Deliberating the perceived risks, benefits and societal implications of shale gas and oil extraction by hydraulic fracturing in the US and UK

Shale gas and oil production in the US has increased rapidly in the past decade, while interest in prospective development has also arisen in the UK. In both countries, shale resources and the method of their extraction (hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’) have been met with opposition amid concerns about impacts on water, greenhouse gas emissions, and health effects. Here we report the findings of a qualitative, cross-national deliberation study of public perceptions of shale development in UK and US locations not yet subject to extensive shale development. When presented with a carefully calibrated range of risks and benefits, participants’ discourse focused on risks or doubts about benefits, and potential impacts were viewed as inequitably distributed. Participants drew on direct, place-based experiences as well as national contexts in deliberating shale development. These findings suggest that shale gas development already evokes a similar ‘signature’ of risk across the US and UK

Seeing futures now: Emergent US and UK views on shale development, climate change and energy systems

Shale development – extraction of oil and gas from shale rock formations using hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking’ – has become a critical focus for energy debates in the US and UK. In both countries, potential industry expansion into new areas for shale extraction is expected to produce a wide range of environmental and social impacts and to change the configuration of future energy systems. To engage with emergent views on these complex, multi-scale issues, we held a series of day-long deliberation workshops (two in the US and two in the UK) designed and facilitated for diverse groups of people to discuss a range of possible consequences and meanings of shale development. Amid nuanced differences between and within national contexts, notable similarities in views were tracked across all four workshops. Concerns in common were not limited to specific risks such as water contamination. Participants also questioned whether shale development was compatible with their visions for and concerns about the longer-term future – including views on impacts and causes of climate change, societal dependency on fossil fuels, development of alternative energy technologies, the perceived short-term objectives of government and industry agencies, and obligations to act responsibly toward future generations. Extending prior qualitative research on shale development and on energy systems change, this research brings open-ended and cross-national public deliberation inquiry to bear on broader issues of climate change, responsibility, and ideas about how shale development might undermine or reinforce the energy systems that people consider important for the future

Public perceptions of shale gas operations in the USA and Canada: a review of evidence

M4ShaleGas stands for Measuring, monitoring, mitigating and managing the environmental impact of shale gas and is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme. The main goal of the M4ShaleGas project is to study and evaluate potential risks and impacts of shale gas exploration and exploitation. The focus lies on four main areas of potential impact: the subsurface, the surface, the atmosphere, and social impacts. The European Commission's Energy Roadmap 2050 identifies gas as a critical fuel for the transformation of the energy system in the direction of lower CO2 emissions and more renewable energy. Shale gas may contribute to this transformation. Shale gas is – by definition – a natural gas found trapped in shale, a fine grained sedimentary rock composed of mud. There are several concerns related to shale gas exploration and production, many of them being associated with hydraulic fracturing operations that are performed to stimulate gas flow in the shales. Potential risks and concerns include for example the fate of chemical compounds in the used hydraulic fracturing and drilling fluids and their potential impact on shallow ground water. The fracturing process may also induce small magnitude earthquakes. There is also an ongoing debate on greenhouse gas emissions of shale gas (CO2 and methane) and its energy efficiency compared to other energy sources There is a strong need for a better European knowledge base on shale gas operations and their environmental impacts particularly, if shale gas shall play a role in Europe’s energy mix in the coming decennia. M4ShaleGas’ main goal is to build such a knowledge base, including an inventory of best practices that minimise risks and impacts of shale gas exploration and production in Europe, as well as best practices for public engagement. The M4ShaleGas project is carried out by 18 European research institutions and is coordinated by TNO-Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Researc

Nanotoxicology: characterizing the scientific literature, 2000–2007

Understanding the toxicity of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products is important for human and environmental health and safety as well as public acceptance. Assessing the state of knowledge about nanotoxicology is an important step in promoting comprehensive understanding of the health and environmental implications of these new materials. To this end, we employed bibliometric techniques to characterize the prevalence and distribution of the current scientific literature. We found that the nano-toxicological literature is dispersed across a range of disciplines and sub-fields; focused on in vitro testing; often does not specify an exposure pathway; and tends to emphasize acute toxicity and mortality rather than chronic exposure and morbidity. Finally, there is very little research on consumer products, particularly on their environmental fate, and most research is on the toxicity of basic nanomaterials. The implications for toxicologists, regulators and social scientists studying nanotechnology and society are discussed

The Ethnography of Health Inequality: Global Risk Society and Local Suffering

The delocalization aspects of globalization are often cited as the most socially and economically destructive of its forces. In this paper, I want to discuss the possibilities for ethnography to relocalize the global. In particular, I argue that the assessment of risks attached to numerous aspects of global enterprises pleads for the kind of recontextualization that ethnography can provide through tracing the contours of local and translocal suffering and illness on the one hand and mobilization of agency and resistance on the other. My discussion will touch down on the SARS epidemic and the health of transnational immigrant workers in the California agricultural industry. They provide two different windows on the value of risk as a lens for examining the role of transnational forces in the social production of health inequality

The Ethnography of Health Inequality: Global Risk Society and Local Suffering

The delocalization aspects of globalization are often cited as the most socially and economically destructive of its forces. In this paper, I want to discuss the possibilities for ethnography to relocalize the global. In particular, I argue that the assessment of risks attached to numerous aspects of global enterprises pleads for the kind of recontextualization that ethnography can provide through tracing the contours of local and translocal suffering and illness on the one hand and mobilization of agency and resistance on the other. My discussion will touch down on the SARS epidemic and the health of transnational immigrant workers in the California agricultural industry. They provide two different windows on the value of risk as a lens for examining the role of transnational forces in the social production of health inequality

Nanotoxicology and risk perception among public and elite groups

In this chapter, we provide an overview of an unprecedented body of new knowledge about the emergence of perceived risks and benefits of nanotechnologies and selected other new technologies through a set of linked studies. The chapter highlights the results of over a decade of mixed methods social science research at the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at the University of California at Santa Barbara with reference to other key publications in the field. The chapter reviews research on: views, perceptions, values, and attitudes and social action among multiple stakeholders in the nanotechnology enterprise; development and refinement of innovative methods for public engagement with new technologies in the US and comparative other nations; experts’ risk knowledge and views on regulatory preparedness for safe handling of novel nanomaterials’ properties; and print and social media and policy attention focused on nanotech risks and benefits, particularly with reference to emergent public perceptions, risk amplification, or attenuation. In addition, the chapter details modes of dissemination of such societal knowledge to an array of critical stakeholders, including scientists and engineers developing these new materials and their enabled systems and products, nanotoxicologists who have been assessing the environmental and health risks presented by such novel materials, the international nanomaterials industry, policymakers/regulators, journalists, the diverse US public, and NGOs and civil society organizations (CSOs). Taken together, the portfolio of new knowledge produced, the methodological advancement evident in its production, and the transfer of knowledge accomplished through engagement with diverse multi-stakeholders are argued to constitute an unprecedented advancement of socio-technical integration. The research process has also generated for the first time a robust international community of socio-technical scholars and experts with the skills and experience to advance societal benefits and ethical governance of emerging technologies