IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v185y2017ip2p1907-1918.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indicative energy technology assessment of UK shale gas extraction

Author

Listed:
  • Hammond, Geoffrey P.
  • O’Grady, Áine

Abstract

There is at present much interest in unconventional sources of natural gas, especially in shale gas which is obtained by hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’. Boreholes are drilled and then lined with steel tubes so that a mixture of water and sand with small quantities of chemicals – the fracking fluid – can be pumped into them at very high pressure. The sand grains that wedge into the cracks induced in the shale rock by a ‘perforating gun’ then releases gas which returns up the tubes. In the United Kingdom (UK) exploratory drilling is at an early stage, with licences being issued to drill a limited number of test boreholes around the country. However, such activities are already meeting community resistance and controversy. Like all energy technologies it exhibits unwanted ‘side-effects’; these simply differ in their level of severity between the various options. Shale gas may make, for example, a contribution to attaining the UK’s statutory ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions targets, but only if appropriate and robust regulations are enforced. The benefits and disadvantages of shale gas fracking are therefore discussed in order to illustrate a ‘balance sheet’ approach. It is also argued that it is desirable to bring together experts from a range of disciplines in order to carry out energy technology assessments. That should draw on and interact with national and local stakeholders: ‘actors’ both large and small. Community engagement in a genuinely participative process – where the government is prepared to change course in response to the evidence and public opinion – will consequently be critically important for the adoption of any new energy option that might meet the needs of a low carbon future.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:185:y:2017:i:p2:p:1907-1918
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261916301477
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.024?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. Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Hazeldine, Tom, 2015. "Indicative energy technology assessment of advanced rechargeable batteries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 559-571.
    2. Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Nash, Nick & Upham, Paul & Lloyd, Alyson & Verdon, James P. & Kendall, J.-Michael, 2015. "UK public perceptions of shale gas hydraulic fracturing: The role of audience, message and contextual factors on risk perceptions and policy support," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 419-430.
    3. Stamford, Laurence & Azapagic, Adisa, 2014. "Life cycle environmental impacts of UK shale gas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 506-518.
    4. Hammond, G.P. & Akwe, S.S. Ondo & Williams, S., 2011. "Techno-economic appraisal of fossil-fuelled power generation systems with carbon dioxide capture and storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 975-984.
    5. Howard Rogers, 2011. "Shale gas--the unfolding story," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 27(1), pages 117-143, Spring.
    6. Alan S. Manne, 1976. "ETA: A Model for Energy Technology Assessment," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 7(2), pages 379-406, Autumn.
    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. Walton, Andrea & McCrea, Rod, 2020. "Understanding social licence to operate for onshore gas development: How the underlying drivers fit together," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    2. Augustine O. Ifelebuegu & Kenneth E. Aidelojie & Elijah Acquah-Andoh, 2017. "Brexit and Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union: Implications for UK Energy Policy and Security," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Musango, Josephine Kaviti & Ouma-Mugabe, John, 2024. "A generic technology assessment framework for sustainable energy transitions in African contexts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. Wei, Yi-Ming & Kang, Jia-Ning & Yu, Bi-Ying & Liao, Hua & Du, Yun-Fei, 2017. "A dynamic forward-citation full path model for technology monitoring: An empirical study from shale gas industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 769-780.
    5. Shi, Yu & Cui, Qiliang & Song, Xianzhi & Liu, Shaomin & Yang, Zijiang & Peng, Junlan & Wang, Lizhi & Guo, Yanchun, 2023. "Thermal performance of the aquifer thermal energy storage system considering vertical heat losses through aquitards," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 447-460.
    6. Middleton, Richard S. & Gupta, Rajan & Hyman, Jeffrey D. & Viswanathan, Hari S., 2017. "The shale gas revolution: Barriers, sustainability, and emerging opportunities," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 88-95.
    7. Wang, Wenyang & Pang, Xiongqi & Chen, Zhangxin & Chen, Dongxia & Ma, Xinhua & Zhu, Weiping & Zheng, Tianyu & Wu, Keliu & Zhang, Kun & Ma, Kuiyou, 2020. "Improved methods for determining effective sandstone reservoirs and evaluating hydrocarbon enrichment in petroliferous basins," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    8. McCrea, Dr Rod & Walton, Dr Andrea & Jeanneret, Ms Talia, 2020. "An opportunity to say no: Comparing local community attitudes toward onshore unconventional gas development in pre-approval and operational phases," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Kant, Michael A. & Rossi, Edoardo & Duss, Jonas & Amann, Florian & Saar, Martin O. & Rudolf von Rohr, Philipp, 2018. "Demonstration of thermal borehole enlargement to facilitate controlled reservoir engineering for deep geothermal, oil or gas systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1501-1509.
