The Experts below are selected from a list of 210 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Kyle E. Murray - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
GIS-based geospatial infrastructure of water resource assessment for supporting oil Shale Development in Piceance Basin of Northwestern Colorado
Computers & Geosciences, 2015Co-Authors: Wei Zhou, Matthew D. Minnick, Earl D. Mattson, Mengistu Geza, Kyle E. MurrayAbstract:Oil Shale deposits of the Green River Formation (GRF) in Northwestern Colorado, Southwestern Wyoming, and Northeastern Utah may become one of the first oil Shale deposits to be developed in the U.S. because of their richness, accessibility, and extensive prior characterization. Oil Shale is an organic-rich fine-grained sedimentary rock that contains significant amounts of kerogen from which liquid hydrocarbons can be produced. Water is needed to retort or extract oil Shale at an approximate rate of three volumes of water for every volume of oil produced. Concerns have been raised over the demand and availability of water to produce oil Shale, particularly in semiarid regions where water consumption must be limited and optimized to meet demands from other sectors. The economic benefit of oil Shale Development in this region may have tradeoffs within the local and regional environment. Due to these potential environmental impacts of oil Shale Development, water usage issues need to be further studied. A basin-wide baseline for oil Shale and water resource data is the foundation of the study. This paper focuses on the design and construction of a centralized geospatial infrastructure for managing a large amount of oil Shale and water resource related baseline data, and for setting up the frameworks for analytical and numerical models including but not limited to three-dimensional (3D) geologic, energy resource Development systems, and surface water models. Such a centralized geospatial infrastructure made it possible to directly generate model inputs from the same database and to indirectly couple the different models through inputs/outputs. Thus ensures consistency of analyses conducted by researchers from different institutions, and help decision makers to balance water budget based on the spatial distribution of the oil Shale and water resources, and the spatial variations of geologic, topographic, and hydrogeological characterization of the basin. This endeavor encountered many technical challenging and has not been done in the past for any oil Shale basin. The database built during this study remains valuable for any other future studies involving oil Shale and water resource management in the Piceance Basin. The methodology applied in the Development of the GIS based geospatial infrastructure can be readily adapted for other professionals to develop database structure for other similar basins.
-
GIS-and Web-based Water Resource Geospatial Infrastructure for Oil Shale Development
2012Co-Authors: Wei Zhou, Matthew D. Minnick, Kyle E. Murray, Mengistu Geza, Earl D. MattsonAbstract:The Colorado School of Mines (CSM) was awarded a grant by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct a research project en- titled GIS- and Web-based Water Resource Geospatial Infrastructure for Oil Shale Development in October of 2008. The ultimate goal of this research project is to develop a water resource geo-spatial infrastructure that serves as “baseline data” for creating solutions on water resource management and for supporting decisions making on oil Shale resource Development. The project came to the end on September 30, 2012. This final project report will report the key findings from the project activity, major accomplishments, and expected impacts of the research. At meantime, the gamma version (also known as Version 4.0) of the geodatabase as well as other various deliverables stored on digital storage media will be send to the program manager at NETL, DOE via express mail. The key findings from the project activity include the quantitative spatial and temporal distribution of the water resource throughout the Piceance Basin, water consumption with respect to oil Shale production, and data gaps identified. Major accomplishments of this project include the creation of a relational geodatabase, automated data processing scripts (Matlab) for database link with more » surface water and geological model, ArcGIS Model for hydrogeologic data processing for groundwater model input, a 3D geological model, surface water/groundwater models, energy resource Development systems model, as well as a web-based geo-spatial infrastructure for data exploration, visualization and dissemination. This research will have broad impacts of the devel- opment of the oil Shale resources in the US. The geodatabase provides a “baseline” data for fur- ther study of the oil Shale Development and identification of further data collection needs. The 3D geological model provides better understanding through data interpolation and visualization techniques of the Piceance Basin structure spatial distribution of the oil Shale resources. The sur- face water/groundwater models quantify the water shortage and better understanding the spatial distribution of the available water resources. The energy resource Development systems model reveals the phase shift of water usage and the oil Shale production, which will facilitate better planning for oil Shale Development. Detailed descriptions about the key findings from the project activity, major accomplishments, and expected impacts of the research will be given in the sec- tion of “ACCOMPLISHMENTS, RESULTS, AND DISCUSSION” of this report. « less
Merryn Thomas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Health risk perception and Shale Development in the UK and US
Health Risk & Society, 2019Co-Authors: Barbara Herr Harthorn, Laura Halcomb, Tristan Partridge, Merryn Thomas, Catherine Enders, Nicholas Frank PidgeonAbstract:In this paper, we examine discourse in public deliberations in pre-Development locales in the UK and US about advantages and disadvantages of future Shale Development (‘fracking’). We aimed to unde...
