3.4. Effectiveness of the Recommendation in taking account of technical progress and the use of techniques other than high-volume hydraulic fracturing

A study carried out for the Commission assesses technological developments since the adoption of the Recommendation and emerging technologies likely to be taken up more widely by the industry in the short to medium term. It does not identify developments that would significantly change the overall risk profile of the way shale gas is developed. For some emerging technologies, however, including nanotechnologies, it is not possible fully to assess associated risks. Although some licences targeting shale formations offshore have been issued in several Member States, no operational activities have been reported to date.

As far as fracturing technologies are concerned, the European Science and Technology Network on Unconventional Hydrocarbon Extraction expects water-based fracturing to remain the most commonly used technique in the sector in the coming years.

As regards the development of unconventional fossil fuels other than shale gas, the licensing, exploration or assessment of coalbed methane resources have taken place or are under way in a number of Member States. Many coalbeds are at a shallower depth than shale formations and are located in ground or drinking water reserves. If hydraulic fracturing is necessary, the risks associated with groundwater contamination are potentially more significant for coalbed methane than for shale gas. Equally, the risk of fugitive emissions is potentially greater. At the production stage, coalbed methane development requires the pumping of water in volumes that present an increased risk of waterresource depletion. Where there is a hydrogeological connection to overlying or lateral formations, groundwater flows might be induced that negatively affect the quality of drinking water.

The production of tight gas requires hydraulic fracturing with volumes that are in most cases not great enough to fall within the scope of the Recommendation. Studies for the Commission indicate that the risks and impacts of tight gas development are similar to those of shale gas, with the exception of impacts and risks associated with the hydraulic fracturing process, well completion and production stages linked to water resource depletion, which are potentially less significant as less water is typically required for the fracturing process.

Generally, the public does not distinguish between low- and high-volume hydraulic fracturing. Many citizens are now concerned about the potential use of any well stimulation technique in oil or gas extraction projects, even though some such techniques have been used for several years.

Enhanced recovery techniques are increasingly used to maximise the production of fossil fuels that initially did not require stimulation. The key risks stem from the construction and drilling of additional wells to provide injection points and the injection of substances, with impacts relating to landtake, traffic and emissions to air, and risks of ground and water pollution.

In view of the interest in several Member States in further developing coalbed methane and tight gas and using well stimulation or enhanced recovery techniques, the Commission commissioned studies that compare the risks and impacts from the extraction of such resources with those of shale gas. Overall, it concludes that the main risk management practices identified for shale gas could be equally applied to the practices mentioned above.

4. Stakeholders’ views

In December 2015, the European Parliament adopted, in plenary session, a Resolution calling on Member States that intend to pursue hydraulic fracturing to respect Recommendation 2014/70/EU and comply with the ‘highest climate, environmental and public health standards’.

In its opinion of June 2014, the European Economic and Social Committee considers that the current framework ‘if correctly implemented, is sufficient for use at local community level’, although it points to the need to reconsider the matter ‘should activities increase substantially in volume’. It also stresses the need for a high level of transparency in both exploration and exploitation projects in order to address public acceptance issues.

From the feedback received at the stakeholder event in June 2015, stakeholders appear to be divided in their views. The oil and gas industry considers that the Recommendation is sufficient and that no further legislative action is needed. Several waterproducing associations called for additional regulatory safeguards to ensure drinking water protection. Environmental NGOs consider that the Recommendation has not been effective and called for additional regulation or a ban on shale gas, shale oil and coalbed methane projects.

The Eurobarometer survey also elicited divergent views, ranging from ‘no need for EU involvement’ to pointing to a need for regulatory action or a ban on hydraulic fracturing. The current approach of providing recommendations without adopting new legislation was the least popular option.

No formal Council position was adopted after the publication of the Recommendation. At a meeting of the Environment Working Party, a number of delegates welcomed the fact that the Commission had opted for a Recommendation, while others considered legally binding measures preferable. Several competent authorities called on the Commission to clarify the applicability of relevant EU environmental legislation, as part of the EU network for the implementation and enforcement of environmental law (IMPEL).