Tithe an Oireachtais An Comhchoiste um Chumarsáid, Gníomhú ar son na hAeráide agus Comhshaol Tuarascáil ón gComhchoiste maidir leis an nGrinnscrúdú Mionsonraithe ar an mBille um Thoirmeasc ar Pheitriliam i dTír Mór a Thaiscéaladh agus a Astarraingt, 2016 A leagadh faoi bhráid dhá Theach an Oireachtais 12 Aibreán 2017 Houses of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Report of the Joint Committee on the Detailed Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016 Laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas 12 April 2017 32CCAE001
172
Embed
Tithe an Oireachtais An Comhchoiste um Chumarsáid, · PDF fileTithe an Oireachtais An Comhchoiste um Chumarsáid, ... Committee Debate Tuesday, ... An Comhchoiste um...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Tithe an Oireachtais
An Comhchoiste um Chumarsáid,
Gníomhú ar son na hAeráide agus Comhshaol
Tuarascáil ón gComhchoiste
maidir leis
an nGrinnscrúdú Mionsonraithe ar
an mBille um Thoirmeasc ar Pheitriliam i dTír Mór a Thaiscéaladh
agus a Astarraingt, 2016
A leagadh faoi bhráid dhá Theach an Oireachtais 12 Aibreán 2017
Houses of the Oireachtas
Joint Committee on Communications,
Climate Action and Environment
Report of the Joint Committee
on the
Detailed Scrutiny of the
Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction
of
Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas 12 April 2017
32CCAE001
Tithe an Oireachtais
An Comhchoiste um Chumarsáid,
Gníomhú ar son na hAeráide agus Comhshaol
Tuarascáil ón gComhchoiste
maidir leis
an nGrinnscrúdú Mionsonraithe ar
an mBille um Thoirmeasc ar Pheitriliam i dTír Mór a Thaiscéaladh
agus a Astarraingt, 2016
A leagadh faoi bhráid dhá Theach an Oireachtais 12 Aibreán 2017
Houses of the Oireachtas
Joint Committee on Communications,
Climate Action and Environment
Report of the Joint Committee
on the
Detailed Scrutiny of the
Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction
of
Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas 12 April 2017
32CCAE001
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 5
1.1.3. Air Quality ....................................................................................................................................... 19
1.1.4. Impacts and Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................. 20
1.1.5. Impact Areas where Data/Experience is Inadequate ..................................................................... 21
2. Policy and legislative Scrutiny framework .................................................................................................... 23
A. Policy and Legislative Framework ........................................................................................................... 23
The Policy Issue ................................................................................................................................................ 23
Exploitation of Shale Gas .............................................................................................................................. 23
Transport Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................... 28
Rail and Road Transport ............................................................................................................................... 28
Gas Pipeline .................................................................................................................................................. 31
Gas Pipelines and Disused, Dismantled or Abandoned Railway Lines .......................................................... 32
2.1. The Policy and Legislative Context ...................................................................................................... 33
2.1.1. Prohibition in Certain European Union states ................................................................................ 34
2.1.2. England and the Shale Wealth Fund ............................................................................................... 34
2.1.5. Wales .............................................................................................................................................. 35
2.1.6. European Union .............................................................................................................................. 35
2.2. Is the Policy Issue Addressed?............................................................................................................. 36
2.3. Non Legislative Approach.................................................................................................................... 37
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 6
2.4. Government Bills ................................................................................................................................. 38
B. Financial Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 41
C. Legal Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 45
2.9. Is the Bill constitutional? ..................................................................................................................... 45
2.10. Compatibility with EU legislation and Human Rights Legislation ........................................................ 47
Appendix 1: Orders of Reference – Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment.... 59
A: Functions of the Committee – derived from Standing Orders [DSO 84A; SSO 70A] .................................... 59
B: Scope and Context of Activities of Committees (as derived from Standing Orders) [DSO 84; SSO 70] ....... 62
C: Establishment of Select Committees: Dáil Éireann Motion Thursday, 16 June 2016 .................................. 63
Committee Terms of Reference: Motion – Dáil Éireann 7 September 2016 ................................................ 64
D: Establishment of Select Committees: Seanad Éireann Motion Thursday, 21 July 2016 .............................. 65
Committee Terms of Reference: Motion – Seanad Éireann 29 September 2016 ........................................ 65
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 7
E: Functions of the Joint Committee ................................................................................................................ 66
Oversight of the Department ....................................................................................................................... 66
Public Service Management Act, 1997 ......................................................................................................... 67
Engagement with Chairmen Designate of State Bodies under the Aegis of the Department ...................... 67
Oversight of Bodies under the Aegis of the Department - Communications, Broadcasting, Postal ............ 68
Oversight of Bodies under the Aegis of the Department - Climate Action and Energy ................................ 69
Oversight of Bodies under the Aegis of the Department - Environment and Natural Resources ................ 70
Appendix 2: Statutory Functions - Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment ..... 71
Broadcasting Authority of Ireland – Accountability to the Joint Committee ............................................... 71
Proposing Members of the boards of BAI, RTÉ, and TG4 ............................................................................. 72
Chairman and Director General of RTÉ and TG4 accountable to the Joint Committee................................ 72
Media Mergers ............................................................................................................................................. 73
Conclusions of Report ...................................................................................................................................... 95
Project Governance and Stewardship ........................................................................................................ 107
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 9
Review Process of the Reports ................................................................................................................... 108
Appendix 8: Opening Statement CDM Smith ............................................................................................... 109
Statement of Mr. A. G. Hooper, Research Consortium Project Manager ...................................................... 109
Personal Statement ........................................................................................................................................ 109
Summary of the Joint Research Programme .................................................................................................. 110
Water ............................................................................................................................................................. 111
Baseline Characterisation of Air Quality ........................................................................................................ 116
Operations and Mitigation ............................................................................................................................. 117
Appendix 9: CDM Smith / Hooper Presentation ................................................................................................. 125
Appendix 10: EPA led Joint Research Programme on the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on the Environment
and Human Health .............................................................................................................................................. 141
Appendix 11: Commitee Meeting 31 January 2017 ........................................................................................... 143
Appendix 12: Second Stage Motion ................................................................................................................... 145
Appendix 13: Committee Debate Tuesday, 31 January 2017 ............................................................................. 147
Scrutiny of EU Legislative Proposals ............................................................................................................... 147
Policy Issues arising from the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016 and the EPA report
on Hydraulic Fracturing: Discussion ............................................................................................................... 148
Appendix 14: Estimated Valuation of the NW Carboniferous and Clare basins ................................................. 169
Value of Recoverable Gas ............................................................................................................................... 169
Gas Price ......................................................................................................................................................... 169
Appendix 15: Public Consultation on UGEE ........................................................................................................ 171
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 10
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 11
BROLLACH
Tharchuir an Dáil an Bille um Thoirmeasc ar Pheitriliam i dTír Mór a Thaiscéaladh agus a
Astarraingt, 2016 chuig an gcoiste an 27 Deireadh Fómhair 2016.
Tharchuir an tAire Cumarsáide, Gníomhaithe ar son na hAeráide agus Comhshaoil an Clár
Comhthaighde maidir le Tionchar an Scoilte Hiodrálaigh ar an gComhshaol agus ar Shláinte an
Duine faoi threoir na Gníomhaireachta um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil (GCC) chuig an gcoiste an 13
Nollaig 2016.
Thionóil an Comhchoiste éisteachtaí maidir leis an mBille le saineolaithe ón Roinn Cumarsáide,
Gníomhaithe ar son na hAeráide agus Comhshaoil, ón nGníomhaireacht um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil
agus óna sainchomhairleoirí – an cuibhreannas faoi threoir CDM Smith, agus thug an Comhchoiste
cuireadh do dhaoine den phobal a gcuid tuairimí a chur faoina bhráid.
Ar scór phléití an Chomhchoiste, tá roinnt conclúidí agus moltaí déanta aige a bhféadfar iad a
léamh ag deireadh na Tuarascála seo.
Tar éis breithniú a dhéanamh ar an bhfianaise go léir a cuireadh faoi bhráid an choiste, agus cé go
nglacann an coiste leis go bhféadfadh buntáistí eacnamaíocha agus méadú ar áirithiú fuinnimh
d’Éirinn teacht as cead a thabhairt do thaiscéaladh neamhghnách ola agus gáis, is é tuairim an
choiste gur tábhachtaí ná na sochair seo an priacal a bhainfeadh don chomhshaol agus do shláinte
an duine as teicneolaíocht nár baineadh mórán trialach aisti go fóill.
Braitheann an coiste anuas air sin gur dócha go mbeadh de thoradh ar infheistíocht bhreise i
saothrú breosla iontaise go laghdófaí ar infheistíocht i bhfoinsí inmharthana fuinnimh, ag féachaint
do ghealltanais na hÉireann i ndáil le maolú ar athrú aeráide.
Dá thoradh sin, tacaíonn an coiste leis an mBille, faoi réir aon leasuithe teicniúla is gá chun go
mbeidh an Bille éifeachtach.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Teachta Antoine Mac Lochlainn agus é a mholadh as an
Bille a thionscnamh, agus níl aon amhras orm ach go mbeidh dea-éifeacht ag an mBille, tar éis a
achtaithe, ar dhul chun cinn na hÉireann i dtreo an dhícharbónaithe, fad a chinnteofar nach
bhfulaingeoidh an pobal éifeacht dhochrach a d’fhéadfadh teacht as scoilteadh hiodrálach.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis na daoine agus na grúpaí go léir a ghlac páirt sa
bhreithniú a rinneamar ar an ábhar seo, lena n-áirítear iad siúd a chuir aighneachtaí faoinár
mbráid mar aon leo siúd a tháinig os comhair an Chomhchoiste.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil freisin le Comhaltaí an Chomhchoiste as a gcuid oibre fad a bhí
an Tuarascáil seo á hullmhú, agus le foireann Rúnaíocht na gCoistí agus foireann Oifig an
Chomhairleora Dlí Parlaiminte as an gcomhairle a chuireadar ar fáil don Chomhchoiste.
