Warning! You are not logged in. Log in or create an account to have your edits attributed to your username rather than your IP, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 28: Line 28:
==== The Constitutional Environmental Human Right to Water: An Economic Model of the Potential Negative Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Quantity and Quality in Pennsylvania ====
==== The Constitutional Environmental Human Right to Water: An Economic Model of the Potential Negative Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Quantity and Quality in Pennsylvania ====


'''Abstract''': The process of hydraulic fracturing (HF) for natural gas leads to two potential negative externalities: (1) a reduction in the quantity of existing drinking water, and (2) a reduction in the quality of existing drinking water. These two externalities can further conspire to lead to a broader problem: an inability to full the human right to (clean or pure) water. Although the United States (US) Constitution does not grant individuals a human right to clean water, the Constitution of Pennsylvania does within Section 27. While US reliance on natural gas and the prevalence of HF as a method for procuring natural gas both increase, the two externalities may lead to actual human rights violations, especially in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania. This paper develops an economic model of the two externalities to: (1) demonstrate how violations of both the quantity and quality of available drinking water can occur; and (2) offer a scale policy to address the violations (i.e., a Pigovian Tax) , where a single tax on natural gas production is capable of addressing both externalities. In keeping with the current case law interpretation of Section 27 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, a due standard of care negligence rule within a unilateral-care accident model is developed and compared to the Pigovian Tax. Depending on the nature of the market demand and supply curves for natural gas, the results indicate that the incidence of the Pigovian Tax is not fully carried by the producers while the due standard of care rule is imposed entirely on the producers (i.e., injurers). In either case, the number of producers is an important consideration for fulfillment of the human right to water.
'''Abstract''': The process of hydraulic fracturing (HF) for natural gas leads to two potential negative externalities: (1) a reduction in the quantity of existing drinking water, and (2) a reduction in the quality of existing drinking water. These two externalities can further conspire to lead to a broader problem: an inability to full the human right to (clean or pure) water. Although the United States (US) Constitution does not grant individuals a human right to clean water, the Constitution of Pennsylvania does within Section 27. While US reliance on natural gas and the prevalence of HF as a method for procuring natural gas both increase, the two externalities may lead to actual human rights violations, especially in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania. This paper develops an economic model of the two externalities to: (1) demonstrate how violations
 
of both the quantity and quality of available drinking water can occur; and (2) offer a scale policy to address the violations (i.e., a Pigovian Tax) , where a single tax on natural gas production is capable of addressing both externalities. In keeping with the current case law interpretation of Section 27 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, a due standard of care negligence rule within a unilateral-care accident model is developed and compared to the Pigovian Tax. Depending on the nature of the market demand
* The paper is important because of the economic analysis included the author suggested that Hydraulic Fracturing imposes two negative externalities on society: (1) a reduction in the remaining quantity of available drinking water, and (2) a reduction in the quality of remaining drinking water.
and supply curves for natural gas, the results indicate that the incidence of the Pigovian Tax is not fully carried by the producers while the due standard of care rule is imposed entirely on the producers (i.e., injurers). In either case, the number of producers is an important consideration for fulfillment of the human right to water.


==== [http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=SPE-121038-MS Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs<ref name="J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne, ">J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne (2009). Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs ''Society of Petroleum Engineers''</ref>] ====
==== [http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=SPE-121038-MS Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs<ref name="J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne, ">J. Daniel Arthur, SPE, Brian Bohm, Bobbi Jo Coughlin, and Mark Layne (2009). Evaluating the Environmental Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Reservoirs ''Society of Petroleum Engineers''</ref>] ====
Warning! All contributions to Appropedia are released under the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license unless otherwise noted (see Appropedia:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here! You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted material without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

This page is a member of 2 hidden categories:

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.