Saturday

13th Aug 2022

Opinion

Fracking lobby calls the tune on commission shale-gas panel

  • Water pollution is one of the feared side-effects of fracking (Photo: Bijoy Mohan)

2015 is a big year for climate in Europe: the UN talks in Paris, this December; the implementation of the EU’s 2030 climate targets; mapping out the Energy Union.

Judging by the European Commission’s public statements, one would think the EU was firmly on its way to transforming our energy system towards efficient and renewable energy.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

But in reality, its recently-established advisory group for the evaluation of shale gas development is opening the back door to this harmful and polluting technology across Europe, despite massive public opposition.

Hydraulic fracturing or fracking involves the extraction of shale-gas from the ground using a pressurized liquid made of water, sand, and chemicals. It has disastrous consequences for public health and the environment - such as water contamination and air pollution - and can even trigger earthquakes. Scientists have said fracking is more damaging to the climate than coal-burning.

A 2013 European barometer survey found that 74 percent of Europeans would be concerned if a shale gas project came to their area, while only 9 percent of Europeans think that unconventional fossil fuel production should be prioritised, likely to do with the inherently destructive extraction technique called high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”.

Yet the commission has put in place a new industry-dominated advisory group called the European Science and Technology Network on Unconventional Hydrocarbon Extraction. It’s tasked with assessing on-going projects across Europe, as well as the appropriateness of new technologies. The aim is to not just to assess them but to produce a “prioritisation of the most attractive” technologies. In short, to explore how fracking can be rolled out across Europe.

What makes this even more worrying is that the majority of non-European Commission members of the network either work directly for the fracking industry (40 percent) or have financial links with industry (33 percent), including academics and research institutions who have worked closely with industry on pro-facking studies.

Fewer than 10 percent of the members represent civil society, despite the commission’s aim to have a “fair and balanced exchange of ideas”.

It has also been revealed that many members, including Shell, Cuadrilla, Total, ExxonMobil and GDF Suez, successfully lobbied against stronger fracturing regulations and safety measures at the EU level, either directly or via their lobby groups (many of whom are also members).

In addition, the chairs of the working groups are all proponents of fracking, including the UK’s leading shale gas exploration company, Cudarilla.

The Polish chair, Grzegorz Pieńkowski, a member of the Polish Geological Institute, said in a recent interview with a gas industry journal that regulators “should not overdo it with these [environmental] concerns and impose new burdens that unnecessarily increase costs” and wants the group “to demonstrate the absence of environmental risks greater than those that appear in the case of conventional hydrocarbon exploitation.”

In short, the European Commission is putting the assessment of a highly damaging and dirty technology in the hands of a group where the majority of members not only have a clear financial stake (in the expansion of fracking and in particularly technology patents), but have lobbied against public interest regulations.

Such a blatant conflict of interest doesn’t just jeopardise public safety and the environment, it also lays bare the European Commission’s cosy relationship with the fracking industry, creating what amounts to a publicly-funded lobby vehicle for the shale gas industry.

Unfortunately the problem of industry domination within the commission’s advisory system is in no way limited to this network.

Last month revealed how the coal industry had equally succeeded in weakening regulations by capturing the relevant advisory group in the commission.

And a recent investigation by the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, has shown widespread systemic industry bias, leading her to make far-reaching recommendations for reform, which the commission must respond to by 30 April.

If 2015 is really going to be the year that sets in motion an energy system transformation, as all the hyperbole from the commission suggests, then it needs to end the privileged access enjoyed by the dirty energy industry, beginning by scrapping this network.

Pascoe Sabido is a Researcher and Campaigner with Corporate Europe Observatory

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

EU must beware Beijing's new charm offensive

The EU needs to be clear eyed about China's new diplomatic charm offensive, as it's more likely driven by short-term necessity than any fundamental policy re-assessment.

Only Western unity can stop Iran hostage-diplomacy

The Belgian parliament's recent decision to ratify its prisoner-exchange treaty with Iran is a grave mistake, and one which exemplifies the many downfalls of dealing with Iran's human-rights abuses on a case-by-case basis.

Russia puts EU in nuclear-energy paradox

There's unprecedented international anxiety about the safety of Ukraine's nuclear reactors, but many European countries are also turning to nuclear power to secure energy supplies.

Column

Global hunger crisis requires more than just the Odessa deal

International donors are playing hide and seek. Instead of stepping up their assistance programmes, richer nations are cutting overseas aid, or reallocating funds from other parts of the world towards the Ukraine crisis.

Exploiting the Ukraine crisis for Big Business

From food policy to climate change, corporate lobbyists are exploiting the Ukraine crisis to try to slash legislation that gets in the way of profit. But this is only making things worse.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBConstruction workers can check wages and working conditions in 36 countries
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Canadian ministers join forces to combat harmful content online
  3. European Centre for Press and Media FreedomEuropean Anti-SLAPP Conference 2022
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers write to EU about new food labelling
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersEmerging journalists from the Nordics and Canada report the facts of the climate crisis
  6. Council of the EUEU: new rules on corporate sustainability reporting

Latest News

  1. Defying Russian bombs, Ukraine football starts 2022 season
  2. Sweden to extradite man wanted by Turkey
  3. EU must beware Beijing's new charm offensive
  4. Forest fire near Bordeaux forces over 10,000 to flee
  5. Estonia and Latvia sever China club ties
  6. Russian coal embargo kicks in, as EU energy bills surge
  7. Only Western unity can stop Iran hostage-diplomacy
  8. Kosovo PM warns of renewed conflict with Serbia

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us