Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Economics of Unconventional Shale Gas Development pp 233–246Cite as

Achieving Balance Between Economic, Sociodemographic, Environmental, and Regulatory Concerns: A Shale Gas Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1370 Accesses

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 45))

Abstract

As with the development of any new industry, shale gas development poses opportunities and challenges. Economically, the benefits related to jobs and tax revenues must be balanced against potential costs including environment, property value, litigation, and financing. The shale energy industry must proactively face these challenges and downstream effects. We summarize these challenges and downstream effects and discuss the much needed future research that is related to these difficult questions and could provide comprehensive understanding.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A related concern is the impact of the shale gas (and oil) boom that unconventional development has had on local airports. The recent increases in commercial aviation activities in Minot, Williston, and Dickinson (North Dakota) have led to tapped out facilities and the need for larger terminals (O’Donnell 2014).

  2. 2.

    “Natural Gas Really is Better than Coal.” http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/natural-gas-really-better-coal-180949739/ (Retrieved July 27, 2014)

  3. 3.

    US Energy Information Administration. “Frequently Asked Questions.” How much carbon dioxide is produced per kilowatt hour when generating electricity with fossil fuels? http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=74&t=11 (Retrieved July 27, 2014)

  4. 4.

    US Carbon Dioxide Emissions Drop 3.8 Percent” http://www.livescience.com/40600-us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-drop.html (Retrieved July 27, 2014)

  5. 5.

    Brandt AR et al. (2014) “Methane Leaks from North American Natural Gas Systems.” Policy Forum. http://www.novim.org/images/pdf/ScienceMethane.02.14.14.pdf (Retrieved July 27, 2014)

  6. 6.

    United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule.” http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/clean-power-plan-proposed-rule (Retrieved July 27, 2014)

  7. 7.

    Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. “Frequently Asked Questions.” http://www.apfc.org/home/Content/aboutFund/fundFAQ.cfm (Retrieved July 25, 2014)

  8. 8.

    “Pa. Supreme Court will not reconsider Act 13 decision.” http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2014/02/21/pa-supreme-court-will-not-reconsider-act-13-decision/ (Retrieved on 07/24/2014)

  9. 9.

    “Williams Strikes Nearly $6 Billion Deal to Expand Shale Oil, Gas Holdings.” http://online.wsj.com/articles/williams-strikes-nearly-6-billion-deal-to-expand-into-shale-oil-natural-gas-1402865062 (Retrieved on 07/24/2014)

  10. 10.

    “Energy Department OKs LNG terminal on Oregon coast.” http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2023217400_apxlngexportsoregon.html (Retrieved on 07/27/2014)

References

  • Adams R, Kelsey TW (2012) Pennsylvania dairy farms and Marcellus shale, 2007–2010. Marcellus Education Fact Sheet. Penn State Cooperative Extension, University Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxall PC, Chan WH, McMillan ML (2005) The impact of oil and natural gas facilities on rural residential property values: a spatial hedonic analysis. Resour Energy Econ 27:248–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown E, Hartman K, Borick C, Rabe BG, Ivacko T (2013) The national surveys on energy and environment. Public opinion on fracking: perspectives from Michigan and Pennsylvania. University of Michigan, The Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy (May)

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown SPA et al (2014) Crude behavior: how lifting the export ban reduces gasoline prices in the United States, Issue brief 14-03-REV. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Economic Analysis (2014) Comparison of personal saving in the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPAs) with personal saving in the Flow of Funds Accounts (FFAs). http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/nipa-frb.asp. Accessed 5 May 2014

  • Bury v. Pope (1587) Cro. Eliz. 118 [78 Eng. Rep. 375]

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole DH, Grossman PZ (2002) The meaning of property rights: law versus economics? Land Econ 78(3):317–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz H (1967) Toward a theory of property rights, the American economic review, 57:2, papers and proceedings of the 79th annual meeting of the American Economic Association, pp 347–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel ML, Selegean J, Hays J et al (2013) Marcellus shale drilling’s impact on the dairy industry in Pennsylvania: a descriptive report. New Solut 23(1):189–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey J (2012) The future of the Pennsylvania dairy industry with the impact of natural gas. Center for Dairy Excellence, Harrisburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelber M (2014) What it takes to strike job gold in North Dakota’s oil boom. http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2014/03/20/oil-boom-north-dakota-what-it-takes/. Accessed 21 May 2014