    10. Yang, Run & Liu, Xiangui & Yu, Rongze & Hu, Zhiming & Duan, Xianggang, 2022. "Long short-term memory suggests a model for predicting shale gas production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    11. Wang, Hui & Chen, Li & Qu, Zhiguo & Yin, Ying & Kang, Qinjun & Yu, Bo & Tao, Wen-Quan, 2020. "Modeling of multi-scale transport phenomena in shale gas production — A critical review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    12. You, Xu-Tao & Liu, Jian-Yi & Jia, Chun-Sheng & Li, Jun & Liao, Xin-Yi & Zheng, Ai-Wei, 2019. "Production data analysis of shale gas using fractal model and fuzzy theory: Evaluating fracturing heterogeneity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 1246-1259.
    13. Vaillancourt, Kathleen & Bahn, Olivier & Roy, Pierre-Olivier & Patreau, Valérie, 2018. "Is there a future for new hydrocarbon projects in a decarbonizing energy system? A case study for Quebec (Canada)," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 114-130.
    14. Griffin, Paul W. & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Norman, Jonathan B., 2018. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the chemicals sector: A UK perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 587-602.
    15. Calderón, Andrés J. & Guerra, Omar J. & Papageorgiou, Lazaros G. & Reklaitis, Gintaras V., 2018. "Disclosing water-energy-economics nexus in shale gas development," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 710-731.
    16. Matthijs Jan Kallen & Bert Scholtens, 2021. "Movers and Shakers: Stock Market Response to Induced Seismicity in Oil and Gas Business," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Yang, Xue & Chen, Zeqin & Liu, Xiaoqiang & Xue, Zhiyu & Yue, Fen & Wen, Junjie & Li, Meijun & Xue, Ying, 2022. "Correction of gas adsorption capacity in quartz nanoslit and its application in recovering shale gas resources by CO2 injection: A molecular simulation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    18. José A. Caballero & Juan A. Labarta & Natalia Quirante & Alba Carrero-Parreño & Ignacio E. Grossmann, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Water Management in Shale Gas Extraction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Musango, Josephine Kaviti & Ouma-Mugabe, John, 2024. "A generic technology assessment framework for sustainable energy transitions in African contexts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    3. Yao, Liuyang & Sui, Bo, 2020. "Heterogeneous preferences for shale water management: Evidence from a choice experiment in Fuling shale gas field, southwest China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. Wei, Yi-Ming & Kang, Jia-Ning & Yu, Bi-Ying & Liao, Hua & Du, Yun-Fei, 2017. "A dynamic forward-citation full path model for technology monitoring: An empirical study from shale gas industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 769-780.
    5. 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).
    6. Olateju, Babatunde & Kumar, Amit, 2013. "Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification (UCG) in Western Canada with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for upgrading bitumen from oil sands," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 428-440.
    7. Lips, Johannes, 2018. "Debt and the Oil Industry - Analysis on the Firm and Production Level," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181504, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Hanak, Dawid P. & Powell, Dante & Manovic, Vasilije, 2017. "Techno-economic analysis of oxy-combustion coal-fired power plant with cryogenic oxygen storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 193-203.
    9. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    10. Zhihua Zhang, 2015. "Techno-Economic Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage Facilities Coupled to Coal-Fired Power Plants," Energy & Environment, , vol. 26(6-7), pages 1069-1080, November.
    11. Peng, Benhong & Zhao, Yinyin & Elahi, Ehsan & Wan, Anxia, 2023. "Can third-party market cooperation solve the dilemma of emissions reduction? A case study of energy investment project conflict analysis in the context of carbon neutrality," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    12. Carapellucci, Roberto & Giordano, Lorena & Vaccarelli, Maura, 2017. "Application of an amine-based CO2 capture system in retrofitting combined gas-steam power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 808-826.
    13. Zhang, Chao & Wei, Yi-Li & Cao, Peng-Fei & Lin, Meng-Chang, 2018. "Energy storage system: Current studies on batteries and power condition system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3091-3106.
    14. Nordhaus, William, 2013. "Integrated Economic and Climate Modeling," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1069-1131, Elsevier.
    15. Khalilpour, Rajab, 2014. "Multi-level investment planning and scheduling under electricity and carbon market dynamics: Retrofit of a power plant with PCC (post-combustion carbon capture) processes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 172-186.
    16. Kleijn, René & van der Voet, Ester & Kramer, Gert Jan & van Oers, Lauran & van der Giesen, Coen, 2011. "Metal requirements of low-carbon power generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 5640-5648.
    17. Marmiroli, Benedetta & Venditti, Mattia & Dotelli, Giovanni & Spessa, Ezio, 2020. "The transport of goods in the urban environment: A comparative life cycle assessment of electric, compressed natural gas and diesel light-duty vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    18. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    19. Nemet, Gregory F. & Baker, Erin & Jenni, Karen E., 2013. "Modeling the future costs of carbon capture using experts' elicited probabilities under policy scenarios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 218-228.
    20. Sebastiano Cupertino, 2013. "Cost-benefit analysis of carbon dioxide capture and storage considering the impact of two different climate change mitigation regimes," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 73-89.

    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:185:y:2017:i:p2:p:1907-1918. 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.