Failed: Fracking Protocol [Complete] [Complete]

Description: THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

DEFINING hydraulic fracturing, “fracking”, as the process of creating fractures in rock formations to extract sources of energy;

AWARE fracking may lead to increased risk to resident populations and the environment, including from groundwater contamination and induced seismic activity, at operational sites;

REQUIRING member states to mitigate associated risks to protect resident populations and the environment;

HEREBY:

MANDATES member states enact legislation requiring, where appropriate, operators of fracking sites to:

adopt industrial best practices and optimal safety standards;

monitor background seismic activity for induced seismic events, and take necessary action to mitigate risks;

minimise site contamination, including from accidental spills and flowback wastewater discharge, and to treat and prevent any further spread of contamination;

compensate displaced resident populations prior to relocation and restore local environments upon cessation of operations;

liaise with relevant WA agencies to ensure compliance under this mandate;

RECOMMENDS member states hypothecate a proportion of fracking revenues to enhance and promote local environments once operations have ceased, and to develop local education and employment opportunities.

Generally, the Ministry finds when appraising environmental proposals, they're usually on a pretty commonly known or understood topic. So it's refreshing to see something like this come out of the blue which seems both well thought out and researched by the author and is something different.

As a whole, there's really not a lot of issues that this Ministry finds with the proposal, the author has been refining it for quite a while, visually there's nothing strikingly wrong with it. The mandates seem pretty reasonable, not overly invasive which is always a plus, and the recommends clause is actually pretty well thought out. We're a still a little iffy on whether the "all businesses" category is really applicable, but we're not inclined at this time to fault the act considerably for that alone.


Considering the above, the Ministry is happily recommending a FOR vote on this proposal.

AS PER USUAL THIS IS A SUGGESTED VOTE ONLY, PLEASE VOTE FOR,AGAINST OR ABSTAIN AS DESIRED BELOW:.

Didn't do enough to convince us it's a transboundary environmental issue.

Against.

Up with the Frack! Cheap energy = Economic growth!

Against

For.

Which places the tally

3-1-0 Against

Greetings honourable nations of The North Pacific,

Forgive the intrusion - I hope you don't mind my anchoring here for a couple of days; I come following a discussion with your WA Delegate via telegram. I hope to speak with your WA members about my current proposal at vote, Fracking Protocol, and engage with any questions or objections in a positive manner.

My aim, obviously, is to convince a majority of you to support my proposal and, in doing so, gain the support of your esteemed WA Delegate McMasterdonia.

If you have not done so already, I implore you to have a brief read of the discussion thread here: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=279463

This gives a balanced overview of the proposal with a majority of comments in favour, although there are, of course, some dissenters.

If you have already voted in favour, then you have my thanks and I apologise for intruding once again.

If you are as yet undecided, or have voted against, then I hope to quickly lay out why I want you to support the proposal.

Let me be clear on a couple of points:

• nothing in the text of the resolution can be construed to force member states to not operate fracking sites anywhere they wish, nor car any member state be forced to shutdown operations;
• member states are being asked to take minimum precautionary measures, where appropriate, to protect resident peoples and the environment - it should be noted that these requirements fall well short of anything as currently required by World Assembly Resolution #263 Uranium Mining Standards Act, #223 Transboundary Water Use Act or other previous legislation in order to minimise the cost to industry;
• "where appropriate" is to allow FT member states a wide latitude in interpretation to allow for remote seismic activity control, forcefield containment of contaminent and transporter removal, and temporary rehousing of displaced peoples in synthetic recreations of their home environs (for example, as might occur here in Aligned Planets) or for the lack of necessesity to restore local environments if previous environments were uninhabited wastelands, deserts, asteroids, etc;

I look forward to engaging with you all further.

Best,


AP

For the record I have voted against this proposal

Against

Against, until they come up with a better word than "fracking".

It sounds like a DC comics curse word.

"Holy reach around, batman, the Riddler has blown up the fracking bridge!"

Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.

Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.