The governance of hydraulic fracturing in unconventional resources: the elements, form and effectiveness of the regulations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Hydraulic fracturing is a process applied for the exploitation of certain hydrocarbon and geothermal resources, to increase the fluid conductivity to a production well. The process entails environmental risks that are managed under specific regulations in most jurisdictions where economic resources of this type are found. For the purpose of this thesis, the process of unconventional resource development (chronological phases) associated with hydraulic fracturing operations was subdivided into 32 aspects, each subject to regulation.This study looked at the structure and form of regulation from jurisdictions across the world by identifying “regulatory statements” (a single-purpose legal requirement) and deconstructing those statements using the institutional grammar tool, in order to allow inter-jurisdictional comparison. The regulatory statements were categorized under a regulatory form typology to identify whether each statement was prescriptive, process-based, principle-based or performance-based. This analysis determines whether the jurisdiction tells the participant “what to do”, “how to do it”, “how to do it and where to get to” or just “where to get to”.Twelve jurisdictions were selected from North and South America, Australia and Africa, each with active, or the potential for, commercial unconventional resource development. Initial selection criteria for jurisdictions included: a constitutional democracy, comprehensive environmental protection legislation, a history of petroleum development, and a high potential for unconventional resource development. Final selection of jurisdictions focussed on a suite that provided a range of scales across commercial development of the resource; and, development or otherwise, of hydraulic fracturing legislation. Over 1,900 rules were identified, categorised and analysed establishing a range of trends.This study found overwhelming application of prescriptive regulatory statements (what to do) at 88.5% occurrence, process-based statements (how to do it) at 8.2%, principle-based statements (how to do it and where to get to) at 2.8% and performance-based statements (where to get to) at just 0.5%.The application of principle/performance statements were more frequent in those jurisdictions where there was minimal or no commercial development of unconventional resources, with Brazil and New South Wales at 13% and 11% respectively. Those jurisdictions with substantial unconventional resource development and a large number of operators used prescription almost exclusively, including Alberta, British Columbia and Colorado. Those aspects of regulation addressing public interfacing with the operators such as setback, access to water resource and seismic effects tended to show little use of performance regulation whereas complex areas centred around the well itself, involving engineering judgement, had a greater application of principle/performance statements.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».