_____________________________
Hildegarde Naughton
Cathaoirleach (Chairman)
12 Aibreán 2017
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 12
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 13
PREFACE
The Dáil referred the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
to the committee on 27 October 2016.
The Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment referred the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) led Joint Research Programme on the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on
the Environment and Human Health to the committee on 13 December 2016.
The Joint Committee held hearings on the Bill with experts from the Department of
Communications, Climate Action and Envirornment, the Environmental Protection Agency and their
consultants - the consortium led by CDM Smith, and invited members of the public to submit their
views.
On foot of its deliberations, the Joint Committee has arrived at a number of conclusions and
recommendations which can be read at the end of this Report.
Having considered all the evidence offered, while the committee accepts that while there may be
economic advantages and enhanced energy security for Ireland in allowing unconventional oil and
gas exploration, the committee is of the view that these benefits are outweighed by the risks to
the environment and human health from an as yet relatively untried technology.
The committee also feels that further investment in exploitation of fossil fuels would in all
likelihood reduce investment in sustainable sources of energy, mindful of Ireland’s commitments in
relation to climate change mitigation.
Consequently, the committee supports the Bill, subject to any necessary technical amendments to
make the Bill effective.
I would like to thank and commend Deputy Tony McLoughlin for sponsoring the Bill, and I have no
doubt that the Bill, when enacted, will have positive effects on Ireland’s progress towards a
decarbonised society, while also ensuring that the public are not subjected to the potentially
harmful effects that may be associated with hydraulic fracturing.
I would like to thank all the individuals and groups who contributed to our consideration of this
subject, including those who made submissions as well as those who appeared before the Joint
Committee.
I wish to also thank the Members of the Joint Committee for their work in preparing this Report,
and the respective staffs of the Committee Secretariat and the Office of the Parliamentary Legal
Advisor for their advice to the Joint Committee.
_____________________________ Hildegarde Naughton
Cathaoirleach (Chairman)
12 April 2017
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 14
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 15
1. INTRODUCTION
On 27 October 2016 the Dáil referred the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of
Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016 to the Select Committee on Communications, Climate
Action and Environment.
The Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment subsequently
decided to carry out a detailed scrutiny of the Bill in accordance with Standing Orders,
before the Select Committee proceeds to Committee Stage.
The primary purpose of the Bill is to provide for a clear and unequivocal position in
relation to the exploration and extraction of petroleum from shale rock, tight sands and
coal seams in the Irish onshore and Ireland’s internal waters.
One method of unconventional gas exploration and extraction involves
… hydraulic fracturing (fracking) of low permeability rock to permit the extraction
of natural gas on a commercial scale from unconventional sources, such as shale
gas deposits, coal seams and tight sandstone.1
An illustration of this method can be found in figure 1 on page 16.
The Northwest Carboniferous Basin, an area which is believed to have potential for shale
gas exploration, spans across the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. It spans
an area that includes counties Cavan, Donegal, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon
and Sligo in Ireland2 and county Fermanagh in Northern Ireland.3
The other relevant area which is believed to have potential for shale gas exploration is
mainly situated in county Clare, along with parts of counties Cork, Kerry and Limerick
and “extends offshore as the Clare Basin”4. A map of both basins can be found in figure
2 on page 17.
During the second stage debate in Dáil Éireann on 27 October 2016 on the Prohibition of
the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016, the Minister for
Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Denis Naughten TD indicated his
strong view that the work of the Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Climate
Action and Environment in respect of the Bill would be considerably aided and advanced
by being able to consider the outcome of the Environmental Protection Agency led Joint
1 Hooper, A., Keating, D., and Olsen, R., (2016) UGEE Joint Research Programme Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) (2014-W-UGEE-1) Integrated Synthesis Report, Ireland: Environmental Protection Agency p. ix. 2 Past Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Mr. Conor Lenihan, Minister Lenihan invites applications for Onshore Petroleum Licensing Options over the Northwest Carboniferous Basin and Clare Basin. 3 EPA, (2013) Proposed Terms of Reference for EPA/DCENR/NIEA Research Programme on Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Gas Exploration & Extraction (UGEE), 2013, p.1. 4 Croker, P.F., (1995) The Clare Basin: a geological and geophysical outline. Geological Society. London. Spec. Publ. 93: 327–339
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 18
1.1. JOINT RESEARCH PROGRAMME ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF UNCONVENTIONAL GAS EXPLORATION AND EXTRACTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a contract to a consortium headed
by CDM Smith Ireland Limited in August 2014 to carry out a 24-month research
programme looking at the potential impacts on the environment and human health from
Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) projects and operations.
In November 2016, the EPA published an Integrated Synthesis Report and a series of
related reports (eleven in total) arising from the Joint Research Programme on
Environmental Impacts of UGEE.5
The scope of the Joint Research Programme was developed to address two key
questions, namely:
can UGEE projects/operations be carried out in the island of Ireland while also
protecting the environment and human health; and
what is best environmental practice in relation to UGEE projects/operations?6
In light of the questions above, the authors of the Integrated Synthesis Report concluded
that:
… many of the activities associated with UGEE projects/operations could
proceed on the island of Ireland, while protecting the environment and human
health. This should be done using the best practices identified in Final and
Summary Reports 4: Impacts and Mitigation Measures and applying the
current regulations, together with a small number of additions and
modifications that should be complemented by adequate implementation and
enforcement.7
On foot of this general conclusion, the authors of the Integrated Synthesis Report then
proceed to make several observations on some of the potential negative effects that have
been raised in relation to Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction activities. These
are discussed further below.
5 http://www.epa.ie/pubs/reports/research/ugeejointresearchprogramme/ 6 Hooper A., Keating D. and Roger Olson, Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) Joint Research Programme, Integrated Synthesis Report, EPA, 2016, p. 42. 7 Ibid, p.42.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 19
1.1.1. GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER AND ASSOCIATED ECO-SYSTEMS
The EPA notes that in a regulatory context identifying and documenting volumetric
impact is relevant. They state that the ecological impact of UGEE-related abstractions
will ultimately determine whether or not an abstraction authorisation should be granted.8
The EPA state that the bedrock aquifers in both study areas (the Northwest
Carboniferous Basin and the Clare Basin) are viable sources of water to meet demands,
at least in part. It is stated that the potential future UGEE-related abstractions would
have to be evaluated at both local and catchment levels.9
The Report acknowledges that the characterisation and knowledge of deep geological
and hydrogeological conditions represent the principal data gaps associated with both
case study areas.10
1.1.2. SEISMICITY
It is suggested that if best practice is applied it is unlikely that there will be any seismic
consequences to normal receptors.11 However, the EPA Report has identified the need for
detailed baseline monitoring as an essential requirement for any future unconventional
gas exploration and extraction.12
1.1.3. AIR QUALITY
The EPA recommends that further research into the potential cause-effect relationship of
UGEE activities and actual health outcomes in hazard analyses requires further
research.13 As the Report notes:
A review of seven jurisdictions where commercial UGEE operations are ongoing
found that, in all cases, a full baseline characterisation of air quality had not been
carried out prior to the commencement of operations. This has been highlighted as
an important information gap and recommendations for baseline studies and
extensive investigations into potential air quality impacts have been made in many
studies.14
8 Hooper A., Keating D. and Roger Olson, Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) Joint Research Programme, Integrated Synthesis Report, EPA, 2016, p. 12. 9 Ibid, pp. x-xi. 10 Ibid, p. xi. 11 Ibid, p. xi. 12 Ibid, p. xiv. 13 Ibid, p. xvi. 14 Ibid, p. xvi.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 20
1.1.4. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The Report notes that surface chemical spills and leaks would be likely to occur and
operators must be prepared with appropriate responses and mitigation measures.15
In addition the Report also notes that fluids associated with drilling and hydraulic
fracturing operations, together with natural gas constituents that are present or
released, represent potential sources of groundwater contamination if these migrate to
the near-surface environment via natural, induced or artificial pathways.16
The EPA Report highlights the following issue: accidental spills of flowback and produced
water can be expected from UGEE-related activities and, although the overall risk of
impact from transport-related spills of flowback17 and produced water is considered to be
low, these could result in an environmental impact.18
The Report notes that “one of the main areas where uncertainties are liable to remain
relates to the quantification of long-term greenhouse gas emissions”.19
15 Hooper A., Keating D. and Roger Olson, Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) Joint Research Programme, Integrated Synthesis Report, EPA, 2016, p. xvii. 16 Ibid, p. xvii. 17 Flowback is a water based solution that flows back to the surface during and after the completion of hydraulic fracturing. 18 Ibid, p. xvii. 19 Ibid, p. xvii.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 23
2. POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY FRAMEWORK
This scrutiny framework was developed by the Working Group of Committee Chairmen
for the scrutiny of private members bills by Joint Committees of the Houses of the
Oireachtas.
A. POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
THE POLICY ISSUE
EXPLOITATION OF SHALE GAS
Internationally, there has been a surge in the exploitation of shale gas by fracking.21 In
Ireland, while the extraction of shale gas on a commercial scale is not likely to occur in
the near future, a number of exploratory licenses were granted in the past. The
Geological Survey of Ireland had the following to say on the matter:
At present there is no shale gas or unconventional gas exploration and extraction
(UGEE) project/operation underway that has reached either the exploratory or
commercial drilling stage.
In Ireland, the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources
(DCENR)22 announced in February 2011 that it was offering Onshore Petroleum
Licensing Options to:
(i) Tamboran Resources PTY Ltd over 986 km² in the Northwest
Carboniferous Basin;
(ii) Lough Allen Natural Gas Company Ltd over 467 km² in the Northwest
Carboniferous Basin; and
(iii) Enegi Oil Plc over 495 km² in the Clare Basin.