-
Shale Development in the US and Canada: A review of engagement practice
The Extractive Industries and Society, 2018Co-Authors: Merryn Thomas, Nicholas Frank Pidgeon, Michael J. BradshawAbstract:Public and stakeholder engagement with Shale Development is difficult, but essential. We review 26 engagement processes carried out by US and Canadian companies, alliances, government agencies, academics and activists; systematically exploring who participates, the stage at which engagements take place, aims and methods, provision for multiway engagement, and issues of credibility. We find a multitude of actors carrying out engagement using a variety of formats, ranging from barbeque events and town hall meetings to citizen science and in-depth qualitative research. Whilst we find many strengths, we also highlight a number of weaknesses. Much of this engagement does not occur at the earliest stages of Development, and rarely asks the most fundamental question -whether Shale Development should proceed at all- instead commonly focusing on questions of impact minimisation, regulation and gaining support. Furthermore, the majority of activities tend to elicit the responses of interested and affected parties, with much less attention to views of the wider public. We reflect on what may be limiting engagement practice, and discuss how engagement might be improved.
-
Deliberating the perceived risks, benefits, and societal implications of Shale gas and oil extraction by hydraulic fracturing in the US and UK
Nature Energy, 2017Co-Authors: Merryn Thomas, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Tristan Partridge, Nicholas Frank PidgeonAbstract:Shale gas and oil production in the US has increased rapidly in the past decade, while interest in prospective Development has also arisen in the UK. In both countries, Shale resources and the method of their extraction (hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’) have been met with opposition amid concerns about impacts on water, greenhouse gas emissions, and health effects. Here we report the findings of a qualitative, cross-national deliberation study of public perceptions of Shale Development in UK and US locations not yet subject to extensive Shale Development. When presented with a carefully calibrated range of risks and benefits, participants’ discourse focused on risks or doubts about benefits, and potential impacts were viewed as inequitably distributed. Participants drew on direct, place-based experiences as well as national contexts in deliberating Shale Development. These findings suggest that Shale gas Development already evokes a similar ‘signature’ of risk across the US and UK. Shale gas and oil production and prospective Development are increasing, but methods for Shale extraction (‘fracking’) have been met with opposition. This study shows that informed discourse around Shale Development focussed on risks or doubts about benefits in a similar manner across the US and UK.
-
Seeing futures now: Emergent US and UK views on Shale Development, climate change and energy systems
Global Environmental Change, 2017Co-Authors: Tristan Partridge, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Merryn Thomas, Nicholas Frank Pidgeon, Ariel Hasell, Louise M. Stevenson, Catherine EndersAbstract:Shale Development – extraction of oil and gas from Shale rock formations using hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking’ – has become a critical focus for energy debates in the US and UK. In both countries, potential industry expansion into new areas for Shale extraction is expected to produce a wide range of environmental and social impacts and to change the configuration of future energy systems. To engage with emergent views on these complex, multi-scale issues, we held a series of day-long deliberation workshops (two in the US and two in the UK) designed and facilitated for diverse groups of people to discuss a range of possible consequences and meanings of Shale Development. Amid nuanced differences between and within national contexts, notable similarities in views were tracked across all four workshops. Concerns in common were not limited to specific risks such as water contamination. Participants also questioned whether Shale Development was compatible with their visions for and concerns about the longer-term future – including views on impacts and causes of climate change, societal dependency on fossil fuels, Development of alternative energy technologies, the perceived short-term objectives of government and industry agencies, and obligations to act responsibly toward future generations. Extending prior qualitative research on Shale Development and on energy systems change, this research brings open-ended and cross-national public deliberation inquiry to bear on broader issues of climate change, responsibility, and ideas about how Shale Development might undermine or reinforce the energy systems that people consider important for the future.
