Social license to operate during Wyoming's coalbed methane boom: Implications of private participation (original) (raw)
Related papers
As growth in unconventional energy production has brought oil and gas development closer to Colorado’s Front Range communities, a desire for more local control over that development has resulted in bans and moratoria in a few communities. Memoranda of understanding (MOUs), signed between local governments and industry operators, are emerging as a policy tool to allow development to proceed while addressing the concerns of local communities. This study analyses how MOUs shape public opinion of unconventional energy production by comparing two communities on the northern edge of the Denver metropolitan area: Erie, which instituted one of the state’s first MOUs in 2012, and nearby Firestone, which does not have MOUs in place. Analysing complaints made to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission suggests that the MOUs narrow the breadth of citizen complaints and increase citizen engagement with state governing bodies. Finally, we find that the most significant predictor of complaint volume is encroachment of drilling activities close to communities.
Political Mobilization, Venue Change, and the Coal Bed Methane Conflict in Montana and Wyoming
Natural Resources Journal, 2005
The emerging conflict over coal bed methane (CBM) exploration and development in the mountain west offers a classic example of what Baumgartner and Jones call a "wave of criticism." The cozy subgovernments that have dominated energy exploration and development in the mountain states are now under attack and are struggling to maintain their autonomy. Energy exploration, which was once perceived to have only positive consequences, is now the focus of an intense debate that has managed to unite previously warring factions. This article utilizes a comparative assessment of CBM politics in Montana and Wyoming to explain the connection between changing popular and elite perceptions of the issue, institutional change, and policy change.
Managing Unconventional Oil and Gas Development as if Communities Mattered
2016
The advent of horizontal oil and gas drilling into relatively impermeable shale rock, and the companion technological breakthrough of high-pressure, multi-stage fracking that frees hydrocarbons along the substantial length of these horizontal wells, has fundamentally altered the oil and gas industry. The Energy Information Administration has gone so far as to predict that North America could become a net energy exporter as early as 2019, largely as a result of the explosive growth of this “unconventional” oil and gas development.2 Despite its promise, managing unconventional oil and gas development has proved challenging, and many of the communities that find themselves hosting this development have begun to push back in the face of serious public health and community impact concerns. Some communities have gone so far as to enact complete bans on “fracking,” the shorthand way that unconventional development is often described. Yet notwithstanding many legitimate concerns, the flexib...
Debating Unconventional Energy: Social, Political, and Economic Implications
Annual Review of Environment and Resources
The extraction of unconventional oil and gas-from shale rocks, tight sand, and coalbed formations-is shifting the geographies of fossil fuel production, with complex consequences. Following Jackson et al.'s (1) natural science survey of the environmental consequences of hydraulic fracturing, this review examines social science literature on unconventional energy. After an overview of the rise of unconventional energy, the review examines energy economics and geopolitics, community mobilization, and state and private regulatory responses. Unconventional energy requires different frames of analysis than conventional energy because of three characteristics: increased drilling density, low-carbon and "clean" energy narratives of natural gas, and distinct ownership and royalty structures. This review points to the need for an interdisciplinary approach to analyzing the resulting dynamic, multilevel web of relationships that implicate land, water, food, and climate. Furthermore, the review highlights how scholarship on unconventional energy informs the broader energy landscape and contested energy futures. 2.1 Review in Advance first posted online on June 21 7. (Changes may still occur before final publication online and in print.) Changes may still occur before final publication online and in print
Space, Place, and Spatial Inequality: Fracking and Split Estates in Colorado