These ‘options’ were valid for a period of up to a maximum of 24 months and
gave the holder the first right, exercisable at any time during the period of the
Option, to an Exploration Licence over all or part of the area covered by the
Option. The licensing options awarded were preliminary authorisations and were
designed to allow the companies assess the shale gas potential of the acreage
largely based on desktop studies of existing data. Exploration drilling, including
drilling that would involve hydraulic fracturing, was not allowed under these
21 Healy, D (2012) Hydraulic Fracturing or ‘Fracking’: A Short Summary of Current Knowledge and Potential Environmental Impacts A Small Scale Study for the Environmental Protection Agency (Ireland) under the Science, Technology, Research & Innovation for the Environment (STRIVE) Programme 2007 – 2013, Ireland: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EPA, 22 As of 23rd of July 2016, the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is known as the Department of Communications, Climate Action and the Environment.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 24
Licensing Options. Two of the three companies, which had been granted on-shore
licensing options in February 2011, have submitted applications for a follow-on
exploration licence. DCENR initially evaluated these applications, focussing on the
technical rationale underpinning the applications, along with the corporate
information provided. Where the outcome of this stage of the evaluation is
positive, further consideration of the application will then be put on hold until
after the findings of the EPA/DCENR/NIEA Research Programme have been
published. It is not proposed to consider applications for exploration
authorisations in respect of other onshore areas until this Research Programme
has concluded.23
The Committee notes that the nature of the "options" granted to two exploration
companies appears to demonstrate that no undertaking was given to them that an
exploration licence would be forthcoming. Quite the contrary, they were aware that a
moratorium was in place.
Therefore, the Committee does not believe they would have a claim that legislation that
barred the grant of a licence would contravene their legitimate expectation.
This is also relevant to CETA, which is discussed below.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Concerns raised relate to potential environmental impacts from fracking.24 Submissions
made by the public to the Joint Committee raised a number of concerns regarding
fracking. These include:
Increased risk of seismic activity;
Threats to air quality;
Threats to water quality;
Threats to public health;
Pressure on local infrastructure.
The purpose of this Bill is to provide for a clear an unequivocal prohibition on the
exploration and extraction of petroleum from shale rock, tight sands and coal seams in
the Irish onshore and Ireland’s internal waters. The Bill ensures the prohibition of any
exploration or extraction of petroleum from rock that requires additional processes to
23 Geological Survey Ireland (2017) Shale Gas in Ireland , Ireland: Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Available: http://www.gsi.ie/Shale+Gas.htm 24 Healy, D (2012) Hydraulic Fracturing or ‘Fracking’: A Short Summary of Current Knowledge and Potential Environmental Impacts A Small Scale Study for the Environmental Protection Agency (Ireland) under the Science, Technology, Research & Innovation for the Environment (STRIVE) Programme 2007 – 2013, Ireland: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 25
increase the permeability of the rock and aid in the extraction of petroleum from
lithologies, shale rock, tight sands and coal seams.25
The Joint Committee notes that there is no public policy on the activities covered by the
Bill, while there is also significant public and industry interest in the issue.
The Joint Committee also notes that Government and state agencies such as the
Petroleum Affairs Division in the Department of Communications, Climate Action and
Environment and the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) may need policy direction
from the Houses of the Oireachtas on how they will assess likely applications for
exploration.
The Joint Committee also notes that, at present, the Environmental Protection Agency
has the responsibility for the issuing of licences for the “extraction, other than offshore
extraction, of petroleum, natural gas, coal or bituminous shale”26. However, as shale
gas may not come under this definition, it appears that legislation is required to provide
guidance in the area.
Two considerations arise here:
1) whether the extraction of shale gas falls within the term "bituminous shale" as
referred to in the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960 or "bitumens"
or "oil shales" in the Minerals Development Act 1940 as amended. That would be a
matter for relevant geological experts.
2) It appears that the EPA is responsible for issuing integrated pollution licences.
Among matters in respect of which it may issue those licences are "The extraction,
other than offshore extraction, of petroleum, natural gas, coal or bituminous shale".
These relate to the emissions caused by the extraction. So, for example, if
exploration is successful, the State might grant a petroleum lease to an oil company
under s. 13 of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960, but before
the company could work the oil under the lease, it would require an integrated
pollution licence from the EPA.
Alternatively, presuming that shale oil is covered by the 1960 Act (which it may well not
be), the Minister would grant a lease for its exploitation, but the oil company would also
require an integrated pollution licence from the EPA.
25 McLoughlin., T (2016) Prohibition of Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016 Explanatory Memorandum, Ireland: Houses of the Oireachtas 26 Class 9.1, First Schedule, Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1992.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 26
If it is not covered, exploitation probably requires a licence both from the Minister under
the Minerals Development Act 1940 as amended and an integrated pollution licence from
the EPA.
The Joint Committee notes that the natural resources specified in the Bill, while focused
in the 12 counties of the Northwest Carboniferous and Clare Basins, are present
throughout the island of Ireland. The exploitation of this resource could have global
consequences, from a climate change point of view in particular, but the effects will be
most immediately and directly borne by the local communities where exploration may
take place.
The Concerned Health Professionals of New York maintain and update a compendium of
publications relating to “fracking”, with the most recent version being published in
November 2016,27 and the co-founder of the organisation, Ms. Sandra Steingraber, PhD
had the following to say in relation to health concerns:
The available evidence overwhelmingly indicates that fracking is incredibly
harmful. Scientific studies have demonstrated that drilling and fracking can
increase risk of cancer, respiratory conditions, and migraines in communities
surrounding fracking sites.28
The 4th Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that the
warming of the climate is unequivocal,29 very likely due to human activities,30 and will
very likely exceed the ability of many ecosystems to adapt.31
The Environmental Protection Agency, in its recent study, also highlighted the following
in relation to groundwater pollution:
The process of hydraulic fracturing creates cracks in the rock through which gases
can move towards the well for collection. The length of these cracks is difficult to
predict, but the assumption of a length of 300 m, with a very low probability of
500 m, is thought to be a conservative approach. If these ruptures extend into an
aquifer, then there is a possibility of gas migration and pollution of the aquifer.
This same risk is higher if the rock mass has pre-existing permeable fault zones
that are intersected by the fracked cracks, allowing more extensive pollutant
27 Concerned Health Professionals of New York & Physicians for Social Responsibility. (2016, November 17). Compendium of scientific, medical, and media findings demonstrating risks and harms of fracking (unconventional gas and oil extraction) (4th Ed.) 28 Filson, D., (2016) Doctors Release New Comprehensive Fracking Impacts Report & Deliver Over 100 Recent Studies to Governor Wolf, New York: Concerned Health Professionals of NY Available: http://concernedhealthny.org/doctors-release-new-comprehensive-fracking-impacts-report-deliver-over-100-recent-studies-to-governor-wolf/ 29 Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. eds., (2007) Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Switzerland: IPCC P.30 30 Ibid p. 37 31 Ibid p. 65
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 27
migration. The evaluation of the risk of this occurring would necessitate detailed
geological structural definition of the hydraulic fracturing site and real-time
seismic monitoring of fracturing operations.32
The Environmental Protection Agency, also in its recent study, identified a number of
data gaps which would need further investigation if Unconventional Gas Exploration and
Extraction activities were to be permitted in Ireland, and the study noted the following in
that regard:
The characterisation and knowledge of deep geological and hydrogeological
conditions represent the principal data gaps associated with both case study
areas. Specific gaps in the hydrogeological knowledge of the two study areas
relate to potential deep groundwater flow, deep water quality and hydraulic
connectivity between unconventional gas target formations and shallow
receptors. In the context of prospective UGEE activity, structural geological
characterisation would have to undergo further and more detailed geological
investigation, including deep drilling and borehole geophysical logging.
Identification of faulting would benefit from detailed surface geophysical
survey work. Deep hydrogeological characterisation would equally benefit
from investigative work involving drilling, hydraulic testing, sampling and
monitoring of new wells to depths of several hundred metres.33
Consequently, the Joint Committee believes that there is a sufficient evidence base that
warrants the introduction of a prohibition of this nature.
32 Hooper, A., Keating, D., and Olsen, R., (2016) UGEE Joint Research Programme Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) (2014-W-UGEE-1) Integrated Synthesis Report, Ireland: Environmental Protection Agency, p. 41 33 Hooper A., Keating D. and Roger Olson, Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction (UGEE) Joint Research Programme, Integrated Synthesis Report, EPA, 2016, p. 11.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 28
TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
If parties partaking in Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction activities, if it is
permitted, are successful in extracting gas from, in particular, the Northwest
Carboniferous Basin, this resource will need to be transported from the area.
The Joint Committee also notes that the output of such operations, i.e. oil or gas, could
create safety issues while they are being transported, while also placing extra pressures
on the transportation infrastrucure in the region.
Oil and gas may be transported by either:
pipeline
rail
road
sea
Sea transportation would not appear to be feasible in this case, the other options are
examined below.
RAIL AND ROAD TRANSPORT
It appears to the Joint Committee that rail or road would be the only viable options in
this instance.
However, the use of road transportation would greatly increase the number of heavy
vehicles on existing roads, which would lead to increased carbon emissions, and traffic
conjestion on the limited road infrastructure in the region.
Alternatively, long tank trains, of which the largest in Ireland are 27 containers in
length,34 which would need to travel around the country in order for their contents to be
refined and distributed.
Neither of these options are desirable as, on the one hand carbon emissions may
increase35, but on the other hand there are risks in relation to the transportation of
fracked resources by tank trains.
For instance, a train that was “transporting crude oil from a large shale deposit in North
Dakota known as the Bakken field”,36 derailed and exploded in Lac-Mégantic in Quebec,
34 Journal of the Irish Railway Record Society, October 2016, Vol. 26, No. 191, p. 190. 35 Rail freight, particularly for bulky goods, could remove considerable numbers of trucks from the road network which would reduce congestion, in turn leading to environmental benefits such as reductions in noise and air pollution. Road is estimated to be around 30% more expensive than rail per tonne km in the transportation of biomass over 100km and around 45% more expensive over 200km given the economies of scale associated with rail. Furthermore, rail freight has less impact on the environment than road freight: rail is estimated to emit 22.8 grams CO2 per tonne km vs. 123.1 grams CO2 per tonne km for road. Rail Review 2016 REPORT, August 2016, Page 19 National Transport Authority https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/151116_2016_Rail_Review_Report_Complete_Online.pdf
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 29
Canada on 06 July 2013 and resulted in the deaths of 47 people. It is worth noting that
the crude oil that was being transported was the product of a fracking operation in North
Dakota.
