Fracking in the United Kingdom: Regulatory Challenges between Resource Mobilisation and Environmental Protection

This article will outline the existing regulatory framework with regard to shale gas extraction and development in the UK and analyse potential implications for the functioning of European and UK legislation in this field with consideration of environmental provisions. Moreover, the impact on wider energy policy objectives of the individual Member States’ implementation of these guidelines will be described.

As the world faces the first impacts of human-induced climate change, easing the way to a low carbon future is only one of several policy objectives in the United Kingdom (UK). Aside from the decarbonisation of its economy, the security of supply and affordability of energy are major objectives for the UK’s energy policy, as formulated in the latest “Energy Bill”. However, because the implementation of low carbon technologies is advancing more slowly than expected, primarily due to very high initial investment costs of green energy and the great uncertainty of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), shale gas is moving more and more to the forefront of the policy debate. Cheap gas prices, relative to oil, make it increasingly attractive for politicians to promote shale gas development in the UK. Moreover, the booming shale gas development in the USA has led to increased interest around the world. In 2010, the share of shale gas in total gas production in the USA was estimated to be 20%, and set to increase further.

Fracking for shale gas also could change the geopolitical balance; the US are drastically reducing their dependency on imports of fossil resources from the Middle East with new natural gas sources rendered accessible through fracking technology. Thus, fracking opens a new dimension of energy sources, even though the technology is rather old and has been used for over 50 years. Reasons for the boom of this new source of fossil sources are the general and steady increase of prices for gas and oil, and the improvements in fracking technology.

But fracking is also linked with several risks, in particular environmental risks with special emphasis on groundwater pollution, as well as tectonic stability and man-made earthquakes. In Europe, public opinion on fracking is not as favourable as it is in the US. In some European countries, such as France, a general ban on fracking has been instituted, while others have seen at least partial restrictions on fracking activities, for instance in several German federal states.

Ever since conventional gas and oil reservoirs have been decreasing, the energy industry is searching for alternative sources of hydrocarbons. The advancement of both directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing has become a chance to extract larger amounts of natural gas from deep underground shale rock formations. Furthermore, over the last decade, advances in technology converged with rising gas prices to now allow the commercially viable development of shale gas exploitation. It is believed that shale gas extraction could help cut emissions by replacing coal to meet emission targets, thus providing a so-called transitional fuel for a smooth change towards a greener low-carbon economy.

Copyright:	© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH
Quelle:	Issue 04/2014 (Dezember 2014)
Seiten:	9
Preis inkl. MwSt.:	€ 41,65
Autor:	Prof. Dr. Eike Albrecht

Artikel weiterleiten	In den Warenkorb legen	Artikel kommentieren

Diese Fachartikel könnten Sie auch interessieren:

Vorschlag abgelehnt
© Rhombos Verlag (12/2013)
Die EU-Kommission ist mit ihrer Biokraftstoffgesetzgebung zu ”indirect Land Use Change” (iLUC) in einer ersten Runde gescheitert

Zuteilungsregeln für messbare Wärme in der dritten Handelsperiode
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (6/2013)
Der Europäische Emissionshandel ist mit Beginn des Jahres 2013 in die dritte Handelsperiode eingetreten. Während die erste Handelsperiode (2005–2007) als Testphase begriffen wurde und die zweite Handelsperiode (2008– 2012) als sogenannte Kyoto-Phase die erste Verpflichtungsperiode des Kyoto-Protokolls nachvollzog, kann die dritte Handelsperiode des Emissionshandels, die von 2013 bis 2020 dauern wird, erneut als Erprobungsphase in der Weiterentwicklung des Emissionshandels bezeichnet werden. Gegenstand der Erprobung ist allerdings nicht mehr, wie in der ersten Handelsperiode, das ökonomische Instrument des europäischen Emissionshandels. In der dritten Handelsperiode wird durch die europaweite Harmonisierung der Zuteilungsregeln und der Übertragung weitgehender Vollzugskompetenzen auf die Europäische Kommission die umfassende Harmonisierung eines Teilbereichs des Emissionshandels erprobt.

Emissionshandelspflicht und Biomasse – Die Ausnahmevorschrift des § 2 Abs. 5 Alt.2 TEHG
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (2/2011)
Der Umfang und die Komplexität des Klimaschutzes erfordern nicht nur ein einziges Instrument wie die Förderung des Einsatzes erneuerbaren Energien, sondern eine Vielzahl weiterer Ansätze. Dazu gehört unter anderem auch der Emissionshandel.

On the Smartness of Smart Regulation – A Brief Comment on the Future Reform Agenda
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (2/2011)
We live at a time where Smart is better than Better, and Better was not Smart enough. This is not a dull pun. It actually reflects the status in which regulatory reform finds itself nowadays. To many observers, the switch from Better to Smart just reflects the attempt to instil renewed commitment and faith in an agenda, which in some (European) countries has maybe exhausted its thrust.

Legal Uncertainties of Carbon Capture and Storage in the EU: The Netherlands as an Example
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (10/2010)
The new EU Directive for the geological storage of CO2 aims at providing a legal framework for the development of CCS. However, the Directive does not remove all legal barriers and uncertainties. Capture, transport and storage of CO2 are covered by a large number of international, European and national regulations, resulting in various legal unknowns. These obstacles and uncertainties need to be removed in order to provide companies with a proper incentive to invest in CCS.