Across the U.S. and worldwide, hydraulic fracturing, or, fracking, has been used as a process to free up sources of natural gas, leaving behind a visible trail of physical alteration and political turmoil. Natural gas proponents have touted this process as an economic boon, a necessary solution to energy dependence, and an alternative fuel to coal. Opponents on the other hand, have argued the process presents a threat to the health and welfare of citizens and communities as a result of the process, visual pollution, environmental degradation, and the lack of adequate science about its effects. Many scholars are exploring various aspects of the issues related to this new wave of domestic natural gas production in the U.S. However, much of the scholarship and discussion has been at the substantive level and fails to explore the issues through a theoretical framework. In this paper we address this gap, provide a much-needed theoretical framework for studying hydraulic fracturing. We utilize a socio-spatial perspective to explore how space, place, territory, and land rights are socially produced and constructed. We also highlight the way in which these processes necessarily involve the uses of meta-power to create the unequal conditions for mineral extraction and power to play out in specific situations. Concentrating on the current state of issues in Colorado, we will present a number of examples of contested sites, framed by our theoretical perspective focusing on the production and construction of space, place, territory, and land use rights
Questions abound about the appropriate governance systems to manage the risks of unconventional oil and gas development, and the ability for citizens to engage and participate in those systems. In this paper, we map the development of shale gas governance in the US and UK; we highlight the contrasting systems of land ownership and mineral rights, compare the opportunities that these systems of governance present the general public to participate and become involved in shale gas decisions and consider the implications on issues of social justice. We conclude that in both countries, that despite government and industry engagement rhetoric and associated processes, the publics' influence on shale gas decisions is perceived to be minimal or not at all. We argue that the implications of the observed institutional governance systems, with few opportunities for citizen influence, are developments which inherently lack social justice, procedural fairness, and ultimately, a social license to operate.
The Extractive Industries and Society, 2019
This analysis of in-depth interviews with members of Frack Free Denton and Denton Taxpayers for a Strong Economy explores the dynamic divide caused by hydraulic fracturing in Denton, Texas. The most vocal and persuasive groups involved in the debate have discursive power to influence public opinion, which in turn shapes policies and practices. This analysis shows that pro- and anti-fracking groups conveyed an attachment to and ownership of the local land and engaged in harsh “othering” discourse to describe the opposing group. This study contributes to scholarly understandings of the relationship(s) between public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing, land use, and proximity.
Framing fracking: private property, common resources, and regimes of governance
In this policy ethnography we examine the discourse related to unconventional natural gas development in western Pennsylvania in order to illuminate expressions of political power in attempts to manufacture consent. We focus on the overlapping spheres of influence between the state and capital to dissect techniques of governance as they operate at the level of civil society. Data collection from fieldwork and discourse analysis, particularly focused on discourse about recent legislation to regulate the booming natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, reveals the ways in which industry proponents attempt to corral public opinion to the goal of extracting and amassing capital. We analyze how industry actors try to gain and draw from the authority and approval of the state in those efforts. In turn, the state uses its socially sanctioned authority to reframe water, land, air, community, health, and self around a paradigm that interprets those as sources of profit. This case study examines how, under neoliberalism, the state organizes knowledge on the topic of fracking such that the balance of power shifts further out of democratic reach.
Energy Policy, 2018
Research on unconventional oil and gas (UOG) development has focused so intently on hydraulic fracturing that it has overlooked "fracking's" partner technology, horizontal drilling (HZD), which now enables operators to drill more than 2.5 miles. This innovation merits examination because it generates opportunities and challenges-in tension-for regions experiencing UOG development. HZD allows operators to condense their surface impacts by drilling multiple wells per pad. This consolidation benefits the many in a given extractive area, but at the expense of the few who live near intensified sites. HZD also allows operators to more flexibly position these large well pads. Combined, these drilling innovations are further splintering an already fragmented UOG gov-ernance space and creating novel procedural fairness challenges, especially in cities. This study offers the concept of "piecemeal participation" to describe these challenges, drawing from a case study in Colorado. Piecemeal participation occurs when governments structure public input on a site-by-site basis, while operators, leveraging HZD's reach and flexibility, plan drilling and weigh alternative drilling locations at the scale of the city. The analysis evaluates piecemeal participation using standard procedural fairness criteria, generating findings of broader relevance as urban areas anticipate UOG development and HZD worldwide.