In publishing the findings of its investigation into the incident, the Transportation Safety
Board of Canada noted that “an accident is never caused by just one factor. This report
identifies 18 distinct causes and contributing factors, many of them influencing one
another.”37 These 18 causes can be found in figure 3 on page 31.
The Joint Committee believes that this disaster, and the subsequent investigation,
illustrates the complexities involved in the regulation of Unconventional Gas Exploration
and Extraction operations.
The Joint Committee believes that if the parties partaking in Unconventional Gas
Exploration and Extraction activities, if it is to be permitted, are succesful in extracting oil
in either the Northwest Carboniferous Basin or the Clare Basin, then this resource will
need to be transported to Ireland’s only oil refinery in Whitegate in County Cork. If gas is
found, a gas refining plant would be required.
The Joint Committee notes that the nearest railway, Dublin – Sligo, is single track from
Maynooth to Sligo, ( Dublin – Longford was originally double track but changed to single
track from Clonsilla, Dublin to Longford in the 1920s). The alternative Colloney –
Claremorris – Athenry line is disused and in poor condition, other lines are abandoned
and dismantled. See the map overleaf: Railway lines in County Leitrim (including
abandoned lines).38
The Joint Committee does not feel that Ireland’s rail and road infrastructure is currently
in a position to support transportation of this nature.39
36 http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/why-was-lac-megantic-crude-oil-so-flammable-authorities-want-closer-look-at-cargo-from-train-disaster 37 http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2013/r13d0054/r13d0054-r-es.pdf 38 Source: Johnson’s Atlas & Gazetter of the Railways of Ireland, Stephen M Johnson, Midland Publishing Limited, 1997 39 For instance, the train that was transporting crude oil through the town of Lac Mégantic had 72 carriages, altogether carrying 7.7 million of petroleum crude oil.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 30
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 31
Figure 3: 18 distinct causes and contributing factors to the
Lac-Mégantic accident
Source: Transportation Safety Board of Canada; Lac-Mégantic runaway train and derailment investigation summary, 2014 available at : http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapportsreports/rail/2013/r13d0054/r13d0054-r-es.pdf
GAS PIPELINE
Gas Networks Ireland confirmed that there are currently no plans to expand the gas
network into the Northwest area of the country40 and, as a consequence, any gas would
need to be transported by either rail or road. Again, the Joint Committee does not feel
that this would be a desirable arrangement due to the issues mentioned above. A map of
the current gas pipeline network can be found in figure 4 below.
40 Information supplied to Committee Secretariat by Gas Networks Ireland in a phone call on 23 March 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 32
Figure 4: Gas Pipeline map of Ireland41
GAS PIPELINES AND DISUSED, DISMANTLED OR ABANDONED RAILWAY LINES
The Committee notes that some parties were proposing42 to lay gas pipelines in disused
or dismantled railway lines in the north west region, the Committee is adverse to using
disused or dismantled old railway lines to carry gas pipelines as this would make it
impossible to restore rail services at a future date, or alternative uses e.g. “greenways”
for example the former Waterford – Dungarvan railway was recently opened as the Deise
Greenway43. The railway lines around County Leitrim (including disused and dismantled
lines) are shown in Map on page 30.44
41 Source: Gas Networks Ireland http://www.gasnetworks.ie/en-IE/About-Us/Our-network/Pipeline-Map/ 42 Plan envisages reusing old rail routes for gas pipeline The Irish Times, Friday 8 December 2000. 43 Waterford’s 46km greenway opens for cyclists and walkers - Off-road track, along an old railway, includes coast, viaducts, tunnel and spectacular gorge, The Irish Times, Saturday 15 March 2017 44 Johnson’s Atlas & Gazetter of the Railways of Ireland, Stephen M Johnson, Midland Publishing Limited, 1997.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 33
2.1. THE POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT
Oil prospecting and recovery in Ireland is governed in principle by the Petroleum and
Other Minerals Development Act 1960, as amended. This defines “petroleum” as:
… any mineral oil or relative hydrocarbon and natural gas and other liquid or
gaseous hydrocarbons and their derivatives or constituent substances existing in
its natural condition in strata (including, without limitation, distillate, condensate,
casinghead gasoline and such other substances as are ordinarily produced from
oil and gas wells) and includes any other mineral substance contained in oil and
natural gas brought to the surface with them in the normal process of extraction,
but does not include coal and bituminous shales and other stratified deposits from
which oil can be extracted by distillation.
The Minerals Development Bill 2015, which is currently before the Committee, invokes a
similar definition. As can be seen, “bituminous shales” are excluded, but “bitumens” and
“oil shales” are specifically included as minerals within the meaning of the Minerals
Development Act 1940 as amended and the 2015 Bill.
A Bill designed to ban certain exploration and extraction technologies was moved in the
Dáil in 2015 by Deputy Richard Boyd-Barrett.45 The Joint Committee notes that this Bill
was introduced on 17 December 2015 and that the Bill was restored to the order paper
following a motion in the Dáil on 01 June 2016, but has since been withdrawn.46
The Joint Committee also notes that that a similar Bill was introduced by Deputy Richard
Boyd-Barrett on 08 November 2016, but that the Bill has not progressed any further
since that date.
The Committee notes the Government White Paper on Energy, Ireland’s transition to a
low carbon energy future (December 2015) which commits Ireland to radically reducing
our dependence on fossil fuels and also our greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
45 McGee, H., (2015) Richard Boyd Barrett to present Bill to prohibit fracking, Ireland: The Irish Times Online, Available: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/richard-boyd-barrett-to-present-bill-to-prohibit-fracking-1.2469901 46 Boyd Barrett., R (2015) Prohibition of Hydraulic Fracturing Bill 2015: Leave to Withdraw Dáil Éireann, 08 November 2016. Available: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2016110800016?opendocument#P02400
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 35
2.1.3. SCOTLAND
In Scotland, there is a moratorium in place on the issuing of fracking licences, with a
determination on whether to allow the practice to proceed to be made in the second half
of 2017.51
2.1.4. NORTHERN IRELAND
In Northern Ireland, the “ban” on fracking was implemented by publishing it as part of a
Strategic Planning Policy Statement, to which planning authorities must have regard: see
Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, ss. 1 and 8(5)(b).
2.1.5. WALES
The Joint Committee also notes that, at an informal meeting with members of the
Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee of the National Assembly for
Wales on 26 January 2017, Members of that Committee suggested that fracking would
be prohibited in Wales once the appropriate powers are devolved to the National
Assembly for Wales.
2.1.6. EUROPEAN UNION
The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union enshrines Ireland’s right to
determine its own energy mix, 52 and this legislative approach supports the wider
European Objective to decarbonise our energy system in a manner which allows us meet
our commitments under the Paris Agreement.53
51BBC News, ‘Scottish government to make fracking decision in 2017’, 08 November 2016. Available: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37898602 52 Article 194 (2), Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 53 United Nations (2015) Paris Agreement, Available: http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 36
2.2. IS THE POLICY ISSUE ADDRESSED?
The Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016 aims to
prevent mineral exploration or exploitation permits, and related planning permissions
being granted for what is known as “fracking” and, apparently, some related
technologies.
The Joint Committee notes that an alternative approach would be to amend one of the
Minerals Acts, particularly the Petroleum and Other Minerals Act 1960, rather than to
enact a stand-alone measure.
However, at second stage in the Dáil, the Bill had broad support from all sides of the
House.
The Joint Committee’s view is that it is important that this Bill be enacted as a stand
alone measure.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 37
2.3. NON LEGISLATIVE APPROACH
There is “a moratorium on the licensing of hydraulic fracturing” and this “has been in
place since 2013”.54 In reference to the report of the EPA led Joint Research Programme
on the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on the Environment and Human Health, Minister
for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten said that
… the Report's findings justify the continuing prohibition on the licensing of
hydraulic fracturing… 55 in Ireland.
On this point, it is possible that maintaining the moratorium on the licensing of hydraulic
fracturing could present a non-legislative alternative to an outright prohibition of fracking
in Ireland, however, the Joint Committee was adamant that an enforceable prohibition
be upheld at its meeting on 31 January 2017. For instance, Deputy Bríd Smith had the
following to say:
I hope my suspicions that the industry wants to leave a chink open on the basis
that this will not get through or that it could be revisited in the future are utterly
and totally misguided and wrong, but I would like to hear that is the case. We
need to deal with climate change and protect the environment. Any idea of shale
gas becoming part of an industry in this country flies in the face of that need.56
In this respect, the Joint Committee does not feel that there is a viable non-legislative
approach to the current policy issue.
54 Minister Naughten's statement on the Publication of the EPA led Joint Research Programme on the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on the Environment and Human Health: http://www.dccae.gov.ie/news-and-media/en-ie/Pages/PressRelease/Minister-Naughten's-statement-on-the-Publication-of-the-EPA-led-Joint-Research-Programme-on-the-Impacts-of-Hydraulic-Fractu.aspx 55 ibid 56 Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 38
2.4. GOVERNMENT BILLS
The Joint Committee notes that Oil prospecting and recovery in Ireland is governed in
principle by the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960, as amended. This
defines “petroleum” so that it:
…includes any mineral oil or relative hydrocarbon and natural gas and other liquid
or gaseous hydrocarbons and their derivatives or constituent substances existing
in its natural condition in strata (including, without limitation, distillate,
condensate, casinghead gasoline and such other substances as are ordinarily
produced from oil and gas wells) and includes any other mineral substance
contained in oil and natural gas brought to the surface with them in the normal
process of extraction, but does not include coal and bituminous shales and other
stratified deposits from which oil can be extracted by distillation.
