International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Research

19 pages, 2264 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Shale Gas Development and Community Distress: Evidence from England

by Feizel Aryee, Anna Szolucha, Paul B. Stretesky, Damien Short, Michael A. Long, Liesel A. Ritchie and Duane A. Gill

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(14), 5069; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17145069 - 14 Jul 2020

Cited by 8 | Viewed by 4374

Abstract

This research examines psychosocial stress associated with shale gas development through the narratives of residents and the Revised Impact of Event Scale (IES-R). We carried out our research in three of England’s communities impacted by shale gas development. To gather data, we conducted [...] Read more.

This research examines psychosocial stress associated with shale gas development through the narratives of residents and the Revised Impact of Event Scale (IES-R). We carried out our research in three of England’s communities impacted by shale gas development. To gather data, we conducted qualitative interviews and engaged in participant observation in all three communities and conducted a quantitative survey of residents. From our qualitative interviews it was apparent that the residents we spoke with experienced significant levels of stress associated with shale gas development in each community. Importantly, residents reported that stress was not only a reaction to development, but a consequence of interacting with industry and decision makers. Our quantitative findings suggest that a significant portion of residents 14.1% living near the shale gas sites reported high levels of stress (i.e., scoring 24 or more points) even while the mean IES-R score of residents living around the site is relatively low (i.e., 9.6; 95% CI 7.5–11.7). We conclude that the experiences, of the three English communities, reported in the qualitative interviews and quantitative survey are consistent with the reports of stress in the United States for those residents who live in shale gas communities. We therefore suggest that psychosocial stress is an important negative externality, which needs to be taken seriously by local planning officers and local planning committees when considering exploration and development permits for shale gas. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 259 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Socio-Psychological Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Community Health and Well-Being

by Mehmet Soyer, Kylen Kaminski and Sebahattin Ziyanak

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(4), 1186; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17041186 - 13 Feb 2020

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 5148

Abstract

At the core of the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) debate is the level of perceived risk involved with extractive industries, such as the release of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals, increased population growth, and truck traffic. However, industry supporters of fracking acclaim the benefits of [...] Read more.

At the core of the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) debate is the level of perceived risk involved with extractive industries, such as the release of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals, increased population growth, and truck traffic. However, industry supporters of fracking acclaim the benefits of oil and gas drilling, such as energy independence and economic gains. In this study, we examine the perceived impacts of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) on community health and well-being based on interviews with anti-fracking activists in Denton, Texas who were active in the “anti-fracking” community organization, Frack Free Denton (FFD). Emergent from the interviews, we discuss the socio-psychological stressors these community members experienced following the introduction of hydraulic fracturing in the region. Some of the major socio-psychological impacts included perceived physical health risks through anxiety surrounding toxins and carcinogens that may be released through this process. Participants also discussed stress put on community relations, primarily through the form of an “us vs. them” mentality related to the support for, or opposition to, fracking in the community. Moreover, we found anxiety and stress surrounding trust in community members’ relationships with governing bodies, such as the federal government, state government, and local governments. This research will allow for a more comprehensive understanding of how fracking can impact the socio-psychological well-being of the community. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

17 pages, 2733 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classification between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development

by Judy Wendt Hess, Gerald Bachler, Fayaz Momin and Krystal Sexton

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(17), 3055; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16173055 - 23 Aug 2019

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 4647

Abstract

Recent studies of unconventional resource development (URD) and adverse health effects have been limited by distance-based exposure surrogates. Our study compared exposure classifications between air pollutant concentrations and “well activity” (WA) metrics, which are distance-based exposure proxies used in Marcellus-area studies to reflect [...] Read more.