Nicholas Frank Pidgeon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Health risk perception and Shale Development in the UK and US
Health Risk & Society, 2019Co-Authors: Barbara Herr Harthorn, Laura Halcomb, Tristan Partridge, Merryn Thomas, Catherine Enders, Nicholas Frank PidgeonAbstract:In this paper, we examine discourse in public deliberations in pre-Development locales in the UK and US about advantages and disadvantages of future Shale Development (‘fracking’). We aimed to unde...
-
Shale Development in the US and Canada: A review of engagement practice
The Extractive Industries and Society, 2018Co-Authors: Merryn Thomas, Nicholas Frank Pidgeon, Michael J. BradshawAbstract:Public and stakeholder engagement with Shale Development is difficult, but essential. We review 26 engagement processes carried out by US and Canadian companies, alliances, government agencies, academics and activists; systematically exploring who participates, the stage at which engagements take place, aims and methods, provision for multiway engagement, and issues of credibility. We find a multitude of actors carrying out engagement using a variety of formats, ranging from barbeque events and town hall meetings to citizen science and in-depth qualitative research. Whilst we find many strengths, we also highlight a number of weaknesses. Much of this engagement does not occur at the earliest stages of Development, and rarely asks the most fundamental question -whether Shale Development should proceed at all- instead commonly focusing on questions of impact minimisation, regulation and gaining support. Furthermore, the majority of activities tend to elicit the responses of interested and affected parties, with much less attention to views of the wider public. We reflect on what may be limiting engagement practice, and discuss how engagement might be improved.
-
Deliberating the perceived risks, benefits, and societal implications of Shale gas and oil extraction by hydraulic fracturing in the US and UK
Nature Energy, 2017Co-Authors: Merryn Thomas, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Tristan Partridge, Nicholas Frank PidgeonAbstract:Shale gas and oil production in the US has increased rapidly in the past decade, while interest in prospective Development has also arisen in the UK. In both countries, Shale resources and the method of their extraction (hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’) have been met with opposition amid concerns about impacts on water, greenhouse gas emissions, and health effects. Here we report the findings of a qualitative, cross-national deliberation study of public perceptions of Shale Development in UK and US locations not yet subject to extensive Shale Development. When presented with a carefully calibrated range of risks and benefits, participants’ discourse focused on risks or doubts about benefits, and potential impacts were viewed as inequitably distributed. Participants drew on direct, place-based experiences as well as national contexts in deliberating Shale Development. These findings suggest that Shale gas Development already evokes a similar ‘signature’ of risk across the US and UK. Shale gas and oil production and prospective Development are increasing, but methods for Shale extraction (‘fracking’) have been met with opposition. This study shows that informed discourse around Shale Development focussed on risks or doubts about benefits in a similar manner across the US and UK.
-
Seeing futures now: Emergent US and UK views on Shale Development, climate change and energy systems
Global Environmental Change, 2017Co-Authors: Tristan Partridge, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Merryn Thomas, Nicholas Frank Pidgeon, Ariel Hasell, Louise M. Stevenson, Catherine EndersAbstract:Shale Development – extraction of oil and gas from Shale rock formations using hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking’ – has become a critical focus for energy debates in the US and UK. In both countries, potential industry expansion into new areas for Shale extraction is expected to produce a wide range of environmental and social impacts and to change the configuration of future energy systems. To engage with emergent views on these complex, multi-scale issues, we held a series of day-long deliberation workshops (two in the US and two in the UK) designed and facilitated for diverse groups of people to discuss a range of possible consequences and meanings of Shale Development. Amid nuanced differences between and within national contexts, notable similarities in views were tracked across all four workshops. Concerns in common were not limited to specific risks such as water contamination. Participants also questioned whether Shale Development was compatible with their visions for and concerns about the longer-term future – including views on impacts and causes of climate change, societal dependency on fossil fuels, Development of alternative energy technologies, the perceived short-term objectives of government and industry agencies, and obligations to act responsibly toward future generations. Extending prior qualitative research on Shale Development and on energy systems change, this research brings open-ended and cross-national public deliberation inquiry to bear on broader issues of climate change, responsibility, and ideas about how Shale Development might undermine or reinforce the energy systems that people consider important for the future.