A similar definition is included in the Minerals Development Bill 2015 currently before the
Committee. As can be seen, “bituminous shales” are excluded, but “bitumens” and “oil
shales” are specifically included as minerals within the meaning of the Minerals
Development Act 1940 as amended and the 2015 Bill. Article 10 of the Constitution
envisages extensive State management of mineral deposits, and this is reflected in the
legislation. All petroleum automatically vests in the State pursuant to s. 5(1) of the 1960
Act. Other mineral deposits may be compulsorily acquired by the State if in the opinion
of the Minister they are not being worked satisfactorily, as per Minerals Development Act
1940, Part III.
The Joint Committee also notes that an alternative approach would be to amend one of
the minerals Acts, especially the Petroleum and Other Minerals Act 1960, rather to enact
a stand-alone measure. Many of the definitions could then be revised; for example,
“Irish onshore and Ireland’s internal waters” would not be needed, because the same
matter is addressed in the definition in s. 2(1) whereby “‘land’ includes foreshore and
land covered with water”.
The Joint Committee considered combining the current Private Member’s Bill with the
Government-sponsored Minerals Development Bill 2015. However, Deputy Seán Kyne,
Minister of State for Natural Resources, had the following to say during the second stage
debate of the 2015 Bill in the Dáil:
…the Bill does not cover oil and gas, as the exploration and development of
petroleum are regulated under separate legislation. Therefore, issues such as
hydraulic fracturing or fracking are outside the scope of this Bill.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 39
On this basis, the Joint Committee does not believe that there is any merit in combining
the current Bill with any Government-sponsored Bills.57
2.5. UNINTENDED POLICY CONSEQUENCES
The Bill has a number of policy objectives according to the Bill’s explanatory
memorandum. The Bill aims to prohibit:
The issue of any undertaking, consent, licence or permit for the exploration,
prospecting or leases or other permissions to facilitate the extraction of
petroleum from within the State from shale rock, tight sands and coal seams;
The use of any processes to increase the permeability of shale rock, tight sands
and coal seams for the purpose of extracting petroleum;
Any Minister, Agency of the State or Body acting on behalf of the State to engage
in prospecting or exploration of petroleum from shale rock, tight sands and coal
seams;
The development of any infrastructure or facilities required for such extraction
within the State; and
The processing and/or disposal of any fluid or waste used in extraction processes
within the State.58
The Joint Committee believes that some of the terminology of the Bill should be revised
(for example, the “State” is invariably referred to as such in legislation and not as the
“Republic of Ireland”).
The only potential unintended policy consequences that the Joint Committee is aware of,
at this point, are those that may arise from terminology issues such as the one
mentioned in the example above.
2.6. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
As this Bill relates to a prohibition, the Joint Committee does not believe that there will
be any issues in relation to implementation, particularly as there has been a de facto
prohibition in the form of a moratorium in place for the past number of years.
The Joint Committee does not feel that performance indicators are necessary in the
current instance.
57Minerals Development Bill 2015 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Continued): http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2017022200051?opendocument 58 Explanatory Memorandum, Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 40
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 41
B. FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT
2.7. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The Joint Committee considered whether the Bill involved a charge on the people, a
charge on the Revenue, or had other costs including opportunity costs.
The committee considered financial provisions of the Constitution of Ireland:
ARTICLE 17
1 1° As soon as possible after the presentation to Dáil Éireann under Article 28 of
this Constitution of the Estimates of receipts and the Estimates of expenditure of
the State for any financial year, Dáil Éireann shall consider such Estimates.
2° Save in so far as may be provided by specific enactment in each case, the
legislation required to give effect to the Financial Resolutions of each year shall
be enacted within that year.
2 Dáil Éireann shall not pass any vote or resolution, and no law shall be enacted,
for the appropriation of revenue or other public moneys unless the purpose of the
appropriation shall have been recommended to Dáil Éireann by a message from
the Government signed by the Taoiseach.
These provisions are given effect by standing orders.
Private Members Bills which have financial implications (ie. which propose charges on the
people or on the public purse) are only in order for introduction if these implications are
“incidental” to the purposes of the Bill (SO 178(1) and 179(1)).
At that, these private members bills may only be taken at Committee Stage if a Financial
Resolution has been passed (in the case of charges on the people – 178(2)) or a Money
Message has been received from Government (for appropriation of revenue or public
monies – 179(2)).
The Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016, while it
may cause a loss of potential revenue being acquired by the State in terms of licenses,
taxation etc. in the event of fracking being prohibited, it does not involve a charge on
the people or the appropriation of revenue or other public moneys, therefore neither a
Financial Resolution nor a Money message are required, and therefore there is no
financial procedure impediment to the Bill proceeding to Committee stage.
The detailed reasons are outlined in the following pages.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 42
2.7.1. CHARGE ON THE PEOPLE
The relevant standing order is as follows:
Bills involving the imposition of charges upon the people.
178. (1) A Bill which involves the imposition of a charge upon the people, other
than an incidental charge, shall not be initiated by any member, save a member
of the Government.
(2) The Committee Stage of a Bill which involves a charge upon the people,
including an incidental charge, shall not be taken unless a motion approving of
the charge has been passed by the Dáil. No such motion as aforesaid nor any
amendment thereto proposing to increase the amount stated in any such motion
may be made by any member, save a member of the Government.
(3) An amendment to a Bill which could have the effect of imposing or increasing
a charge upon the people may not be moved by any member, save a member of
the Government or Minister of State.
The Joint Committee is of the view that the Bill does not involve a charge on the people.
In this regard, a Financial Resolution is not required, and therefore there are no financial
implications under standing order 178 that will prevent the Bill from proceeding to
Committee stage.
2.7.2. CHARGE ON THE REVENUE
The relevant standing order is as follows:
Bills involving the appropriation of revenue or other public moneys.
179. (1) A Bill which involves the appropriation of revenue or other public
moneys, other than incidental expenses, shall not be initiated by any member,
save a member of the Government.
(2) The Committee Stage of a Bill which involves the appropriation of revenue or
other public moneys, including incidental expenses, shall not be taken unless the
purpose of the appropriation has been recommended to the Dáil by a Message
from the Government. The text of any Message shall be printed on the Order
Paper.
(3) An amendment to a Bill which could have the effect of imposing or increasing
a charge upon the revenue may not be moved by any member, save a member of
the Government or Minister of State.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 43
The Joint Committee is of the view that the Bill does not involve the appropriation of
revenue or other public moneys. In this regard, a Money message is not required, and
therefore there are no financial implications under standing order 179 that will prevent
the Bill from proceeding to Committee stage.
2.7.3. OPPORTUNITY COSTS
The Joint Committee also notes that there are potential financial revenues to be gained
for the State if extraction of petroleum was permitted to be undertaken in this way.
Firstly, the Joint Committee acknowledges that the State may lose out on a potential
revenue stream, in that it will not benefit from potential revenues accruing from the
granting of licences to successful parties.
Secondly, the Joint Committee acknowledges that an opportunity to create jobs in the
areas at issue may be lost, should the Bill be enacted.
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the Joint Committee acknowledges that the State
may be missing out on an opportunity to provide a steady stream of energy, enhancing
Ireland’s energy security, particularly in the context of the withdrawl of the United
Kingdom from the European Union (Brexit). At present, Ireland is very heavily reliant on
energy from the UK. To illustrate this point, the National Treasury Management Agency
recently noted that:
The Irish energy market is heavily reliant on its connection to the UK market.
Ireland imported €6.5bn worth of energy products in 2014 (3.6% of real
GDP), more than 90% of which came from the UK.59
However, at its meeting on 28 February 2017 on the effect of Brexit on the Irish Energy
market, Mr. Fintan Slye, chief executive officer, EirGrid said in relation to the proposed
electricity interconnector with France:
The Celtic interconnector is a joint project with Réseau de Transport d’Électricité,
RTE, the French transmission system operator. We have been working on it
together for approximately three years. We have completed the initial pre-
feasibility phase in the middle of last year which showed this is viable. It
estimated the cost at approximately €1 billion, which would be split between the
two countries and companies. We are now in the preliminary design and pre-
consultation phase.
59 Purdue, D. and Huang, H., Report - Brexit and its Impact on the Irish Economy, NTMA Economics, 2015, p. 10.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 44
We have a memorandum of understanding in place with the French and have
received European funding through the Connecting Europe facility for the phase
we are in. That phase will run for probably another 12 to 18 months. It involves
all the very detailed economic assessment and the finalisation of the cost
assessment to work out the benefits at European level but also the benefits to
Irish and French consumers. We will then consider the next phases and whether
to proceed with it and whether it qualifies for any European funding. If the project
continues to pass through the various stage gates and proves to be viable we
would seek commissioning of the interconnector in or around 2025. That is a ball
park timeline.
This project, if it proceeds, will lessen Ireland’s energy dependence on the UK.
Estimates of the quantity of recoverable gas vary, for example60:
Tamboran Energy have presented estimates of gas recovery for the target layers
within the NW Carboniferous basin … and range from 2.6tcf to 5.2tcf. Estimates
from the Lough Allen Natural Gas Company are no longer available as it is
understood that the company was dissolved on 09 Apr 2014.
In 2012, Enegi Oil plc preliminary resource estimates for their licence option in
the Clare Basin consisted of between 1.55tcf and 3.62tcf of free gas initially in
place. They also suggested potential recoverable gas reserves of between 1.49tcf
and 3.86tcf for the Clare Basin as a whole.
The Committee notes that the valuation of the recoverable gas in the NW Carboniferous
Basin and the Clare Basin would appear to the between $14.3B and $31.7B. See
Appendix 14 for more information.
Ultimately, the Joint Committee acknowledges that while there may be economic
benefits in allowing fracking to proceed, it is in the interest of the public, as evidenced by
the submissions received by it, and in the interest of the State, especially given Ireland’s
commitments to international environmental agreements, that legislation in the area be
enacted tp prohibit hydraulic fracturing.
