Okay, I lied when I said not to worry about the the flood of fracked gas from the U.S. into Ontario. Of course, everyone should be worried about the impacts of increasing energy consumption on a planet that has already dangerously tipped out of ecological balance — the recent extreme cold snap being a good example. But fracked gas presents its own unique problems, so serious as to rival those of  the oil sands.

Now this may seem counterintuitive to many who regard clean-burning natural gas as a bridging fuel that will help us reduce greenhouse gas emissions as we ween ourselves off of more dirty fuels like oil and coal. The problem is that an awful lot of natural gas (methane) escapes into the atmosphere during the fracking process and methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

In fact, when these fugitive emissions are taken into account, the greenhouse gas footprint of fracked gas is actually higher than for oil or coal. Recent studies by Professor Anthony Ingraffea and his colleagues explain this science and conclude that fracked gas is much more a gangplank than an bridge.

The Council of Canadians raised this red flag in recent Ontario Energy Board proceedings. The Board is considering proposals by Union Gas and Enbridge to restructure the gas infrastructure of the Greater Toronto Area to increase the flow of fracked gas to and through Ontario and Quebec. The Board’s decision is imminent.