¨  A Dilemma of Abundance: Governance Challenges of Reconciling Shale Gas Development and Climate  Change Mitigation

Stephenson, E. Frank; Shaw, Karena

doi:10.3390/su5052210

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, critiques focus on the Crown's approach to assessing permit applications for resource extraction and water use on a site‐by‐site basis . The narrow spatial and temporal focus directly conflicts with, and thus undermines, the view by many Indigenous nations about the interconnectedness of social and ecological systems within and beyond a watershed and the cumulative impacts that occur over time . Critiques have also emerged that the courts mirror this narrow view on temporal and spatial impacts, and neglect to acknowledge the associated cultural harm .…”

Section: Part 3: Consultation Accommodation and The Search For Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some provinces, such as British Columbia and Alberta, hydraulic fracturing development is underway and has been actively promoted by provincial governments, while in other provinces such as Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, moratoria on fracturing have been put in place . These two opposing approaches to hydraulic fracturing development can be observed in jurisdictions throughout the world where both rapid growth or complete bans/moratoria have occurred …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consultation is not consent: hydraulic fracturing and water governance on Indigenous lands in Canada

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid increase in private sector proposals and permit applications to use water for the purpose of hydraulic fracturing has led to significant concerns in nearly every jurisdiction in the world where shale gas development has been explored. In addition to concerns about risks to water quantity and quality, in Canada, shale gas development has highlighted how the Crown (federal and provincial governments) continues to struggle in its approach to honor, respect, and uphold Nation‐to‐Nation relationships with Indigenous peoples. But moving beyond the criticism, we argue that these circumstances have provided a renewed opportunity to explore alternative governance approaches. Existing water governance challenges are exacerbated by historical injustices generated by resource management approaches that have exposed Indigenous nations to disproportionate environmental risks. Furthermore, the inadequacy of current water governance approaches to recognizing Indigenous rights, self‐determination, ways of knowing, and values has been well established in literature relating to environmental governance and Indigenous peoples. Given these circumstances, if water is allocated to hydraulic fracturing in Canada with continued disregard for Indigenous rights and risks, we contend that this only further intensifies unjust environmental and cultural harm to Indigenous peoples. In the quest for solutions, we discuss the challenges to alternative models (co‐management, collaborative governance, and impact benefit agreements) that are frequently cited in environment‐Indigenous literature. We conclude with recommendations to address the unresolved challenges inherent in these governance models, in the interest of improving water decision‐making. WIREs Water 2017, 4:e1180. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1180 This article is categorized under: Human Water > Rights to Water Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water Human Water > Water Governance

show abstract

Section: Part 3: Consultation Accommodation and The Search For Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consultation is not consent: hydraulic fracturing and water governance on Indigenous lands in Canada

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The appropriate scale of environmental regulation of fracking is a central topic of inquiry (Andrews and McCarthy 2014;Davis 2012;Davis and Hoffer 2012;Spence 2013;Stephenson and Shaw 2013), and is often discussed in detail even in articles where it is not the central focus. As described above, fracking has been exempted from many federal environmental regulatory programs, and is instead regulated primarily at the state and local levels.…”

Section: Social Impacts Of Frackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydraulic Fracturing: A Critical Physical Geography Review

Lave

Lutz

2014

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking a critical physical geography approach, this article provides the first side-by-side review of the physical and social literature on hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" as it is frequently referred to. We note the striking disparities between the physical science literature's description of the relatively manageable impacts of fracking and the almost apocalyptic tone taken in some popular press and critical social science literature. We argue that these disparities may be a result of the dramatic shift in the geography of energy production in the US. The rise of fracking has redistributed environmental injustices beyond traditional national sacrifice zones, such as Appalachia, and towards regions that in many cases are wealthier than Appalachia and have not recently borne the brunt of energy production, causing profound social, cultural, and economic shocks. Reviewing the physical and social science literature together suggests that we reconsider the fracking research agenda. Studies of the physical impacts of hydraulic fracturing should be expanded to address communities' concerns about habitat fragmentation and the impacts of the myriad truck trips required to service fracking wells, neither of which currently are given much attention. Social science research on fracking could benefit from an increase in comparative work, assessing the relative economic and social impacts in regions where energy production is ramping up in relation to regions where it is declining.

show abstract

“…Although scenario 11 (100 % of the emissions are vented) does not represent a feasible option according to the UK regulation, it has nevertheless been explored to identify the potential threats of complete venting. Scenarios 13-14 explore a 15 % increase/decrease in the amount of completion/workover emissions due to the hydraulic fracturing process, in virtue of the current debate on this in the literature Howarth et al 2011b;Jiang et al 2011;Forster and Perks 2012;Cathles et al 2012;Stephenson and Shaw 2013). Scenario 15-16 investigate an increase/decrease of EUR according to the values reported in DECC (2013a, b).…”

Section: Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shale gas: a life-cycle perspective for UK production

Tagliaferri

Clift

Lettieri

et al. 2016

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Following the boom of shale gas production in the USA and the decrease in the US gas prices, increasing interest in shale gas is developing in many countries holding shale reserves and exploration is already taking place in some EU countries, including the UK. Any commercial development of shale gas in Europe requires a broad environmental assessment, recognizing the different European conditions and legislations. Methods This study focuses on the UK situation and estimates the environmental impacts of shale gas using lifecycle assessment (LCA); the burdens of shale gas production in the UK are compared with the burdens of the current UK natural gas mix. The main focus is on the analysis of water impacts, but a broad range of other impact categories are also considered. A sensitivity analysis is performed on the most environmentally criticized operations in shale gas production, including flowback disposal and emission control, by considering a range of possible process options.Results and discussion Improper waste water management and direct disposal or spills of waste water to river can lead to high water and human ecotoxicity. Mining of the sand and withdrawal of the water used in fracking fluids determine the main impacts on water use and degradation. However, the water degradation of the conventional natural gas supply to the UK is shown to be even higher than that of shale gas. For the global warming potential (GWP), the handling methods of the emissions associated with the hydraulic fracturing influence the results only when emissions are vented. Finally, the estimated ultimate recovery of the well has the greatest impact on the results as well as the flowback ratio and flowback disposal method. Conclusions This paper provides insights to better understand the future development of shale gas in the UK. Adequate waste water management and emission handling significantly reduce the environmental impacts of shale gas production. Policy makers should consider that shale gas at the same time increases the water consumption and decreases the water degradation when compared with the gas mix supply. Furthermore, the environmental impacts of shale gas should be considered according to the low productivity that force the drilling and exploitation of a high number of wells.

show abstract

¨ A Dilemma of Abundance: Governance Challenges of Reconciling Shale Gas Development and Climate Change Mitigation

Cited by 15 publications

References 36 publications

Consultation is not consent: hydraulic fracturing and water governance on Indigenous lands in Canada

Consultation is not consent: hydraulic fracturing and water governance on Indigenous lands in Canada

Hydraulic Fracturing: A Critical Physical Geography Review

Shale gas: a life-cycle perspective for UK production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About