IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v146y2020ics0301421520304729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Costs of increasing oil and gas setbacks are initially modest but rise sharply

Author

Listed:
  • Ericson, Sean J.
  • Kaffine, Daniel T.
  • Maniloff, Peter

Abstract

Spatial setback rules are a common form of oil and gas regulation worldwide - they require minimum distances between oil and gas operations and homes and other sensitive locations. While setbacks can reduce exposure to potential harms associated with oil and gas production, they can also cause substantial quantities of oil and gas resources to be unavailable for extraction. Using both theoretical modeling and spatial analysis with GIS tools on publicly available data, we determine oil and gas resource loss under different setback distances, focusing on Colorado counties as a case study. We show that increasing setbacks results in small resource loss for setbacks up to 1500 feet, but resource loss quickly increases with longer setbacks. Approximately $4.5 billion in annual resource revenues would be lost in Colorado under 2500-foot setbacks, a distance recently proposed in Colorado Proposition 112 and California AB 345.

Suggested Citation

  • Ericson, Sean J. & Kaffine, Daniel T. & Maniloff, Peter, 2020. "Costs of increasing oil and gas setbacks are initially modest but rise sharply," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:146:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520304729
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421520304729
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111749?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucija Muehlenbachs & Elisheba Spiller & Christopher Timmins, 2015. "The Housing Market Impacts of Shale Gas Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3633-3659, December.
    2. Weber, Jeremy G. & Wang, Yongsheng & Chomas, Maxwell, 2016. "A quantitative description of state-level taxation of oil and gas production in the continental U.S," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 289-301.
    3. J. K. Lundquist & K. K. DuVivier & D. Kaffine & J. M. Tomaszewski, 2019. "Costs and consequences of wind turbine wake effects arising from uncoordinated wind energy development," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 26-34, January.
    4. Maniloff, Peter & Mastromonaco, Ralph, 2017. "The local employment impacts of fracking: A national study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 62-85.
    5. Dev Millstein & Ryan Wiser & Mark Bolinger & Galen Barbose, 2017. "The climate and air-quality benefits of wind and solar power in the United States," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 1-10, September.
    6. Hill, Elaine L., 2018. "Shale gas development and infant health: Evidence from Pennsylvania," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 134-150.
    7. Mason Inman, 2016. "Can fracking power Europe?," Nature, Nature, vol. 531(7592), pages 22-24, March.
    8. Fry, Matthew, 2013. "Urban gas drilling and distance ordinances in the Texas Barnett Shale," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 79-89.
    9. Elaine Hill & Lala Ma, 2017. "Shale Gas Development and Drinking Water Quality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 522-525, May.
    10. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    11. J. K. Lundquist & K. K. DuVivier & D. Kaffine & J. M. Tomaszewski, 2019. "Publisher Correction: Costs and consequences of wind turbine wake effects arising from uncoordinated wind energy development," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 251-251, March.
    12. Fry, Matthew & Briggle, Adam & Kincaid, Jordan, 2015. "Fracking and environmental (in)justice in a Texas city," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 97-107.
    13. Esmail Ansari & Robert. K. Kaufmann, 2019. "The effect of oil and gas price and price volatility on rig activity in tight formations and OPEC strategy," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(4), pages 321-328, April.
    14. Kroepsch, Adrianne C., 2018. "Horizontal drilling, changing patterns of extraction, and piecemeal participation: Urban hydrocarbon governance in Colorado," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 469-480.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Katie Jo Black & Shawn J. McCoy & Jeremy G. Weber, 2018. "When Externalities Are Taxed: The Effects and Incidence of Pennsylvania’s Impact Fee on Shale Gas Wells," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 107-153.
    2. Hill, Elaine L. & Ma, Lala, 2022. "Drinking water, fracking, and infant health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. 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).
    4. Muehlenbachs, Lucija & Staubli, Stefan & Chu, Ziyan, 2021. "The accident externality from trucking: Evidence from shale gas development," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Siu, Wai Yan & Akhundjanov, Sherzod B., 2020. "Fracking Boom and Agricultural Doom: Evidence from Kern County, California," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304255, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Hess, Joshua H. & Manning, Dale T. & Iverson, Terry & Cutler, Harvey, 2019. "Uncertainty, learning, and local opposition to hydraulic fracturing," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 102-123.
    7. Kroepsch, Adrianne C., 2018. "Horizontal drilling, changing patterns of extraction, and piecemeal participation: Urban hydrocarbon governance in Colorado," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 469-480.
    8. Black, Katie Jo & McCoy, Shawn J. & Weber, Jeremy G., 2019. "Fracking and indoor radon: Spurious correlation or cause for concern?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 255-273.
    9. Jeffrey Rous & Vicki Oppenheim & Myungsup Kim & Matthew Fry & Chetan Tiwari & Murray Rice, 2020. "Evaluating determinants of shale gas well locations in an urban setting," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 65(3), pages 645-671, December.
    10. Cameron T. Whitley, 2019. "Exploring the Place of Animals and Human–Animal Relationships in Hydraulic Fracturing Discourse," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Shah Rukh Abbas & Syed Ali Abbas Kazmi & Muhammad Naqvi & Adeel Javed & Salman Raza Naqvi & Kafait Ullah & Tauseef-ur-Rehman Khan & Dong Ryeol Shin, 2020. "Impact Analysis of Large-Scale Wind Farms Integration in Weak Transmission Grid from Technical Perspectives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-32, October.
    12. Apergis, Nicholas & Mustafa, Ghulam & Dastidar, Sayantan Ghosh, 2021. "An analysis of the impact of unconventional oil and gas activities on public health: New evidence across Oklahoma counties," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    13. Cuevas-Figueroa, Gabriel & Stansby, Peter K. & Stallard, Timothy, 2022. "Accuracy of WRF for prediction of operational wind farm data and assessment of influence of upwind farms on power production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PB).
    14. Giani, Paolo & Tagle, Felipe & Genton, Marc G. & Castruccio, Stefano & Crippa, Paola, 2020. "Closing the gap between wind energy targets and implementation for emerging countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    15. Cai, Zhengyu & Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2019. "Who benefits from local oil and gas employment? Labor market composition in the oil and gas industry in Texas and the rest of the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    16. Gourley, Patrick & Madonia, Greg, 2018. "Resource booms and crime: Evidence from oil and gas production in Colorado," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-52.
    17. Elizabeth U. Cascio & Ayushi Narayan, 2022. "Who Needs a Fracking Education? The Educational Response to Low-Skill-Biased Technological Change," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(1), pages 56-89, January.
    18. Gu, Bo & Meng, Hang & Ge, Mingwei & Zhang, Hongtao & Liu, Xinyu, 2021. "Cooperative multiagent optimization method for wind farm power delivery maximization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    19. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    20. Timmins, Christopher & Vissing, Ashley, 2022. "Environmental justice and Coasian bargaining: The role of race, ethnicity, and income in lease negotiations for shale gas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Oil and gas; Energy policy; Energy economics; Setbacks;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:146:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520304729. 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/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.