Unconventional oil and gas extraction (UOGE) including fracking for shale gas is underway in North America on a large scale, and in Australia and some other countries. It is viewed as a major source of global energy needs by proponents. Critics consider fracking and UOGE an immediate and long-term threat to global, national, and regional public health and climate. Rarely have governments brought together relatively detailed assessments of direct and indirect public health risks associated with fracking and weighed these against potential benefits to inform a national debate on whether to pursue this energy route. The Scottish government has now done so in a wide-ranging consultation underpinned by a variety of reports on unconventional gas extraction including fracking. This paper analyses the Scottish government approach from inception to conclusion, and from procedures to outcomes. The reports commissioned by the Scottish government include a comprehensive review dedicated specifically to public health as well as reports on climate change, economic impacts, transport, geology, and decommissioning. All these reports are relevant to public health, and taken together offer a comprehensive review of existing evidence. The approach is unique globally when compared with UOGE assessments conducted in the USA, Australia, Canada, and England. The review process builds a useful evidence base although it is not without flaws. The process approach, if not the content, offers a framework that may have merits globally.

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary public health policies relating to fossil fuels including shale exploration. Yet air quality and related public health impacts linked to ethical and environmental justice elements are often marginalized or missing in planning and associated decision making. Industry and government policies and practices, laws and planning regulations lagged well behind the science in the United Kingdom. This paper explores the reasons for this and what shaped some of those policies. Why did shale gas policies in England fail to fully address public health priorities and neglect ethical and environmental justice concerns. To answer this question, an interdisciplinary analysis is needed informed by a theoretical framework of how air pollution and climate change are largely discounted in the complex realpolitik of policy and regulation for shale gas development in England. Sources, including official government, regulatory and planning documents, as well as industry and scientific publications are examined and benchmarked against the science and ethical and environmental justice criteria. Further, our typology illustrates how the process works drawing on an analysis of official policy documents and statements on planning and regulatory oversight of shale exploration in England, and material from industry and their consultants relating to proposed shale oil and gas development. Currently the oil, gas and chemical industries in England continue to dominate and influence energy and feedstock-related policy making to the detriment of ethical and environmental justice decision making with significant consequences for public health.

This paper focuses on how climate delay narratives populate the information environment of decision makers and regulators in EU policy making. We examine the communications of selected trade associations representing oil and gas extraction interests in Europe. Our analysis offers a novel synthesis, drawing on official data, industry and social media content, using mixed methods and informed by recent theorising on the advocacy activities of trade associations. The paper contextualises the lobbying and communication activities of oil and gas trade associations in Europe using publicly available data on lobbying (drawn from the EU transparency register) and the outputs of oil and gas trade associations (in trade, specialist and social media) to examine their preferred framings and promoted policy prescriptions for addressing climate and energy policy. We find that trade associations representing oil and gas interests in Europe spend millions of euros per annum producing and promoting policy ideas that seek to secure the long-term future of these industries. Wider climate science is rarely directly referenced or acknowledged in their public advocacy. We argue that the normalization of a new form of climate denial has emerged, based on unproven technologies and market mechanisms being pushed by powerful economic interests.

-- This book unmasks the covert and undemocratic world of corporate spin -- 'Corporate Spin is one of the great toxins of democracy and a free society. This...