Recent studies of unconventional resource development (URD) and adverse health effects have been limited by distance-based exposure surrogates. Our study compared exposure classifications between air pollutant concentrations and “well activity” (WA) metrics, which are distance-based exposure proxies used in Marcellus-area studies to reflect variation in time and space of residential URD activity. We compiled Pennsylvania air monitoring data for benzene, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, fine particulates and sulfur dioxide, and combined this with data on nearly 9000 Pennsylvania wells. We replicated WA calculations using geo-coordinates of monitors to represent residences and compared exposure categories from air measurements and WA at the site of each monitor. There was little agreement between the two methods for the pollutants included in the analysis, with most weighted kappa coefficients between −0.1 and 0.1. The exposure categories agreed for about 25% of the observations and assigned inverse categories 16%–29% of the time, depending on the pollutant. Our results indicate that WA measures did not adequately distinguish categories of air pollutant exposures and employing them in epidemiology studies can result in misclassification of exposure. This underscores the need for more robust exposure assessment in future analyses and cautious interpretation of these existing studies. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 575 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Air Emissions from Natural Gas Facilities in New York State

by Pasquale N. Russo and David O. Carpenter

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(9), 1591; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16091591 - 7 May 2019

Cited by 8 | Viewed by 3911

Abstract

While New York has banned fracking, new and expanded natural gas pipelines are being constructed across the state. Our previous studies have reported that compressor stations are a major source of air pollution at fracking sites. We have used two federal datasets, the [...] Read more.

While New York has banned fracking, new and expanded natural gas pipelines are being constructed across the state. Our previous studies have reported that compressor stations are a major source of air pollution at fracking sites. We have used two federal datasets, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Emissions Inventory and Greenhouse Gas Inventory, to determine what is known concerning emissions from the compressor stations along natural gas pipelines in the state. From a total of 74 compressor stations only 18 report to EPA on emissions. In the seven year period between 2008 and 2014 they released a total of 36.99 million pounds of air pollutants, not including CO₂ and methane. This included emissions of 39 chemicals known to be human carcinogens. There was in addition 6.1 billion pounds of greenhouse gases release from ten stations in a single year. These data clearly underestimate the total releases from the state’s natural gas transportation and distribution system. However, they demonstrate significant releases of air pollutants, some of which are known to cause human disease. In addition, they release large amounts of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

60 pages, 8772 KiB

Open AccessReview

Inadequate Regulation of the Geological Aspects of Shale Exploitation in the UK

by David K. Smythe

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(19), 6946; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17196946 - 23 Sep 2020

Viewed by 4140

Abstract

Unconventional oil and gas exploitation, which has developed in the UK since 2009, is regulated by four main agencies: The Oil and Gas Authority, the Environment Agency, the Health and Safety Executive and local Mineral Planning Authorities (usually county councils). The British Geological [...] Read more.

Unconventional oil and gas exploitation, which has developed in the UK since 2009, is regulated by four main agencies: The Oil and Gas Authority, the Environment Agency, the Health and Safety Executive and local Mineral Planning Authorities (usually county councils). The British Geological Survey only has an advisory role, as have ad hoc expert committees. I firstly define terms, and summarise the remits of the regulators and background history. Fourteen case histories are then discussed, comprising most of the unconventional exploitation to date; these cases demonstrate the failure of regulation of the geological aspects of fracking operations in the UK. The regulators let inadequacies in geological understanding, and even mendacious geological interpretations by the hydrocarbon operators slip through the net. There are potentially severe implications for environmental safety—if and when permits are granted. Geological pathways, if not properly understood and mitigated, may lead to long-term pollution of groundwater and surface water; methane and H₂S emissions. Induced earthquakes have not been well regulated. The case histories demonstrate a laissez-faire and frequently incompetent regulatory regime, devised for the pre-unconventional era, and which has no geological oversight or insight. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 949 KiB

Open AccessReview

A Systematic Review of the Epidemiologic Literature Assessing Health Outcomes in Populations Living near Oil and Natural Gas Operations: Study Quality and Future Recommendations

by Alison M. Bamber, Stephanie H. Hasanali, Anil S. Nair, Sharon M. Watkins, Daniel I. Vigil, Michael Van Dyke, Tami S. McMullin and Kristy Richardson

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(12), 2123; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16122123 - 15 Jun 2019

Cited by 27 | Viewed by 14431

Abstract

A systematic method was used to review the existing epidemiologic literature and determine the state of the scientific evidence for potential adverse health outcomes in populations living near oil and natural gas (ONG) operations in the United States. The review utilized adapted systematic [...] Read more.