Wei Zhou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
GIS-based geospatial infrastructure of water resource assessment for supporting oil Shale Development in Piceance Basin of Northwestern Colorado
Computers & Geosciences, 2015Co-Authors: Wei Zhou, Matthew D. Minnick, Earl D. Mattson, Mengistu Geza, Kyle E. MurrayAbstract:Oil Shale deposits of the Green River Formation (GRF) in Northwestern Colorado, Southwestern Wyoming, and Northeastern Utah may become one of the first oil Shale deposits to be developed in the U.S. because of their richness, accessibility, and extensive prior characterization. Oil Shale is an organic-rich fine-grained sedimentary rock that contains significant amounts of kerogen from which liquid hydrocarbons can be produced. Water is needed to retort or extract oil Shale at an approximate rate of three volumes of water for every volume of oil produced. Concerns have been raised over the demand and availability of water to produce oil Shale, particularly in semiarid regions where water consumption must be limited and optimized to meet demands from other sectors. The economic benefit of oil Shale Development in this region may have tradeoffs within the local and regional environment. Due to these potential environmental impacts of oil Shale Development, water usage issues need to be further studied. A basin-wide baseline for oil Shale and water resource data is the foundation of the study. This paper focuses on the design and construction of a centralized geospatial infrastructure for managing a large amount of oil Shale and water resource related baseline data, and for setting up the frameworks for analytical and numerical models including but not limited to three-dimensional (3D) geologic, energy resource Development systems, and surface water models. Such a centralized geospatial infrastructure made it possible to directly generate model inputs from the same database and to indirectly couple the different models through inputs/outputs. Thus ensures consistency of analyses conducted by researchers from different institutions, and help decision makers to balance water budget based on the spatial distribution of the oil Shale and water resources, and the spatial variations of geologic, topographic, and hydrogeological characterization of the basin. This endeavor encountered many technical challenging and has not been done in the past for any oil Shale basin. The database built during this study remains valuable for any other future studies involving oil Shale and water resource management in the Piceance Basin. The methodology applied in the Development of the GIS based geospatial infrastructure can be readily adapted for other professionals to develop database structure for other similar basins.
-
GIS-and Web-based Water Resource Geospatial Infrastructure for Oil Shale Development
2012Co-Authors: Wei Zhou, Matthew D. Minnick, Kyle E. Murray, Mengistu Geza, Earl D. MattsonAbstract:The Colorado School of Mines (CSM) was awarded a grant by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct a research project en- titled GIS- and Web-based Water Resource Geospatial Infrastructure for Oil Shale Development in October of 2008. The ultimate goal of this research project is to develop a water resource geo-spatial infrastructure that serves as “baseline data” for creating solutions on water resource management and for supporting decisions making on oil Shale resource Development. The project came to the end on September 30, 2012. This final project report will report the key findings from the project activity, major accomplishments, and expected impacts of the research. At meantime, the gamma version (also known as Version 4.0) of the geodatabase as well as other various deliverables stored on digital storage media will be send to the program manager at NETL, DOE via express mail. The key findings from the project activity include the quantitative spatial and temporal distribution of the water resource throughout the Piceance Basin, water consumption with respect to oil Shale production, and data gaps identified. Major accomplishments of this project include the creation of a relational geodatabase, automated data processing scripts (Matlab) for database link with more » surface water and geological model, ArcGIS Model for hydrogeologic data processing for groundwater model input, a 3D geological model, surface water/groundwater models, energy resource Development systems model, as well as a web-based geo-spatial infrastructure for data exploration, visualization and dissemination. This research will have broad impacts of the devel- opment of the oil Shale resources in the US. The geodatabase provides a “baseline” data for fur- ther study of the oil Shale Development and identification of further data collection needs. The 3D geological model provides better understanding through data interpolation and visualization techniques of the Piceance Basin structure spatial distribution of the oil Shale resources. The sur- face water/groundwater models quantify the water shortage and better understanding the spatial distribution of the available water resources. The energy resource Development systems model reveals the phase shift of water usage and the oil Shale production, which will facilitate better planning for oil Shale Development. Detailed descriptions about the key findings from the project activity, major accomplishments, and expected impacts of the research will be given in the sec- tion of “ACCOMPLISHMENTS, RESULTS, AND DISCUSSION” of this report. « less
