Shale gas controversy in Europe
Unconventional sources of gas and oil seem to present for many countries tangible opportunities of a new, cheap and reliable source of energy, accessible through the modern technique of hydraulic fracturing (fracking), thus answering to rising demands for energy. Unconventional gas, mainly shale gas, now makes up about 60% of marketed production in the United States. Explorations have taken place in Poland, China and other countries. As shale gas is widely dispersed geographically, it also seems to offer economic development opportunities for local landowners and beneficiary communities. A new report for the US also highlights the potential of shale oil, still under investigation.
In the countries involved in exploration or exploitation, civil society groups and activists have underlined the risks involved in hydraulic fracturing (or fracking), the only technique available today for exploring and exploiting unconventional gas deposits, shale gas. This new technique “involves injecting huge amounts of water, mixed with sand and chemicals, at high pressures to break up rock formations and release the gas” (New-York Times, Feb. 26, 2011).
The controversy on exploitation of shale gas in industrialized countries as well as in other contexts refers to a social choice problem involving a diversity of dimensions and issues. Because it cannot be solved by a linear and unequivocal approach, there is a necessity to treat it through various methods of sustainability assessment. After describing the social choice problem related to shale gas exploitation, we find evidence of social and political concern in the restrictions on shale gas exploration and exploitation and in the risks and impacts of the associated technique of fracking.
Going through the first steps of sustainability assessment of shale gas exploitation leads us to identify the main issues at stake in this controversy. After identifying the main stakeholder groups concerned by one or several aspects of shale gas exploration or exploitation, we describe three policy options for shale gas, and then three different scenarios, related to the future of energy.
After detailing the documentation supporting this analysis, we scrutinize different multicriteria assessment methods. Sound methods for deliberation and debate over social choice are urgently needed to shed a light on those dilemmas, and suggest a mode of decision-making which takes into account the different categories of impacts, costs and benefits, risks, as well as the point of view of the stakeholders within this question of social choice.
Hopefully this case study will help the researcher and the citizen to identify the stakeholders involved and the issues underlying the shale gas controversy.
You are in ePLANETe >