2.8. COMPLIANCE COSTS
The Joint Committee is satisfied that enforcement and compliance costs will be minimal,
in that they will only be incurred through monitoring and enforcement of planning and
enforcement notices.
60 Research Project on Hydraulic Fracturing ─ Interactions with the Water Framework Directive & Groundwater Directive and Implications for the Status of Ireland’s Waters, Kieran Craven, B.Sc. (Geology and Biology), Ph.D. (Geology), Dr Paul Johnston, John Kenny, LLB, LLM, Barrister-at-Law, et al, May 2016 p121, 129
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 45
C. LEGAL ANALYSIS
2.9. IS THE BILL CONSTITUTIONAL?
The relevant provisions of the Constitution are as follows:
Article 10:
1 All natural resources, including the air and all forms of potential energy, within
the jurisdiction of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution
and all royalties and franchises within that jurisdiction belong to the State subject
to all estates and interests therein for the time being lawfully vested in any
person or body…
3 Provision may be made by law for the management of the property which
belongs to the State by virtue of this Article and for the control of the alienation,
whether temporary or permanent, of that property.
4 Provision may also be made by law for the management of land, mines,
minerals and waters acquired by the State after the coming into operation of this
Constitution and for the control of the alienation, whether temporary or
permanent, of the land, mines, minerals and waters so acquired.
Article 40.3.2:
The State shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may from unjust attack
and, in the case of injustice done, vindicate the…property rights of every citizen.
Article 43:
1 1° The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the
natural right, antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external
goods.
2° The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the
right of private ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath, and inherit
property.
2 1° The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in
the foregoing provisions of this article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by
the principles of social justice.
2° The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of
the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the
common good.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 46
The Joint Committee believes that the Bill in question is compatible with the
Constitution, in that all natural resources, including those that are “forms of potential
energy”, which would encompass “petroleum from shale rock, tight sands and coal
seams”,61 belong to the State, as per Article 10.
Citizens enjoy property rights by virtue of Articles 40.3.2 and 43.1 of the Constitution.
The State may in accordance with Article 43.2.2 delimit the exercise of those rights in
order to reconcile their exercise with the exigencies of the common good; once it strikes
the appropriate balance, that delimitation is not an 'unjust attack' on those rights
contrary to Article 40.3.2.
The proposal in the Bill does not seek to deprive a citizen of what is currently his or her
property, but rather seeks to regulate, in the interests of the common good, what he or
she may do with the property. This form of regulation is generally regarded as
consistent with the constitutional provisions in question.
The Joint Committee has not identified any potential issues with the “principles and
policies” test in relation to the Bill in question.
61 Explanatory Memorandum, Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 47
2.10. COMPATIBILITY WITH EU LEGISLATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION
(ECHR)
Article 29.4.6° of the Constitution provides:
No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or
measures adopted by the State, before, on or after the entry into force of the
Treaty of Lisbon, that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of
the European Union referred to in subsection 5° of this section or of the
European Atomic Energy Community, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or
measures adopted by—
(i) the said European Union or the European Atomic Energy Community, or
institutions thereof,
(ii) the European Communities or European Union existing immediately before
the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, or institutions thereof, or
(iii) bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section,
from having the force of law in the State.
Given that the principle of the primacy of European Union law is enshrined in the
Constitution, the Joint Committee notes that the Bill, if enacted, could potentially be
incompatible with EU law.
The Joint Committee would be concerned to ensure that no question of the Bill's
incompatibility with EU law would arise, although no such incompatibility is immediately
apparent.
The EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) contains provisions
which relate to the resolution of investment disputes between investors and Member
states. Article 8.18 of CETA states that:
1. Without prejudice to the rights and obligations of the Parties under Chapter
Twenty- Nine (Dispute Settlement), an investor of a Party may submit to the
Tribunal constituted under this Section a claim that the other Party has
breached an obligation under:
(i) Section C, with respect to the expansion, conduct, operation, management,
maintenance, use, enjoyment and sale or disposal of its covered investment;
or
(ii) Section D: where the investor claims to have suffered loss or damage as a
result of the alleged breach.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 48
2. Claims under subparagraph 1(a) with respect to the expansion of a covered
investment may be submitted only to the extent the measure relates to the existing
business operations of a covered investment and the investor has, as a result,
incurred loss or damage with respect to the covered investment.
An investing party, which has suffered a loss due to the actions of a State, may be
entitled to sue the relevant State to recover damages for those losses. With the current
Bill in mind, it is possible that a case of that nature might have arisen if the State had
encouraged investment in fracking, and this Bill, if enacted, subsequently outlawed
fracking.
For instance, a US company is suing the Canadian government over the Quebec
government’s decision to revoke oil and gas exploration licences located beneath the St.
Lawrence River.62 While this case is not specifically related to CETA, both CETA and the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) contain similar Investor-State dispute
settlement mechanisms.
However, at a meeting of the Joint Committee on 31 January 2017, Mr. Matthew Collins,
Assistant Secretary, Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment
confirmed that “the moratorium declared by Ministers on any fracking activities in Ireland
has been in place since 2011 and continues. No applications have been approved.”63 It
would appear that the State has not encouraged any investment in this regard.
In any event, Article 8.9.1 of CETA provides “For the purpose of this Chapter, the Parties
reaffirm their right to regulate within their territories to achieve legitimate policy
objectives, such as the protection of public health, safety, the environment or public
morals, social or consumer protection or the promotion and protection of cultural
diversity.” As this prohibition is being sought on, inter alia, environmental grounds, it
would appear that Ireland is entitled to regulate the area/activity in question, without
contravening CETA.
Moreover, it appears that CETA, while in principle it could give rise to a money claim
against a State, could not invalidate the law passage of which gave rise to the claim.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 49
The European Convention on Human Rights, to which Ireland is a signatory, is governed
by the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003. The relevant sections are as
follows:
2.—(1) In interpreting and applying any statutory provision or rule of law, a
court shall, in so far as is possible, subject to the rules of law relating to such
interpretation and application, do so in a manner compatible with the State's
obligations under the Convention provisions.
(2) This section applies to any statutory provision or rule of law in force
immediately before the passing of this Act or any such provision coming into
force thereafter.
5.—(1) In any proceedings, the High Court, or the Supreme Court when
exercising its appellate jurisdiction, may, having regard to the provisions of
section 2 , on application to it in that behalf by a party, or of its own motion,
and where no other legal remedy is adequate and available, make a
declaration (referred to in this Act as “a declaration of incompatibility”) that a
statutory provision or rule of law is incompatible with the State's obligations
under the Convention provisions.
(2) A declaration of incompatibility—
(a) shall not affect the validity, continuing operation or enforcement of the
statutory provision or rule of law in respect of which it is made, and
(b) shall not prevent a party to the proceedings concerned from making
submissions or representations in relation to matters to which the
declaration relates in any proceedings before the European Court of Human
Rights.
(3) The Taoiseach shall cause a copy of any order containing a declaration of
incompatibility to be laid before each House of the Oireachtas within the next
21 days on which that House has sat after the making of the order
(4) Where—
(a) a declaration of incompatibility is made,
(b) a party to the proceedings concerned makes an application in writing to
the Attorney General for compensation in respect of an injury or loss or
damage suffered by him or her as a result of the incompatibility concerned,
and
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 50
(c) the Government, in their discretion, consider that it may be appropriate
to make an ex gratia payment of compensation to that party (“a payment”),
the Government may request an adviser appointed by them to advise them
as to the amount of such compensation (if any) and may, in their discretion,
make a payment of the amount aforesaid or of such other amount as they
consider appropriate in the circumstances.
(5) In advising the Government on the amount of compensation for the
purposes of subsection (4), an adviser shall take appropriate account of the
principles and practice applied by the European Court of Human Rights in
relation to affording just satisfaction to an injured party under Article 41 of
the Convention.
The European Convention on Human Rights has quasi-legal standing in Ireland, in that a
declaration of incompatibility may be made in relation to Irish legislation, and
compensation may subsequently be paid, but such a declaration will not affect the
validity of the provision in question.
The provision of the Convention that notionally might have most relevance in this regard
is Article 1 of Protocol 1.
This provides:
Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his
possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public
interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general
principles of international law.
'The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a
State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in
accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other
contributions or penalties.
As can be seen, the principles of the Protocol are not noticeably different from those
expressed in Articles 40.3.2 and 43 of the Constitution of Ireland, and breach of the first
paragraph is unlikely to be found where no infringement of the principles of those Articles
would arise as a matter of Irish constitutional jurisprudence.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 51
2.11. AMBIGUITY IN DRAFTING
As mentioned previously, the Joint Committee’s main concern in this regard is that some
of the terminology in the Bill, the use of “Republic of Ireland” as opposed to “State” for
example, needs to be addressed so as to avoid unintended consequences. Apart from
this, the Joint Committee believes that the draft Bill is adequately unambiguous so as to
achieve its objectives.
2.12. DRAFTING DEFICIENCIE S
On 27 October 2016, during the Second Stage debate on this Bill in the Dáil, Minister for
Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten had the
following to say:
…if the current wording of the Bill were to become law, the spirit and intention of
the Deputy’s objective may not in fact be definitively reflected in law. The debate
for me as Minister was never whether to ban or not to ban fracking but to ensure
we legislate in order that the law does what we want it to do. As such, it is my
strong view that the work of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate
Action and Environment would be considerably aided and advanced by being able
to consider the outcome of the shortly to be published integrated synthesis report
on the environmental impacts of fracking.
…
Today, along with the Minister of State, Deputy Kyne, I am accepting this Bill as
another step towards protecting the environment and our future, thus showing
that our deeds are our actions.64
At its meeting on 31 January 2017, the Joint Committee undertook a scrutiny of the Bill
and during this discussion the Committee noted that there were a number of comments
made in relation to the Minister’s comments made during the Second Stage debate on
this Bill.
