
More common nuisances include noise pollution, primarily associated with drilling and fracking (which is a non-stop operation over several weeks), but also from truck transport (Rahm, 2011).
Fracturing fluid consists of large amounts of water mixed with chemicals and sand. In most countries the chemicals used in fracking fluid are considered trade secrets (Zoback et al., 2010). If companies are not required to publicly disclose the full list of chemicals used, assessing potential short- and long-term impacts on public health will be difficult. Colborn and others (2011) compiled a list of products (about 1000) used in fracking fluid. They carried out literature review on 353 chemicals and found that "more than 75% of the chemicals could affect the skin, eyes, and other sensory organs, and the respiratory and gastrointestinal systems. Approximately 40–50% could affect the brain/nervous system, immune and cardiovascular systems, and the kidneys; 37% could affect the endocrine system; and 25% could cause cancer and mutations." (Colborn et al., 2011).
Nonylphenol, for example, which is commonly used in fracking fluid, mimics estrogen, and can cause the feminization of fish, even at concentrations not detected by normal monitoring of the fluid (NYS-WRI, 2011). The consequence of the feminization of fish is an imbalance between male and female populations, resulting in a deficit of fertilization and potentially leading to a rapid decline of these fish populations.

Detail: Gas fracking: do we understand the potential health consequences?

0 Health must be central to climate action

This is the declaration prepared by health and medical organisations during the COP18.  The declaration can be supported by Organisations and Individuals.

Health and medical organisations from around the world are calling for the protection and promotion of health to be made the one of the central priorities of global and national policy responses to climate change.

The protection of health and welfare is one of the central rationales for reducing emissions in Article One of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Article Four requires all countries to consider the health implications of climate adaptation and mitigation. Yet health is being overlooked in the development of responses to climate change, and its importance undervalued by policymakers, business and the media.

Human health and wellbeing is a basic human right and contributes to economic and social development. It is fundamentally dependent on stable, functioning ecosystems and a healthy biosphere.  These foundations for health are at risk from climate change and ecological degradation.

Health as a driver for mitigation and adaptation

The impact of climate change on health is one of the most significant measures of harm associated with our warming planet. Protecting health is therefore one of the most important motivations for climate action.

Climate change is affecting human health in multiple ways: both direct – through extreme weather events, food and water insecurity and infectious diseases – and indirect – through economic instability, migration and as a driver of conflict.
The risks to health from climate change are very large and will affect all populations, but particularly children, women and poorer people and those in developing nations.  Urgent and sustained emissions reductions as well as effective adaptation are needed.
Climate action can deliver many benefits to health worldwide. Reducing fossil fuel consumption simultaneously improves air quality and improves public health.  Shifting to cleaner, safer, low carbon energy systems will save millions of lives each year.  Moving to more active lifestyles and expansion of and access to public transport systems can improve health through increased physical activity and reduced air pollution.  Improving insulation in homes and buildings can protect people from extreme temperatures and reduce energy consumption. All of these changes will provide significant economic savings. Climate action that recognises these benefits can improve the health of individuals and communities, support resilient and sustainable development, and improve global equity.

What we seek from climate action

Recognising health in all policies and strengthening health systems globally can advance human rights and help create safe, resilient, adaptable, and sustainable communities.   

We call for:

1.       The health impacts of climate change to be taken into account domestically and globally

•Health impacts and co-benefits to be fully evaluated, costed and reflected in all domestic, regional and global climate decisions on both mitigation and adaptation;
•Health and environmental costs to be reflected in corporate and national accounts;
•Assessment of loss and damage from climate change to include impacts on human health, wellbeing and community resilience, as well as impacts to health care infrastructure and systems;

2.       Investment in climate mitigation and adaptation to be significantly increased on a rapid timescale

•Priority given to decarbonisation of national and global energy supplies;
•Cessation of fossil fuel subsidies globally and greater funding for renewable and clean technologies;
•Funding for programs to support and protect health in vulnerable countries to be significantly increased;
•Investment in adaptation and mitigation programs that can demonstrate health benefits to be substantially increased;    

3.       The health sector and the community to be engaged and informed on climate action

•The health sector to be engaged and included in the processes of designing and leading climate mitigation and adaptation worldwide;
• National and global education programs to increase public awareness of the health effects of climate change and promote the health co-benefits of low carbon pathways; and
•More inclusive consultation processes in global climate negotiations to reflect the views of young people, women and indigenous people.

Our Future

Human health is profoundly threatened by our global failure to halt emissions growth and curb climate change. As representatives of health communities around the world, we argue that strategies to achieve rapid and sustained emissions reductions and protect health must be implemented in a time frame to avert further loss and damage.
We recognise that this will require exceptional courage and leadership from our political, business and civil society leaders, including the health sector; acceptance from the global community about the threats to health posed by our current path; and a willingness to act to realise the many benefits of creating low carbon, healthy, sustainable and resilient societies.

Detail: Health must be central to climate action

0 Towards noiseless turbines?

At the IAIA conference in Portugal we hosted a session on Community Responses to New Energy Sources. There were very interesting case studies of wind turbine projects in Australia and in the Netherlands (see the posts of May on this blog).

Wind energy is a constantly growing source of alternative energy worldwide and while it is accepted as green alternative to the usual coal and fossil fuels, local communities are not so supportive of wind parks in their backyard. Indeed deciding where to place wind turbines is a major challenge in the decision making process and one of the complaints often made by local inhabitants is noise.

A recent study reviews recent advances in the area of noise pollution from wind turbines. “To date, there have been many different noise control studies. While there are many different sources of noise, the main one is aerodynamic noise. The largest contributor to aerodynamic noise comes from the trailing edge of wind turbine blades. The aim of this paper is to critically analyse and compare the different methods currently being implemented and investigated to reduce noise production from wind turbines, with a focus on the noise generated from the trailing edge.”

The discussion is not over and community acceptance of new energy will remain a topic at the next conference in Calgary

Detail: Towards noiseless turbines?