  • Gopalakrishnan S, Klaiber HA (2012) Is the shale boom a bust for nearby residents? Evidence from housing values in Pennsylvania. Working paper, The Ohio State University, Columbus

    Google Scholar 

  • Hefley WE et al (2011) The economic impact of the value chain of a Marcellus shale well, Pitt business working papers. University of Pittsburgh Katz Graduate School of Business, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham A et al (2010) The economic impact of the natural gas industry and the Marcellus Shale development in West Virginia in 2009. Bureau of Business and Economic Research College of Business and Economics West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2011) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Pennsylvania: employment and income in 2009. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2012a) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Bradford county: employment and income 2010. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2012b) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Sullivan county: employment and income 2010. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2012c) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Susquehanna county: employment and income 2010. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2012d) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Tioga county: employment and income 2010. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey TW et al (2012e) Economic impacts of Marcellus shale in Wyoming county: employment and income 2010. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center (a collaboration of Pennsylvania College of Technology and Penn State Extension), State College, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  • Loder A (2014) Junk bonds fuel the shale boom. Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 5 May 2014, pp 45–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Muehlenbachs L, Spiller E, Timmins C (2014) The housing market impacts of shale gas development. Resources for the future discussion paper 13-39-REV, Jan, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences (2012) Induced seismicity potential in energy technologies. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (2012) Nationwide statement regarding concerns about hydraulic fracturing, press release dated 13 July 2012. http://www.nationwide.com/newsroom/071312-FrackingStatement.jsp. Accessed Jan 2013

  • O’Donnell JK (2014) Where the oil boom is making airports zoom. Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 28 Apr 2014, pp 27–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyakawa J et al (2013) Economic impact of the Eagle Ford Shale. Center for Community and Business Research, Institute for Economic Development, The University of Texas as San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas

    Google Scholar 

  • Radow EN (2011) Homeowners and gas drilling leases: boon or bust. New York State Bar Association Journal (Nov/Dec)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sax JL (1971) Takings, private property and public rights. Yale Law J 81(2):149–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schick FB (1961) Space law and space politics. Int Comp Law Q 10(4):681–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wobbekind R, Lewandowski B (2014) Hydraulic fracturing ban the economic impact of a statewide fracking ban in Colorado. The Business Research Division, Leeds School of Business, The University of Colorado Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood G (2013) Williston, ND, Oil boom means rents as high as New York City’s. http://realestate.aol.com/blog/2013/01/14/williston-north-dakota-oil-boom-rental-costs/. Accessed 21 May 2014

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Greenfield Advisors LLC, 106 N. Bartow Street, Cartersville, GA, 30120, USA

    Clifford A. Lipscomb

  2. Greenfield Advisors LLC, 13517 35th Avenue S, Tukwila, WA, 99168, USA

    Sarah J. Kilpatrick

  3. Washington and Jefferson College, 60 South Lincoln Street, Washington, PA, 15301, USA

    Yongsheng Wang

  4. Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business and College of Business Administration, University of Pittsburgh, Mervis Hall, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA

    William E. Hefley

Authors
  1. Clifford A. Lipscomb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah J. Kilpatrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yongsheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. William E. Hefley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clifford A. Lipscomb .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    William E. Hefley

  2. Washington and Jefferson College, Washington, Pennsylvania, USA

    Yongsheng Wang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lipscomb, C.A., Kilpatrick, S.J., Wang, Y., Hefley, W.E. (2015). Achieving Balance Between Economic, Sociodemographic, Environmental, and Regulatory Concerns: A Shale Gas Perspective. In: Hefley, W., Wang, Y. (eds) Economics of Unconventional Shale Gas Development. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 45. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11499-6_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation