Exploring the intersections between local knowledge and environmental regulation: A study of shale gas extraction in Texas and Lancashire

Abstract

Contemporary shale gas extraction, also known as ‘fracking’, has become one of the most contentious environmental issues facing Europe and North America. Academic and policy debates have hitherto focused principally on questions related to scientific disputes, risk perception, potential health impacts, and the wider economic and geo-political dimensions to energy security. This paper draws on extensive qualitative research in Texas and Lancashire, undertaken between 2012 and 2015, to explore how differing regulatory frameworks are shaped through highly localized discourses that include communities opposed to fracking. Whilst there are significant differences between these two examples, including the extent of environmental monitoring, the local context remains a pivotal arena within which the regulatory and technical dimensions to fracking are being contested and scrutinized. The two cases illustrate how community opposition has catalysed important processes that have enhanced understanding of the environmental and social impacts of shale gas extraction.

Keywords

Shale gas extraction fracking environmental planning community engagement local knowledge

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aitken

(2009) Wind power planning controversies and the construction of ‘expert’ and ‘lay’ knowledges. Science as Culture 18(1): 47–64.

Andrews IJ (2013) The Carboniferous Bowland Shale study: Geology and resource estimate. British Geological Survey for Department of Energy and Climate Change, London.

BBC (2014) Cuadrilla fracking delays over radioactive waste water. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25902272 (accessed 25 October 2014).

Bell

Gray

Haggett

(2005) The ‘social gap’ in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics 14(4): 460–477.

Bickerstaff

(2012) ‘Because we’ve got history here’: Nuclear waste, cooperative siting, and the relationship geography of a complex issue. Environment and Planning C 44(11): 2611–2628.

Blackpool Gazette (2015) Please save our villages. 28 January. Available at: http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/community/community-news/please-save-our-villages-1-7075337 (accessed 3 February 2015).

Boersma

Johnson

(2012) The shale gas revolution: US and EU policy agendas. Review of Policy Research 29(4): 570–576.

Bomberg E (2015) Shale we drill? Discourse dynamics in UK fracking debate. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 1–17.

Brasier

McLaughin

Rhubart

(2013) Risk perceptions of natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale. Environmental Practice 15(2): 108–122.

10.

Briggle

(2015) A Field Philosopher’s Guide to Fracking, New York, NY: Liveright Publishing.

11.

British Geological Survey and Department for Communities and Local Government (BGS and DCLG) (2011) Onshore Oil and Gas, London: Crown Copyright.

12.

Buchele M (2015) Texas Railroad Commission refutes study linking quakes to oil and gas industry. Available at: https://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2015/09/02/texas-railroad-commission-refutes-study-linking-quakes-to-oil-and-gas-industry/.

13.

CBS News (2014) Azle residents take their earthquake concerns to Austin. Available at: http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/01/20/azle-residents-take-their-earthquake-concerns-to-austin/.

14.

City of Azle (2014) Earthquake info. Available at: http://www.cityofazle.org/index.aspx?NID=456.

15.

Clifford

(2013) Rendering reform: Local authority planners and perceptions of public participation in Great Britain. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability 18(1): 110–131.

16.

Corburn

(2003) Bringing local knowledge into environmental decision making: Improving urban planning for communities at risk. Journal of Planning Education and Research 22(4): 420–433.

17.

Cotton

Rattle

Van Alstine

(2014) Shale gas policy in the UK: An argumentative discourse analysis. Energy Policy 73: 427–438.

18.

Cowell

Lennon

(2014) The utilisation of environmental knowledge in land-use planning: Drawing lessons from an ecosystem services approach. Environment and Planning C 32(2): 263–282.

19.

Davis

(2012) The politics of fracking: Regulating natural gas drilling practices in Colorado and Texas. Review of Policy Research 29(2): 177–191.

20.

Davis

Hoffner

(2012) Federalizing energy? Agenda change and the politics of fracking. Policy Sciences 45(3): 221–241.

21.

Deloitte (2008) Onshore UK 13th licensing round report. Available at: http://www.psg.deloitte.co.uk/NewsLicensingRounds_GB_ON_0806.asp.

22.

Department of Energy and Climate Change (2014a) Correspondence and meetings between the Office of Unconventional Gas and Oil. UKOOG, Centrica and IGas. UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, London.

23.

Department of Energy and Climate Change (2014b) Correspondence and meetings between the Office of Unconventional Gas and Oil, UKOOG, Centrica and IGas. Response to Freedom of Information request – series of redacted emails. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/correspondence-and-meetings-between-the-office-of-unconventional-gas-and-oil-ukoog-centrica-and-igas.

24.

Devine-Wright

(2013) Explaining “NIMBY” objections to a power line: The role of personal place attachment and project-related factors. Environment and Behaviour 45(6): 761–781.

25.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2014) Regulation of the hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Water Drinking Act. Available at: http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/wells_hydroreg.cfm (accessed 9 July 2014).

26.

Feenberg

(2010) Between Reason and Experience: Essays on Technology and Modernity, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

27.

Feenberg

(2003) Modernity theory and technology studies: Reflections on bridging the gap. In: Misa

Brey

Feenberg

(eds) Modernity and Technology, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 73–104.

28.

Finewood

Stroup

(2012) Fracking and the neo-liberalization of the hydro-social cycle in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale. Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education 147(1): 72–79.

29.

Frohlich

(2012) A survey of earthquakes and injection well locations in the Barnett Shale. Texas Leading Edge 31: 1446–1451.

30.

Fry

(2013) Urban gas drilling and distance ordinances in the Texas Barnett Shale. Energy Policy 62: 79–89.

31.

Glass

(2011) Shale gas and oil terminology: Products and byproducts, Washington, DC: Environmental and Energy Study Institute.

32.

Green C, Styles P and Baptize B (2012) Preese Hall shale gas fracturing-review and recommendations for induced seismic mitigation. UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, London.

33.

Haughton

Bankoff

Coulthard

(2015) In search of ‘lost’ knowledge and outsourced expertise in flood risk management. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 40(3): 375–386.

34.

Hilaire

Bauer

Brecha

(2015) Boom or bust? Mapping the global unknowns of shale gas potential. Energy Economics 49: 581–587.

35.

Hilson C (2015) Framing fracking: Which frames are heard in English planning and environmental policy and practice? Journal of Environmental Law 27(2): 177–202.

36.

House of Commons Environment, food and rural affairs committee (2006) The environment agency: Seventh report of session 2005–2006 volume one. The Stationery Office, London.

37.

Howarth

Ingraeffea

Engelder

(2011) Natural gas: should fracking stop? Nature 477: 271–275.

38.

Institute for Economic Development (2013) Economic impact of the Eagle Ford Shale. University of Texas, San Antonio, TX.

39.

Jacquet J (2014) Review of risk to communities from shale gas development. Environmental Science and Technology 48(15): 8321–8333.

40.

Jaspal R, Turner A and Nerlich B (2014) Fracking on YouTube: Exploring risks, benefits and human values. Environmental Values 23(5): 501–527.

41.

Jaspal

Nerlich

(2014) Fracking in the UK press: Threat dynamics in an unfolding debate. Public Understandings of Science 23(3): 348–363.

42.

Jones P, Hillier D and Comfort D (2013) Fracking and public relations: rehearsing the arguments and making the case. Journal of Public Affairs 13(4): 384–390.

43.

Keller

(2009) Science in Environmental Policy Making: The Politics of Objective Advice, Boston, MA: The MIT Press.

44.

McClymont

O’Hare

(2008) We’re not NIMBYs! contrasting local protest groups with idealised conceptions of sustainable communities. Local Environment 13(4): 321–355.

45.

McKenzie

Guo

Witter

(2014) Birth outcomes and maternal residential proximity to natural gas development in rural Colorado. Children’s Health 122(4): 412–417.

46.

Metze T (2014) Fracking the debate: Frame shifts and boundary work in Dutch decision making on shale gas. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning. Epub ahead of print 2014.

47.

Mitchell

(2011) Carbon Democracy: Political Power in an Age of Oil, London: Verso.

48.

Morris J, Song L and Hasemyer J (2014) Big oil, bad air: Fracking the Eagle Ford Shale of South Texas. The Center for Public Integrity, 18 February. Available at: http://eagleford.publicintegrity.org.

49.

Morton

(2013) Unlocking the earth – A short history of hydraulic fracturing. GEOExPro 10(6): 86–90.

50.

Owens

(2004) Siting, sustainable development, and social priorities. Journal of Risk Research 7(2): 101–114.

51.

Oxburgh Lord (2014) Shale gas: An overview. Keynote presentation at Shale UK organised on behalf of the Geological Society, London, 4–5 March.

52.

Powers

Saberi

Pepino

(2015) Popular epidemiology and “fracking”: Citizens’ concerns regarding the economic, environmental, health and social impacts of unconventional natural gas drilling operations. Journal of Community Health 40(3): 534–541.

53.

Rabe

Borick

(2013) Conventional politics for unconventional drilling? Lessons from Pennsylvania’s early move into fracking policy development. Review of Policy Research 30(3): 321–340.

54.

Rahm

(2011) Regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale gas plays: The case of Texas. Energy Policy 5: 2974–2981.

55.

Rodriguez

Soeder

(2015) Evolving water management practices in shale oil and gas development. Journal of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources 10: 18–24.

56.

Royal Society, Royal Academy of Engineering (2012) Shale Gas Extraction in the UK: A Review of Hydraulic Fracturing, London: The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering.

57.

Schafft

Borlu

Glenna

(2013) The relationship between Marcellus Shale gas development in Pennsylvania and local perceptions of risk and opportunity. Rural Sociology 78(2): 143–166.

58.

Small

Stern

Bomberg

(2014) Risks and risk governance in unconventional shale gas development. Environmental Science & Technology 48(15): 8289–8297.

59.

Spence

(2013) Backyard politics: National policies: Understanding the opportunity costs of national fracking bans. Yale Journal on Regulation 30(30): 30–38.

60.

Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) (2015) Eagle Ford Shale information. Available at: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/oil-gas/major-oil-gas-formations/eagle-ford-shale/.

61.

United States Environmental Information Agency (2013) Technically Recoverable Shale Oil and Shale Gas Resources: An Assessment of the 137 Shale Formations in 41 Countries Outside the United States, Washington, DC: States EIA.

62.

United States Geological Survey (USGS) (2013) Letter to the Mayor of Azle, The Honorable Alan Brundett, 23 December 2013. Available at: http://www.cityofazle.org/DocumentCenter/View/2564.

63.

Willow

(2014) The new politics of environmental degradation: Un/Expected landscapes of disempowerment and vulnerability. Journal of Political Ecology 21: 237–257.

64.

Willow

Wylie

(2014) Politics, ecology and the new anthropology of energy: Exploring the emerging frontiers of hydraulic fracturing. Journal of Political Ecology 21: 226–236.