Performance of a cap and trade system for managing environmental impacts of shale gas surface infrastructure

被引:9
|
作者
Milt, Austin W. [1 ]
Armsworth, Paul R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tennessee, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, 569 Dabney Hall,1416 Circle Dr, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Shale energy; Shale gas infrastructure; Environmental policy; Conservation planning; Spatial optimization; NATURAL-GAS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; MARKET; BIODIVERSITY; INSTRUMENTS; POLICY; EMISSIONS; FRACKING; RISKS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.016
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Governments across the globe are exploring ways to reduce the environmental and human health impacts created by shale energy production. In active areas, environmental regulations tend to be limited. We apply established instruments to empirically estimated environmental impact abatement cost curves for the development of 56 sites in Pennsylvania, USA. We compare the cost to industry of setting a cap on environmental impacts from land-clearing and building of surface infrastructure under two regulations: cap and trade versus a uniform, inflexible regulation. Greatest differences in cost are achieved when firm-level permits are allocated to reduce market-wide potential impacts by 36%. Cap and trade achieved this cap at a cost of 0.05% of not developing and allowed all development to proceed. The uniform, inflexible regulation cost 32% of not developing for a similar outcome and prevented 18% of firms from developing. Cap and trade's performance depended on the regulator's ability to accurately allocate firm-level permits that reflect developers' options. In extreme cases, inaccurate allocations made cap and trade perform worse than other the approach. We conclude that, where developers differ in their ability and cost of minimizing impacts, cap and trade should be explored as an inexpensive alternative to traditional approaches. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:399 / 406
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The costs of avoiding environmental impacts from shale-gas surface infrastructure
    Milt, Austin W.
    Gagnolet, Tamara D.
    Armsworth, Paul R.
    [J]. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2016, 30 (06) : 1151 - 1158
  • [2] Synergies and Tradeoffs Among Environmental Impacts Under Conservation Planning of Shale Gas Surface Infrastructure
    Milt, Austin W.
    Gagnolet, Tamara
    Armsworth, Paul R.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2016, 57 (01) : 21 - 30
  • [3] Synergies and Tradeoffs Among Environmental Impacts Under Conservation Planning of Shale Gas Surface Infrastructure
    Austin W. Milt
    Tamara Gagnolet
    Paul R. Armsworth
    [J]. Environmental Management, 2016, 57 : 21 - 30
  • [4] Environmental Impacts of Shale Gas Extraction in China
    Xia, Yuqiang
    Boufadel, Michel C.
    [J]. ADVANCE IN RESOURCES & ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH, 2010, : 212 - +
  • [5] Environmental impacts of shale-gas production
    Soeder, Daniel J.
    [J]. PHYSICS TODAY, 2011, 64 (11) : 8 - 8
  • [6] Production optimization considering environmental performance and preference in the cap-and-trade system
    Du, Shaofu
    Hu, Li
    Song, Malin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2016, 112 : 1600 - 1607
  • [7] Cumulative environmental and employment impacts of the shale gas boom
    Erin N. Mayfield
    Jared L. Cohon
    Nicholas Z. Muller
    Inês M. L. Azevedo
    Allen L. Robinson
    [J]. Nature Sustainability, 2019, 2 : 1122 - 1131
  • [8] Cumulative environmental and employment impacts of the shale gas boom
    Mayfield, Erin N.
    Cohon, Jared L.
    Muller, Nicholas Z.
    Azevedo, Ines M. L.
    Robinson, Allen L.
    [J]. NATURE SUSTAINABILITY, 2019, 2 (12) : 1122 - 1131
  • [9] Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas
    Stamford, Laurence
    Azapagic, Adisa
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2014, 134 : 506 - 518
  • [10] Special Issue on Environmental Impacts of Shale Gas Development Introduction
    VanBriesen, Jeanne M.
    Boufadel, Michel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, 2014, 140 (05)