A systematic method was used to review the existing epidemiologic literature and determine the state of the scientific evidence for potential adverse health outcomes in populations living near oil and natural gas (ONG) operations in the United States. The review utilized adapted systematic review frameworks from the medical and environmental health fields, such as Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE), the Navigation Guide, and guidance from the National Toxicology Program’s Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT). The review included 20 epidemiologic studies, with 32 different health outcomes. Studies of populations living near ONG operations provide limited evidence (modest scientific findings that support the outcome, but with significant limitations) of harmful health effects including asthma exacerbations and various self-reported symptoms. Study quality has improved over time and the highest rated studies within this assessment have primarily focused on birth outcomes. Additional high-quality studies are needed to confirm or dispute these correlations. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

3 pages, 224 KiB

Open AccessReply

Reply to Schade G. Comment on Hess et al. “Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classifications between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development.”

by Judy Wendt Hess, Gerald Bachler, Fayaz Momin and Krystal Sexton

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(16), 5801; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17165801 - 11 Aug 2020

Viewed by 1508

Abstract

We appreciate the comments by Dr [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

4 pages, 253 KiB

Open AccessComment

Critique of Well Activity Proxy Uses Inadequate Data and Statistics

by Gunnar W. Schade

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(15), 5597; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17155597 - 3 Aug 2020

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1898

Abstract

The recent publication, “Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classification between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development” by Hess et al [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

30 pages, 821 KiB

Open AccessCommentary

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

by Andrew Watterson and William Dinan

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(12), 4320; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17124320 - 17 Jun 2020

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 5078

Abstract

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary [...] Read more.

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary public health policies relating to fossil fuels including shale exploration. Yet air quality and related public health impacts linked to ethical and environmental justice elements are often marginalized or missing in planning and associated decision making. Industry and government policies and practices, laws and planning regulations lagged well behind the science in the United Kingdom. This paper explores the reasons for this and what shaped some of those policies. Why did shale gas policies in England fail to fully address public health priorities and neglect ethical and environmental justice concerns. To answer this question, an interdisciplinary analysis is needed informed by a theoretical framework of how air pollution and climate change are largely discounted in the complex realpolitik of policy and regulation for shale gas development in England. Sources, including official government, regulatory and planning documents, as well as industry and scientific publications are examined and benchmarked against the science and ethical and environmental justice criteria. Further, our typology illustrates how the process works drawing on an analysis of official policy documents and statements on planning and regulatory oversight of shale exploration in England, and material from industry and their consultants relating to proposed shale oil and gas development. Currently the oil, gas and chemical industries in England continue to dominate and influence energy and feedstock-related policy making to the detriment of ethical and environmental justice decision making with significant consequences for public health. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

3 pages, 1101 KiB

Open AccessReply

Response to Buonocore et al. Comments on Wendt Hess et al. “Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classification between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development.” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3055

by Judy Wendt Hess, Gerald Bachler, Fayaz Momin and Krystal Sexton

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(2), 512; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17020512 - 14 Jan 2020

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2569

Abstract

We appreciate the comments by Buonocore et al [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

5 pages, 261 KiB

Open AccessComment

Air Monitoring Stations Far Removed From Drilling Activities Do Not Represent Residential Exposures to Marcellus Shale Air Pollutants. Response to the Paper by Hess et al. on Proximity-Based Unconventional Natural Gas Exposure Metrics

by Jonathan J. Buonocore, Joan A. Casey, Rachel Croy, John D. Spengler and Lisa McKenzie

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(2), 504; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17020504 - 13 Jan 2020

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2772

Abstract

In their study “Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classification between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development” Hess et al [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment)

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Shale Gas and Fracking: Impacts on Health and the Environment

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (11 papers)

Research

Review

Other

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI