IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v88y2016icp504-514.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hydraulic fracturing chemicals reporting: Analysis of available data and recommendations for policymakers

Author

Listed:
  • Konschnik, Katherine
  • Dayalu, Archana

Abstract

Twenty-eight states require disclosure of hydraulic fracturing chemicals. Twenty-three states direct reporting to FracFocus; additionally, companies in other states use this registry. FracFocus contains the most comprehensive dataset on fracturing chemicals but faces data quality and transparency criticisms. In response, FracFocus announced upgrades, and since May 2015, publishes aggregated data. We used Linux and R version 3.2.0 to clean and analyze 96,449 forms submitted between March 9, 2011 and April 13, 2015 for accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We characterize data, and compare results to state law and industry practice, to suggest how to induce more accurate and complete disclosures. We find that rates of withheld chemical information have increased since 2013, and appear unaffected by different legal requirements. However, when companies report fracturing chemicals without attribution to the specific products in the fracturing fluid (a “systems approach” to reporting), withholding rates drop four-fold. State deadlines shortened reporting timelines, but compliance rates are low absent indication states will enforce. Automatic field population and prompts in FracFocus can reduce data error, while enforcement signals, education, and harmonized requirements may boost compliance and enhance disclosure. Systems reporting should occur, with states retaining authority to request product-specific ingredient lists.

Suggested Citation

  • Konschnik, Katherine & Dayalu, Archana, 2016. "Hydraulic fracturing chemicals reporting: Analysis of available data and recommendations for policymakers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 504-514.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:88:y:2016:i:c:p:504-514
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515301804
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.11.002?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Miron Avidan & Dror Etzion & Joel Gehman, 2019. "Opaque transparency: How material affordances shape intermediary work," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 197-219, June.
    2. Esterhuyse, Surina & Avenant, Marinda & Redelinghuys, Nola & Kijko, Andrzej & Glazewski, Jan & Plit, Lisa & Kemp, Marthie & Smit, Ansie & Vos, A. Tascha, 2018. "Monitoring of unconventional oil and gas extraction and its policy implications: A case study from South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 109-120.
    3. T. Robert Fetter & Andrew L. Steck & Christopher Timmins & Douglas Wrenn, 2018. "Learning by Viewing? Social Learning, Regulatory Disclosure, and Firm Productivity in Shale Gas," NBER Working Papers 25401, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Centner, Terence J., 2016. "Reducing pollution at five critical points of shale gas production: Strategies and institutional responses," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 40-46.
    5. Michanowicz, Drew R. & Buonocore, Jonathan J. & Konschnik, Katherine E. & Goho, Shaun A. & Bernstein, Aaron S., 2021. "The effect of Pennsylvania's 500 ft surface setback regulation on siting unconventional natural gas wells near buildings: An interrupted time-series analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    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:enepol:v:88:y:2016:i:c:p:504-514. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/locate/enpol .

    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.