GA: Fracking Protocol

[Cerb]

GA: Fracking Protocol

Fracking Protocol

A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

This is the discussion thread, please go here to vote.



Category: Environmental

Industry Affected: All Businesses

Proposed by: Aligned Planets


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.

[Cerb]

Screwed up with this one guys. I could have sworn it was up already. I got my vote threads mixed up as well. Kudos to me.

[Deleted]

Hehe

Greetings all,

As the author of the proposal, I'm happy to engage with any questions you may have.

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 Cerb.

Best,


AP

[Siuts]

Feb 10, 2014 18:03:36 GMT -5 alignedplanets said:

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 Cerb.

You had me convinced with your proposal, well, the ..th draft that is ;-) In the hope to protect the environment a little and given the compensation guideline in your proposal, I voted 'For'.

[Ardreas]

While I respect what you're trying to do, alignedplanets, I do not at this time support the proposal at vote. It's an admirable goal, to protect the environment, but it raises again the issue of national sovereignty vs subservience to the WA. My people are perfectly capable of developing safety standards for ourselves regarding the working of this procedure. We don't need WA agents breathing down our necks to watch and criticize our every move. To that end, I am voting against this.
I hope you do not misunderstand. This is not a vote against you or against the principles of safety and environmental protection. However, it is a vote against what I see as the continued erosion of national sovereignty. This is what I do not support.

[Witchcraft and Sorcery]

I'm against as well. Nothing against the writer of the resolution or anything, but I also wish to respect national sovereignty on this issue. I support the cause and all but at the same time I think it's getting a bit micromanagey.

[The Candy Lane]

I'm against this proposal, as in my opinion the WA is too bloated as it is.

[Cerb]

Currently the vote is hung 50/50. Continuing to abstain until we get a majority.

[Zybex]

I too must vote against, for if a nation truly cared about its people and land, they would make such safety standards by default, and if a nation had not cared really, they could simply leave. I just feel its a tad micromanaging, and that I hold the freedom that people can try to run their own nation, even if I may not always agree with how they run it, we can't force things on people.