Robert B. Keiter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Resource Management Challenges in the Context of Potential Oil Shale Development
2010Co-Authors: Kirsten Uchitel, John C. Ruple, Robert B. KeiterAbstract:Ongoing efforts to commercialize the oil Shale resource face numerous environmental challenges due to the potential impacts of oil Shale Development on air, land, water and wildlife resources. Although many of these resource management challenges cannot be meaningfully addressed until proven oil Shale technologies emerge, certain of these anticipated conflicts would benefit from attention and investigation by oil Shale developers and policymakers in advance of detailed commercial oil Shale leasing and Development plans. This chapter discusses three such resource management challenges: the impacts of oil Shale Development on wildlife, aquatic and plant resources; issues associated with the Development of oil Shale and other co-located minerals; and water availability for oil Shale Development.
-
Water for Commercial Oil Shale Development in Utah: Clarifying How Much Water is Needed and Available
Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 2010Co-Authors: John C. Ruple, Robert B. KeiterAbstract:Utah contains an estimated 150 billion barrels of ‘recoverable’ oil trapped in its extensive oil Shale formations – enough oil single-handedly to satisfy 100 per cent of the United States’ oil demand for 21 years at current consumption rates. Most authorities assume that commercial oil Shale Development will require significant quantities of water, a constraining resource in a region that receives, on average, less than nine inches of precipitation annually and where water resources are already over-appropriated. The technical water requirements of commercial oil Shale Development are poorly understood, but this represents only part of the problem. Utah operates under the prior appropriations system of water allocation whereby the first in time is the first in right. Unanswered legal and political questions create uncertainty regarding the amount of available water within the most geologically prospective area and the rights of competing water appropriators. This article addresses two foundational questio...
-
WATER FOR COMMERCIAL OIL Shale Development IN UTAH: ALLOCATING SCARCE RESOURCES AND THE SEARCH FOR NEW SOURCES OF SUPPLY
Utah Environmental Law Review, 2010Co-Authors: John C. Ruple, Robert B. KeiterAbstract:72 1024x768 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} While oil Shale Development could provide significant energy resources, a commercial oil Shale industry has thus far failed to develop. In fact, oil Shale has long been held forth as a promising answer to U.S. national energy needs only to fall victim to repeated boom-bust cycles, most recently in the 1970s and early 1980s. Today, concerns over adverse environmental impacts, fluctuations in the price of oil, and regulatory uncertainty are often cited as obstacles to the Development of oil share as a viable source of energy. These concerns, combined with today's challenging economic climate, complicate efforts to obtain up-front funding for oil Shale Development. Given oil Shale's considerable challenges and lack of prior success, it is not surprising that oil Shale opponents highlight the numerous promises that oil Shale is the fuel of the future and that these promises have repeatedly failed to materialize. However, for the past three decades, several large energy companies and a number of smaller innovators have been working quietly towards cost-effective and environmentally acceptable means of producing oil from Shale. Most of these efforts have been located on non-federal land and the details of ongoing research efforts are often shrouded in secrecy. While the details are murky, technology developers recognize the major constraints to commercial oil Shale Development and have been working to address these issues. While carbon emissions, land use and surface impacts, impacts to protected species and water quality are all potential showstoppers, great attention has been focused on water use and availability. This latter issue is the focus of this paper and where we now turn.