In relation to the Minister’s comments, Deputy Bríd Smith said:
In the Dáil, he said that the Bill was tight and needed to be legally checked. This
is not a legal check.65
64
Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten, Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016: Second Stage [Private Members], 27 October 2016. 65
Deputy Bríd Smith, Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 52
Deputy Eamon Ryan said:
It is a strange situation because there is consensus. In the Second Stage debate,
we reached an important decision so it is strange that we are stepping back a bit.
However, it is not a permanent step back. In fact, we have respect for this
process and for the submissions that various people with an interest in this
matter have been asked to present and the work they have done on them.66
Deputy Tony McLoughlin said:
I was very pleasantly surprised by the unanimous decision in the Dáil in October
on Second Stage. To be quite honest, I am a little concerned. I know the
Chairman was trying to clarify the process of going from Second Stage to
Committee Stage and the fact that we are now listening to comments being
made. I was of the opinion that perhaps on Committee Stage, more advice and
more detail should be sought.67
On this basis, the Joint Committee believes that any potential drafting deficiencies in the
Bill would be best addressed at the Committee Stage of the Bill. The Joint Committee
suggests that the Minister, with the assistance of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel to
the Government, could propose amendments to rectify any such problems by proposing
suitable amendments at Committee stage.
2.13. UNINTENDED LEGAL CONSEQUENCES
There are activities, such as geothermal energy technologies, that may be able to access
geological formations where these activities are not prohibited under the legislation.
However, the Bill does not prohibit access to these formations categorically, only
accessing these formations for a specific purpose (exploration and extraction of
petroleum). Therefore, boring into shale, tight sands, and coal seams would be
permitted so long as the objective of the activity did not fall under the scope of the Bill.
It is possible that people may access the relevant geological formations for reasons other
than the extraction of petroleum: the Joint Committee is slightly concerned that an
unintended legal consequence could arise in this regard.
66
Deputy Eamon Ryan, Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017. 67
Deputy Tony McLoughlin, Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 53
2.14. ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL ARRANGEMENTS
The Joint Committee notes that there are no enforcement measures contained within the
draft Bill. In the absence of such measures, it is possible that the Bill, if enacted in its
current drafting, will not achieve its objective. For instance, the Bill would not be
achieving its objective if a person was to attempt to extract petroleum from shale rock in
contravention of the proposed legislation, and the legislation did not provide for an
offence or an appropriate penalty in relation to same.
The Committee believes that some enforcement provision is desirable.
The Committee notes that while it is not minded to incorporate the Bill as an amendment
to existing law, it will have that practical effect.
For example, s. 6(2) and (3) of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960
make it an offence for a person to extract petroleum without a petroleum lease.
The Committee notes that if the Minister is precluded by law from granting a lease then
s. 6(2) and (3) provide one means of enforcement. It is improbable to the point of
irrelevance that shale oil extraction falls outside the regulatory system altogether. The
Bill precludes the grant of any necessary permission or authorization, and the exploiter
will be liable to whatever remedies the underlying Act imposes or allows for conducting
with works without that permission or authorization.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 54
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 55
3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1. CONCLUSIONS
The Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment is broadly in
favour of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill
2016.
The Joint Committee is not convinced that the findings of the Joint Research Programme
on the Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Gas Exploration and Extraction
sufficiently demonstrate that UGEE projects/operations could proceed in Ireland without
having a harmful effect on the environment and on human health. To illustrate this
point, the Joint Committee makes the following observations.
The findings of the Joint Research Programme demonstrate that, in the two case study
areas, there is a lack of knowledge in relation to deep geological and hydrogeological
conditions. The Joint Committee feels that it would be irresponsible to allow UGEE
projects/operations to proceed in Ireland, especially when there appears to be
substantial gap in the data. Consequently, it is not possible to predict what geological
effect these projects/operations may have on the areas in questions. This is evidenced
by Mr. Alan Hooper’s comments at the meeting of the Joint Committee on 31 January
2017 to the effect that:
One of the big problems, which brings us back to Deputy Eamon Ryan's point
about water pollution, is that it depends on the underground geology,
hydrogeology and fracturing. Those data are not available. It is not possible to
say if there are or are not many fractures. That piece of information is vital in
the assessment of the risk.68
In relation to air quality, the EPA recommends that further research into the potential
cause-effect relationship of UGEE activities and actual health outcomes in hazard
analyses requires further research. These concerns were echoed by Mr. Matthew Collins,
Assistant Secretary, of the Department of Communications, Climate Action and
Environment at the meeting of the Joint Committee on 31 January 2017 to the effect
that:
The reasons for maintaining the moratorium are quite simple. There are a
number of unresolved issues in the risks that have been identified. They
relate to groundwater and air quality. Those risks mean that the frameworks
68 Mr. Alan Hooper, Principal Investigator, CDM Smith Ltd., Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 56
are unresolved at the moment. That is the justification for the Department
maintaining the moratorium, particularly in light of the Oireachtas examining
a legislative basis for preventing fracking. It seems clear to us that, in the
interim, we are satisfied that those risks exist. It is in line with the policy goal
of the Oireachtas in terms of the legislation. The Minister has already said that
he accepts the Bill. He is supportive. He flagged quite a long time ago his
specific concerns about groundwater and air quality. It is important that the
research that was carried out flagged that as well.69
The Joint Committee notes that, according to the the research conducted by the EPA,
there is reason for concern in relation to potential impacts and mitigation measures. In
this regard, the findings demonstrate that there is potential:
for surface chemical spills and leaks during UGEE operations;
that fluids associated with drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations, together
with natural gas constituents that are present or released, represent potential
sources of groundwater contamination;
that accidental spills of flowback and produced water can be expected from
UGEE-related activities and, although the overall risk of impact from transport-
related spills of flowback and produced water is considered to be low, these could
result in an environmental impact; and
that uncertainties are liable to remain in relation to the quantification of long-
term greenhouse gas emissions.
While the Joint Committee acknowledges that the impacts above may never occur, to
mitigate the possibe impacts occuring would require a vigorous regulatory regime, and
even then this may not prevent some of the above from occuring. Ultimately, the fact
that there may always be uncertainty with regard to the quantification of long-term
greenhouse gas emissions as a result of UGEE activities is adequate in itself, in the Joint
Committee’s opinion, to justify a prohibition of this nature.
69 Mr. Matthew Collins, Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment on 31 January 2017.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 57
3.2. RECOMMENDATIONS
The Joint Committee is concerned that the Bill may not achieve its objective with its
current drafting, if enacted, and makes the recommendations below in this regard.
1. In certain sections, the terminology of the Bill should be revised so as to
ensure that the objectives of the Bill are achieved.
2. An enforcement mechanism should be included in the Bill. This would include
the penalties/offences associated with the contravention of this Bill, if
enacted. It should also include a provision granting responsibility for the
enforcement of the prohibition to a specified body.
3. Any potential drafting deficiencies in the Bill may be best addressed during
the Committee Stage debate of the Bill. The Joint Committee also believes
that the Minister, with the assistance of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel to
the Government, could propose amendments to rectify any drafting problems
by drafting a suitable amendment at either Committee or Report stages of the
Bill.
4. The scope of the Bill should be expanded to take account of other activities,
such as those that use geothermal technologies, which may be used to access
shale gas through other means.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 58
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 59
APPENDIX 1: ORDERS OF REFERENCE – JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS,
CLIMATE ACTION AND ENVIRONMENT
A: FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE – DERIVED FROM STANDING ORDERS [DSO 84A; SSO 70A]
1) The Select Committee shall consider and report to the Dáil on—
a) such aspects of the expenditure, administration and policy of a Government
Department or Departments and associated public bodies as the Committee
may select, and
b) European Union matters within the remit of the relevant Department or
Departments.
2) The Select Committee appointed pursuant to this Standing Order may be joined with
a Select Committee appointed by Seanad Éireann for the purposes of the functions
set out in this Standing Order, other than at paragraph (3), and to report thereon to
both Houses of the Oireachtas.
3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the Select Committee appointed
pursuant to this Standing Order shall consider, in respect of the relevant Department
or Departments, such—
a) Bills,
b) proposals contained in any motion, including any motion within the meaning of
Standing Order 187,
c) Estimates for Public Services, and
d) other matters as shall be referred to the Select Committee by the Dáil, and
e) Annual Output Statements including performance, efficiency and effectiveness in
the use of public monies, and
f) such Value for Money and Policy Reviews as the Select Committee may select.
4) The Joint Committee may consider the following matters in respect of the relevant
Department or Departments and associated public bodies:
a) matters of policy and governance for which the Minister is officially responsible,
b) public affairs administered by the Department,
c) policy issues arising from Value for Money and Policy Reviews conducted or
commissioned by the Department,
d) Government policy and governance in respect of bodies under the aegis of the
Department,
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 60
e) policy and governance issues concerning bodies which are partly or wholly funded
by the State or which are established or appointed by a member of the
Government or the Oireachtas,
f) the general scheme or draft heads of any Bill,
g) any post-enactment report laid before either House or both Houses by a member
of the Government or Minister of State on any Bill enacted by the Houses of the
Oireachtas,
h) statutory instruments, including those laid or laid in draft before either House or
both Houses and those made under the European Communities Acts 1972 to
2009,
i) strategy statements laid before either or both Houses of the Oireachtas pursuant
to the Public Service Management Act 1997,
j) annual reports or annual reports and accounts, required by law, and laid before
either or both Houses of the Oireachtas, of the Department or bodies referred to
in subparagraphs (d) and (e) and the overall performance and operational results,
statements of strategy and corporate plans of such bodies, and
k) such other matters as may be referred to it by the Dáil from time to time.
5) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the Joint Committee appointed
pursuant to this Standing Order shall consider, in respect of the relevant Department
or Departments—
a) EU draft legislative acts standing referred to the Select Committee under
Standing Order 114, including the compliance of such acts with the principle of
subsidiarity,
b) other proposals for EU legislation and related policy issues, including programmes
and guidelines prepared by the European Commission as a basis of possible
legislative action,
c) non-legislative documents published by any EU institution in relation to EU policy
matters, and
d) matters listed for consideration on the agenda for meetings of the relevant EU
Council of Ministers and the outcome of such meetings.
