Questerre Energy Corporation

Hi Expeter: The articles coming out of Quebec I've read lately are very interesting but as usual one sided and not factually correct. The issues about what chemicals are contained in the frac water are not a mystery. If they aren't included in the MSDS sheets then they can be obtained on line from the manufacturers of the product. And if that presents a problem then a chemical analysis of the frac water can easily be completed any qualified and accredited laboratory. The smoke and mirrors gimmick type arguments that the tree huggers present is just that "full of misguided emotion and smoke and mirrors" and just doesn't hold water. This all from a province that has been exploiting minerals for the past 2 centuries; has also exploited their lumber for pulp and paper as well as wood; and exploited and poisoned their fisheries. The effluent from a gold mining operation or an aluminum smelter and its tailings is a far more environmentally significant issue than petroleum products.

The real issues as well as the perceived environmental issues are still the same as they have always been, not listed in priority but just off the top of my head and of course IMHO:

1. the regulatory framework...which does not exist. Try duplicating what has been proven in the past, in places like Ontario (where oil was first discovered in North america) and is still being looked at for shale gas as well. Other areas such as BC, AB ans SK have decent regulatory framework. If that doesn't work look at the US of Europe.

2. the different ministries will fight over who actually has control and will exercise whatever rights they think they have in trying to show control. None of them have a clear control over the industry and as such they all try to control what they can.

3. disposal of the frac water at the local sewage treatment plants. This is easily resolved through treatment.

The municipalities will line up and want $$ for infastructure improvements so that they can profit from this economic boom. ie waste water treatment, local monitoring of wells and construction...who is going to pay for that...Ottawa???

3. the moratorium which is justified in the fishery areas of the St Lawrence and on the river...not on the land was inacurrately reported by our friends south of the border. I guess they can't read en francais...and maybe shouldn't be following plays they don't understand. This has created a bigger green movement without justification.

4. the contamination of the drinking water supply. Most municipalities as I understand it draw water from the St Lawrence River or from other surface water bodies. Local farmers etc in the country will have their own water supply but nowhere near even the upper Utica. The middle Utica is 1000+ metres below ground surface and with appropriate confining layers and aquitards to protect the drinking water aquifers.

Drilling techniques of today are far more advanced than they were even 10 years ago. I've been in the environmental industry for 35 years and have seen the improvements in drilling through that period.

5. the latest testing of the Utica was understood before the NR by those who understand the geology of the area. So again a total misrepresentation of the facts... a little off topic here but had to put it in.

6. Everyone knows that there is a substantial amount of NG to be exploited. undisputed by even the tree huggers.

7. the largest consumer market for NG in North America is only a short connnection to the pipeline away.

8. QC always wants to socialize everything. Do they actually think that the province could afford to takeover the rights to the gas and pay the going price to the exploration companies so that they could own it. They would probaly ask ROC to pay for it anyway

9.QC always wants to do things differently...not always better

Any ways it is just my humble opinion and should be taken for what it is worth. Hopefully we get some new results that negates the infuence of St Edouard.

Peace and grooviness to all, Foghorn