Hydraulic fracking or fracking is a mechanical powered process whereby natural gas and petroleum quantities are released using fluid pressure from beneath the earth's surface. There are two major forms of hydrofracking, including horizontal and vertical fracking. When using conventional drilling to extract gas and oil, industrial systems collect it from the surface of belowground reservoirs accessible. Comparatively, the fracking method involves sand and pressured chemically treated water injection to crack past the shale rock and discharge inaccessible gas and oil quantities through the conventional drilling method. Even though fracking bears its risks argued as a subversion of public interest in profits of the energy industry and adverse environmental pollution, it also has positive contributions to society's lives such as new job creation, allowing access to other methods inaccessible sources of energy, and lowering energy prices. Hydraulic fracking opponents and proponents debate over its impact on climate change, payments balance of the nation, less USA dependence on importation of oil or slow down the development of such sources of renewable energy.
A major issue on fracking is what government level should regulate what practice aspect. The debate's complexity is brought about by the fact that profits resulting from hydraulic fracking are local, regional, and national (Mayer, 2018). Also, concerns raised by fracking risks are within the existing local, federal, and state governments' legal jurisdiction. Further debates result from the above realities on the government's level is mandated as the primary regulators of the discipline. Some debate that the responsibility should be fully given to local governments while others that the federal government should hold it. There are also suggestions that both should work together for the optimum achievement of hydrofracking. However, as state zoning and planning acts indicate, the government levels should work together as they both have a part to play in the industry. Ideologically, local governments derive their powers and are created by the state. Through the zoning and planning Act, they acquire the power to assume land use regulations and plans.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In most states, Zoning is one power of the several delegated states to the local government that serves both jurisdiction's interests. It provides guidelines on the value, use, and development of the property. Local governments are mandated to impose taxes on property and use the revenues to fund projects at local and running of municipal operations. When citizens are provided with good services at a local level due to proper use of the revenue, the overall government goal is achieved. Due to the utility, comprehensiveness, and complexity of the intergovernmental levels links of powers and duties in hydrofracking and property used as a whole, the judiciary is justly wary about suggesting that regulatory enactments of the state, including those on hydrofracking, are intended local privileges by the legislature (Mayer, 2018). In fracking, the collaboration systems between the local and state government are different. On an overall view, in most cases, the local governments tax the operations of hydrofracking and enforce measures of community health while the state is responsible for the whole project.
Coordination between the government's different levels is facilitated by statutes of law that theoretically or directly affect hydrofracking. Riverstone-Newell (2017) notes that the statutes include Safe Water for Drinking Act (SDWA), which is concerned with the hydrofracking fluid with chemicals injection or reinjection into groundwater. He also indicates that the Act of Clean Water (CWA) is concerned with the contamination of surface water. However, it lacks the power to address water migration to surface water contamination after groundwater is injected to surface water. New regulations are being put in place regarding the Act of Clean Air (CAA) on air pollutants and methane gas, but its success is limited to the well sources of pad point. Clean-up costs are strictly mandated to polluters of hazardous pollutants ad methane as indicated by CERCLA Act. Endangered Species Act gives the interior authority to provide protection to the endangered species, which is rarely used, endangering the societies residing close to fracking plants (Riverstone-Newell, 2017). Local and state government collaboration in hydrofracking ensures that the risk is diversified, and thus issues arising are easily identifiable and corrected before they adversely affect society.
There has a difference between the government levels overtime on a collaborative model of hydrofracking. This is because no level wants to simultaneously bear the load of the risks of hydrocracking, each wanting to profit more out of it. Precise and powerful statutes should be put in place to mandate who should be responsible for fracking's negative impacts. Every participant in the practice of hydrofracking will know their responsibilities in ascertaining it's safe to the public and costs involved as a result of environmental leading to proper coordination between the different levels of the government and other involved stakeholders. Revenue sharing systems between the participants should also be determined to carb conflicts arising from revenue sharing criteria. Additionally, communication between the local and state governments should be improved by coming up with good communication channels, making them feel informed about the project's progress. With the major issues deterring federal and local government working together, hydrocracking can become very profitable and practice safe to the public's members.
Proper communication is key to the efficient function of any firm, whether big or small. Conflicts between the state and local government in hydrofracking mostly arise due to poor communication between them. It is mostly caused by each member feeling equally entitled to the hydrofracking plants. To improve communication, terms such as 'regulation, zoning, and jurisdiction' should be properly defined in a common manner that each of the government mutually agrees. Any changes made, every level should be notified. The state and local tension of control of hydrofracking should be reduced by putting legislative measures that address both governments' concerns (Riverstone-Newell, 2017). Even though, as observed above, more focus is put on the financial outcomes of hydrofracking, the environment should be respected. With hydrofracking being the option of economic stimulation, proper waste cleaning facilities that are environmentally friendly should be developed. With vast scientific and technological advancement, the governments should use technology to develop air and water purification methods such as carbon capture and storage technology.
Florida has a hydrofracking industry that has shown a lack of stakeholders and local-state government collaboration as it has caused adverse environmental effects. For example, in 2016, 250 million gallons of contaminated water may have been dumbed over a short period into Florida's underground water layer (Aquifer) due to a huge sinkhole that opened up below a gypsum stack of a phosphate mosaic plant (Huebner, 2018). Additionally, Huebner (2018) notes that many firms such as Duke Energy want to open up oil and natural gas plants on the Florida coast despite confirmation by the US agency of environment protection, EPA, that there will be adverse negative effects Aquifer.
Conclusively, as a result of hydrofracking practice, more public environmental safety alarms have come up. The most evident effect is earthquakes around hydrofracking areas, which didn't have such cases. One of the causes of the continued environmental safety risks the public is likely to face is the government prioritizing economic stimulation over fracking's environmental impacts. Poor communication and lack of collaboration between stakeholders, local and state government is a major challenge in the practice of hydrofracking. Some directives may come from the national level, which the local government does know about, leading to ignorance. Allowing new hydraulic fracturing plants without proper environmental safety measures is putting public health at more risk. However, fracking is one of the most economically viable practices creating jobs and leading infrastructural development to the US population. With practical environment protection strategies, hydrofracking has a heavy impact economically on the public.
References
Huebner, A., & Proffitt, J. M. (2018). " Paving the Way": How Newspaper Coverage of Fracking in Florida Supports Fossil Fuels. Florida Communication Journal , 46 (2).
Mayer, A., & Malin, S. (2018). Keep it local? Preferences for federal, state, or local unconventional oil and gas regulations. Energy research & social science , 44 , 336-345.
Riverstone-Newell, L. (2017). The rise of state preemption laws in response to local policy innovation. Publius: The Journal of Federalism , 47 (3), 403-425.