6) The Chairman of the Joint Committee appointed pursuant to this Standing Order,
who shall be a member of Dáil Éireann, shall also be the Chairman of the Select
Committee.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 61
7) The following may attend meetings of the Select or Joint Committee appointed
pursuant to this Standing Order, for the purposes of the functions set out in
paragraph (5) and may take part in proceedings without having a right to vote or to
move motions and amendments:
a) Members of the European Parliament elected from constituencies in Ireland,
including Northern Ireland,
b) Members of the Irish delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe, and
c) at the invitation of the Committee, other Members of the European Parliament.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 62
B: SCOPE AND CONTEXT OF ACTIVITIES OF COMMITTEES (AS DERIVED FROM STANDING ORDERS) [DSO 84; SSO 70]
1) The Joint Committee may only consider such matters, engage in such activities,
exercise such powers and discharge such functions as are specifically authorised
under its orders of reference and under Standing Orders.
2) Such matters, activities, powers and functions shall be relevant to, and shall arise
only in the context of, the preparation of a report to the Dáil and/or Seanad.
3) The Joint Committee shall not consider any matter which is being considered, or of
which notice has been given of a proposal to consider, by the Committee of Public
Accounts pursuant to Standing Order 186 and/or the Comptroller and Auditor General
(Amendment) Act 1993.
4) The Joint Committee shall refrain from inquiring into in public session or publishing
confidential information regarding any matter if so requested, for stated reasons
given in writing, by—
a) a member of the Government or a Minister of State, or
b) the principal office-holder of a body under the aegis of a Department or which is
partly or wholly funded by the State or established or appointed by a member of
the Government or by the Oireachtas:
Provided that the Chairman may appeal any such request made to the Ceann
Comhairle / Cathaoirleach whose decision shall be final.
5) It shall be an instruction to all Select Committees to which Bills are referred that they
shall ensure that not more than two Select Committees shall meet to consider a Bill
on any given day, unless the Dáil, after due notice given by the Chairman of the
Select Committee, waives this instruction on motion made by the Taoiseach pursuant
to Dáil Standing Order 28. The Chairmen of Select Committees shall have
responsibility for compliance with this instruction.
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 63
C: ESTABLISHMENT OF SELECT COMMITTEES: DÁIL ÉIREANN MOTION THURSDAY, 16 JUNE 2016
Dáil Éireann Debate, Vol. 913 No. 3
(1) That Select Committees as set out in column (1) of the Schedule hereto are hereby
appointed pursuant to Standing Order 84A.
(2) Each Select Committee shall perform the functions set out in Standing Order 84A in
respect of the Government Department or Departments listed in column (2) opposite
each Committee (in anticipation of the coming into effect of the necessary Government
Orders in relation to names of Departments and titles of Ministers and transfer of
Departmental Administration and Ministerial Functions).
(3) The number of members appointed to each Select Committee shall be seven.
(4) Each Select Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 85 (1), (2)
and (3).
(5) Each Select Committee shall be joined with a Select Committee appointed by Seanad
Éireann to form a Joint Committee to carry out the functions set out in Standing Order
84A, other than at paragraph (3) thereof.
(6) Each Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Orders 85 (other
than paragraph (2A) thereof), 114 and 116.
(7) The Select Committee on Justice and Equality shall have the powers defined in
Standing Order 115(1)(b).
(8) The Order of the Dáil of 10th March, 2016 in relation to the Standing Order 112
Select Committee is hereby rescinded and the Committee is accordingly dissolved.
Schedule (extract):
Committee: Select Committee on Communications, Climate Change and
Natural Resources
Department: Communications, Climate Change and Natural Resources
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 64
COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE: MOTION – DÁIL ÉIREANN 7 SEPTEMBER 2016
That, following Orders made by Government on 5 July, 2016, and 19 July, 2016,
respectively, altering the names of Departments and titles of Ministers, the names of the
Select Committees in column (1) of the Schedule below, which were established by
Order of the Dáil of 16 June, 2016, are hereby amended as set out in column (2) of the
Schedule and each such Committee shall perform the functions set out in Standing Order
84A in respect of the Government Department or Departments listed in column (3)
opposite each Committee.
Select Committee established on 16 June 2016: Communications, Climate Change
and Natural Resources
New name of Select Committee: Communications, Climate Action and
Environment
Government Department: Communications, Climate Action and Environment
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 65
D: ESTABLISHMENT OF SELECT COMMITTEES: SEANAD ÉIREANN MOTION THURSDAY, 21 JULY 2016
Seanad Éireann Debate, Vol. 247 No. 5
(1) That Select Committees as set out in column (1) of the Schedule hereto are
hereby appointed pursuant to Standing Order 70A.
(2) Each Select Committee shall perform the functions set out in Standing Order
70A in respect of the Government Departments listed in column (2) opposite
each Committee (in anticipation of the coming into effect of the necessary
Government Orders in relation to names of Departments and titles of Ministers
and transfer of Departmental Administration and Ministerial Functions).
(3) The number of members appointed to each Select Committee shall be four.
(4) Each Select Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 71 (1),
(2) and (3).
(5) Each Select Committee shall be joined with a Select Committee appointed by
Dáil Éireann to form a Joint Committee to carry out the functions set out in
Standing Order 70A.
(6) Each Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Orders 71
(other than paragraph (2A) thereof), 107 and 109.
(7) The Select Committee on Justice and Equality shall have the powers defined in
Standing Order 108(1)(b). Schedule (extract):
Committee: Select Committee on Communications, Climate Change and
Natural Resources
Department: Communications, Climate Change and Natural Resources
COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE: MOTION – SEANAD ÉIREANN 29 SEPTEMBER 2016
That, following Orders made by Government on 5th July, 2016, and 19th July, 2016,
respectively, altering the names of Departments and titles of Ministers, the names of the
Select Committees in column (1) of the Schedule below, which were established by
Order of the Seanad of 21st July, 2016, are hereby amended as set out in column (2) of
the Schedule and each such Committee shall perform the functions set out in Standing
Order 70A in respect of the Government Department or Departments listed in column (3)
opposite each Committee.
Select Committee established on 16 June 2016: Communications, Climate Change
and Natural Resources
Government Department: Communications, Climate Action and Environment
New name of Select Committee: Communications, Climate Action and
Environment
Scrutiny of the Prohibition of the Exploration and Extraction of Onshore Petroleum Bill 2016
Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment Page 66
E: FUNCTIONS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE
OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT
The joint committee shadows the Department of Communications, Climate Action and
Environment, bodies under its aegis, and associated bodies.
The joint committee will also carry out ex ante, current year, and ex post scrutiny of the
performance of the department, including output measures and financial indicators.
There are many bodies under the aegis of the department and they may be required to
appear before the joint committee. The bodies under the remit of the department are
listed below.
Policy
The committee may also on its own initiative, initiate a review of policy of any area
within its remit, or may also carry out a policy review combined with one or more other
joint committees.
The functions of the department, and consequently the remit of this committee, can be
broadly categorised into the following areas:
Communications, Broadcasting and Postal;
Climate Action and Energy;
Environment and Natural Resources.
Pre Legislative Scrutiny
The committee may carry out prelegislative scrutiny of any legislative proposals from the
Minister, including a public consultation exercise.
EU Scrutiny
The Committee also plays a role in the consideration of legislative proposals from the
European Union. When the Committee is unsatisfied with a legislative proposal, it can
make its observations known to the European Commission through either a reasoned
opinion or a political contribution.
Further information on European Union legislative proposals can be found on the
Clare Basin High 3.86 3,860,000,000,000 3,964,220,000,000,000 3,964,220,000 $13,874,770,000
Total Low 4.09 4,090,000,000,000 4,200,430,000,000,000 4,200,430,000 $14,701,505,000
Total High 9.06 9,060,000,000,000 9,304,620,000,000,000 9,304,620,000 $32,566,170,000
GAS PRICE
$3.50 = 2017 high, Natural Gas Weekly Update, $/MMbtu.71
1,000 cubic feet (1 Mcf) = 1,027,000 Btu.
Estimated Value in USD of recoverable gas: €14.7B - €32.6B.
70 Research Project on Hydraulic Fracturing ─ Interactions with the Water Framework Directive & Groundwater Directive and Implications for the Status of Ireland’s Waters, Kieran Craven, B.Sc. (Geology and Biology), Ph.D. (Geology), Dr Paul Johnston, John Kenny, LLB, LLM, Barrister-at-Law, et al, May 2016 p121, 129 71 US Energy Information Administration, Natural Gas Spot Prices Henry Hubb, https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/ Accessed on 27 March 2017
A standard unit of measurement used to denote both the amount of heat energy in fuels
and the ability of appliances and air conditioning systems to produce heating or cooling.
A BTU is the amount of heat required to increase the temperature of a pint of water
(which weighs exactly 16 ounces) by one degree Fahrenheit. Since BTUs are
measurements of energy consumption, they can be converted directly to kilowatt-hours
(3412 BTUs = 1 kWh) or joules (1 BTU = 1,055.06 joules). A wooden kitchen match
produce approximately 1 BTU, and air conditioners for household use typically produce
between 5,000 and 15,000 BTU.
MBTU stands for one million BTUs, which can also be expressed as one decatherm (10
therms). MBTU is occasionally used as a standard unit of measurement for natural gas
and provides a convenient basis for comparing the energy content of various grades of
natural gas and other fuels. One cubic foot of natural gas produces approximately 1,000
BTUs, so 1,000 cu.ft. of gas is comparable to 1 MBTU. MBTU is occasionally expressed as
MMBTU, which is intended to represent a thousand thousand BTUs.
72 https://www.petropedia.com/definition/9354/trillion-cubic-feet-tcf accessed on 27 March 2017. 73 ibid 74 https://www.energyvortex.com/energydictionary/british_thermal_unit_(btu)__mbtu__mmbtu.html Accessed on 27 March 2017