Risks and Risk Governance in Unconventional Shale Gas Development

Abstract

A broad assessment is provided of the current state of knowledge regarding the risks associated with shale gas development and their governance. For the principal domains of risk, we identify observed and potential hazards and promising mitigation options to address them, characterizing current knowledge and research needs. Important unresolved research questions are identified for each area of risk; however, certain domains exhibit especially acute deficits of knowledge and attention, including integrated studies of public health, ecosystems, air quality, socioeconomic impacts on communities, and climate change. For these, current research and analysis are insufficient to either confirm or preclude important impacts. The rapidly evolving landscape of shale gas governance in the U.S. is also assessed, noting challenges and opportunities associated with the current decentralized (state-focused) system of regulation. We briefly review emerging approaches to shale gas governance in other nations, and consider new governance initiatives and options in the U.S. involving voluntary industry certification, comprehensive development plans, financial instruments, and possible future federal roles. In order to encompass the multiple relevant disciplines, address the complexities of the evolving shale gas system and reduce the many key uncertainties needed for improved management, a coordinated multiagency federal research effort will need to be implemented.

Comparing the relationship between knowledge and support for hydraulic fracturing between residents of the United States and the United Kingdom

“…This latter point will be reengaged below. Accompanying and complementing this decentralized leasing in the US is fragmented governance [58]. In the US, states retain the majority of control over regulation; some have granted municipalities varying levels of oversight over development (e.g., Pennsylvania) while others have retained all governance capacity centrally (e.g., Ohio).…”

Assessing Risk in Chinese Shale Gas Investments Abroad: Modelling and Policy Recommendations

“…Technological risks are usually caused by technical design, construction, operation and other factors in oil and gas development [45,65], and are mainly reflected in the following four aspects.…”

Water for Energy: Inconsistent Assessment Standards and Inability to Judge Properly

“…These changes are due to the wider use of higher efficiency power plants with more advanced cooling systems, which reduce water withdrawals at the expense of increased consumption, and to the increased production of biofuel [38], with a water footprint that is 70-400 times larger than that of conventional fossil energies [22]. Carbon capture and storage and expansion of nuclear facilities [42•], as well as increased hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and shale gas production [2••, [43][44][45][46][47][48], have been recognized as the other possible causes of increased water withdrawals in the future.…”