The French government has just announced that it has referred “the General Council for Industry, Energy, and Technologies (CGIET) for the revocation of the following three permits: Nant (held by the company Schuepbach), Villeneuve-de-Berg (Schuepbach), and Montélimar (Total group),” thereby erasing the signature of Jean-Louis Borloo by which these permits were granted in March 2010 under the utmost opacity.
This is firstly a victory for all those who have strived to reveal the full scope of environmental, health, and economic risks associated with the extraction of shale gas and oil. In less than 9 months, thousands of public meetings, flyers, information panels, press releases, Facebook groups, etc., have supported a true movement of popular and civic education, reclaiming a subject hitherto confiscated. The revocation of the three permits results from this power dynamic built in society.
It is also a stinging rebuff to all those who claimed that the extraction of shale gas and oil posed no specific problems. Or that it was possible to exploit “à la française” without causing the same consequences as in the United States. Let us remember that last spring, ministers and the government were tempted by this imprudent discourse whispered by industrialists to “not close the door completely on shale gas.” The door has just slammed shut on their fingers.
Furthermore, it is a real slap in the face to the administration of the Ministry of Energy. By asking it to revoke permits it studied, validated, and supported, the government is absurdly demonstrating that a few high-ranking officials in the mining body should no longer have control over French energy policy. Conversely, we collectively have the capacity to determine what its major orientations should be.
It is also an opportunity to challenge the government and its Minister of the Environment:
• 61 other “exclusive permits for the research of liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons” remain valid; as the application files show, many of them involve hydraulic fracturing; such is the case for the permits in the Paris Basin aimed at exploring and exploiting shale oil. To explain this validation, the government specifies that the holders of these 61 permits “have not planned to search for shale gas and oil or have renounced it” and have made “a formal commitment not to resort to hydraulic fracturing”; how can the government trust permit holders who do not hesitate to amend their application file to comply with the Jacob Law of July 13, 2011?
• If hydraulic fracturing is dangerous and prohibited in France, it must be so everywhere else, and out of political coherence, immediately in Europe, since France holds a strategic position there.
• 86 applications are still under review, including the “Brignoles” permit, which covers a large part of the Alpes Maritimes. The most complete opacity continues to reign over the fate of these permit applications and their content.
The Prefect of the Alpes Maritimes has still not responded to the inquiries of the “Collective 06 No to Shale Gas,” which is seeking clarifications regarding the possible authorization for exploration and exploitation of the mentioned “Brignoles permit.”
“The Collective 06 No to Shale Gas” will remain very vigilant as long as all granted or pending permits are not revoked.
