IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v148y2015icp489-495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comment on ‘Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas’ by L. Stamford and A. Azapagic. Applied Energy, 134, 506–518, 2014

Author

Listed:
  • Westaway, Rob
  • Younger, Paul L.
  • Cornelius, Chris

Abstract

In the recent work entitled “Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas” (Applied Energy, 134 (2014) 506–518) Stamford and Azapagic (2014) make a first attempt at quantifying a range of overall lifecycle impacts of shale gas production in the UK. Their analysis led to some very unfavourable comparisons with other energy technologies and concluded that, for three types of impact (depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer, photochemical pollution, and terrestrial eco-toxicity), shale gas is ‘worse’ even than coal as an energy source for generating electricity; furthermore, uncertainties in input data mean that it might also be worse than coal for three additional impacts (on global warming, acidification, and human toxicity). One of their principal inferences is, therefore, that shale gas development in the UK should be subject to stringent environmental regulation, to ensure that it is only developed where it can be demonstrated to regulatory authorities on a well-by-well basis that these and other impacts can be minimized. The present commentary reassesses some of the conclusions reached by this published analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Westaway, Rob & Younger, Paul L. & Cornelius, Chris, 2015. "Comment on ‘Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas’ by L. Stamford and A. Azapagic. Applied Energy, 134, 506–518, 2014," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 489-495.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:148:y:2015:i:c:p:489-495
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.03.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261915002925
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.03.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stamford, Laurence & Azapagic, Adisa, 2014. "Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 506-518.
    2. McGlade, Christophe & Speirs, Jamie & Sorrell, Steve, 2013. "Methods of estimating shale gas resources – Comparison, evaluation and implications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 116-125.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xi Yang & Alun Gu & Fujie Jiang & Wenli Xie & Qi Wu, 2020. "Integrated Assessment Modeling of China’s Shale Gas Resource: Energy System Optimization, Environmental Cobenefits, and Methane Risk," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Xianyu & Cai, Jihua & Jiang, Guosheng & Zhang, Yungen & Shi, Yanping & Chen, Shuya & Yue, Ye & Wei, Zhaohui & Yin, Dezhan & Li, Hua, 2022. "Modeling of nanoparticle fluid microscopic plugging effect on horizontal and vertical wellbore of shale gas," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PB).
    2. Jang, Hayoung & Jeong, Byongug & Zhou, Peilin & Ha, Seungman & Nam, Dong, 2021. "Demystifying the lifecycle environmental benefits and harms of LNG as marine fuel," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Chi Yong & Mu Tong & Zhongyi Yang & Jixian Zhou, 2023. "Conventional Natural Gas Project Investment and Decision Making under Multiple Uncertainties," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-30, February.
    4. Chen, Junqing & Jiang, Fujie & Cong, Qi & Pang, Xiongqi & Ma, Kuiyou & Shi, Kanyuan & Pang, Bo & Chen, Dongxia & Pang, Hong & Yang, Xiaobin & Wang, Yuying & Li, Bingyao, 2023. "Adsorption characteristics of shale gas in organic–inorganic slit pores," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    5. Tunstall, Thomas, 2015. "Iterative Bass Model forecasts for unconventional oil production in the Eagle Ford Shale," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P1), pages 580-588.
    6. Montgomery, J.B. & O’Sullivan, F.M., 2017. "Spatial variability of tight oil well productivity and the impact of technology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 344-355.
    7. Kuchler, Magdalena & Höök, Mikael, 2020. "Fractured visions: Anticipating (un)conventional natural gas in Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. De Silva, P.N.K. & Simons, S.J.R. & Stevens, P., 2016. "Economic impact analysis of natural gas development and the policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 639-651.
    9. Raj, Ratan & Ghandehariun, Samane & Kumar, Amit & Linwei, Ma, 2016. "A well-to-wire life cycle assessment of Canadian shale gas for electricity generation in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 642-652.
    10. Zou, Youqin & Yang, Changbing & Wu, Daishe & Yan, Chun & Zeng, Masun & Lan, Yingying & Dai, Zhenxue, 2016. "Probabilistic assessment of shale gas production and water demand at Xiuwu Basin in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 185-195.
    11. Liu, Wen & Ramirez, Andrea, 2017. "State of the art review of the environmental assessment and risks of underground geo-energy resources exploitation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 628-644.
    12. Yang, Xianyu & Cai, Jihua & Jiang, Guosheng & Xie, Jingyu & Shi, Yanping & Chen, Shuya & Yue, Ye & Yu, Lang & He, Yichao & Xie, Kunzhi, 2020. "Nanoparticle plugging prediction of shale pores: A numerical and experimental study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    13. Speirs, Jamie & McGlade, Christophe & Slade, Raphael, 2015. "Uncertainty in the availability of natural resources: Fossil fuels, critical metals and biomass," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 654-664.
    14. Apergis, Nicholas, 2019. "The impact of fracking activities on Oklahoma's housing prices: A panel cointegration analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 94-101.
    15. Yang, Xianyu & Chen, Shuya & Shi, Yanping & Feng, Ruimin & Cai, Jihua & Jiang, Guosheng, 2019. "CFD and DEM modelling of particles plugging in shale pores," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1026-1038.
    16. Hui, Gang & Chen, Zhangxin & Wang, Youjing & Zhang, Dongmei & Gu, Fei, 2023. "An integrated machine learning-based approach to identifying controlling factors of unconventional shale productivity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    17. Hammond, Geoffrey P. & O’Grady, Áine, 2017. "Indicative energy technology assessment of UK shale gas extraction," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(P2), pages 1907-1918.
    18. Philipp M. Richter, 2015. "From Boom to Bust? A Critical Look at US Shale Gas Projections," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    19. Howard Lee, 2015. "Educating for food security in the UK: Planning for an uncertain future," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 30(3), pages 330-341, May.
    20. Andres Soage & Ruben Juanes & Ignasi Colominas & Luis Cueto-Felgueroso, 2021. "The Impact of the Geometry of the Effective Propped Volume on the Economic Performance of Shale Gas Well Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:148:y:2015:i:c:p:489-495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.