A Regulatory Comparison of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Disclosure Regimes in the United States, Canada, and Australia

Allan Ingelson, Tina Hunter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Numerous state, provincial, and federal governments in the United States, Canada, and Australia have created guidelines, legislation, and/or regulations (or are in the process of doing so) in response to public concerns about water contamination from hydraulic fracturing. This article will compare and analyze three national regimes in the leading states and provinces in which laws have been amended, proposed, or adopted to address public concerns about the chemicals and additives in hydraulic fracturing fluids used to produce unconventional hydrocarbons. New regulations, recent legislative amendments, and, in some cases, new statutes have been proposed or adopted in the past few years. Most of the state and provincial laws require public disclosure of some information about the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids. At the same time, governments interested in attracting investment capital to develop their shale oil and gas resources recognize the importance of protecting the intellectual property rights (trade secrets) of those parties that have developed hydraulic fracturing fluids.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1
Pages (from-to)217-253
Number of pages37
JournalNatural Resources Journal
Volume54
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2014

Fingerprint

regime
Canada
regulation
public law
capital investment
intellectual property
right of ownership
environmental pollution
Federal Government
statute
amendment
legislation
water
Law
resources

Cite this

A Regulatory Comparison of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Disclosure Regimes in the United States, Canada, and Australia. / Ingelson, Allan; Hunter, Tina.

In: Natural Resources Journal, Vol. 54, No. 2, 1, 03.2014, p. 217-253.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{30c38f89151048038f6d30791192ea69,
title = "A Regulatory Comparison of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Disclosure Regimes in the United States, Canada, and Australia",
abstract = "Numerous state, provincial, and federal governments in the United States, Canada, and Australia have created guidelines, legislation, and/or regulations (or are in the process of doing so) in response to public concerns about water contamination from hydraulic fracturing. This article will compare and analyze three national regimes in the leading states and provinces in which laws have been amended, proposed, or adopted to address public concerns about the chemicals and additives in hydraulic fracturing fluids used to produce unconventional hydrocarbons. New regulations, recent legislative amendments, and, in some cases, new statutes have been proposed or adopted in the past few years. Most of the state and provincial laws require public disclosure of some information about the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids. At the same time, governments interested in attracting investment capital to develop their shale oil and gas resources recognize the importance of protecting the intellectual property rights (trade secrets) of those parties that have developed hydraulic fracturing fluids.",
author = "Allan Ingelson and Tina Hunter",
year = "2014",
month = "3",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "217--253",
journal = "Natural Resources Journal",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Regulatory Comparison of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Disclosure Regimes in the United States, Canada, and Australia

AU - Ingelson, Allan

AU - Hunter, Tina

PY - 2014/3

Y1 - 2014/3

N2 - Numerous state, provincial, and federal governments in the United States, Canada, and Australia have created guidelines, legislation, and/or regulations (or are in the process of doing so) in response to public concerns about water contamination from hydraulic fracturing. This article will compare and analyze three national regimes in the leading states and provinces in which laws have been amended, proposed, or adopted to address public concerns about the chemicals and additives in hydraulic fracturing fluids used to produce unconventional hydrocarbons. New regulations, recent legislative amendments, and, in some cases, new statutes have been proposed or adopted in the past few years. Most of the state and provincial laws require public disclosure of some information about the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids. At the same time, governments interested in attracting investment capital to develop their shale oil and gas resources recognize the importance of protecting the intellectual property rights (trade secrets) of those parties that have developed hydraulic fracturing fluids.

AB - Numerous state, provincial, and federal governments in the United States, Canada, and Australia have created guidelines, legislation, and/or regulations (or are in the process of doing so) in response to public concerns about water contamination from hydraulic fracturing. This article will compare and analyze three national regimes in the leading states and provinces in which laws have been amended, proposed, or adopted to address public concerns about the chemicals and additives in hydraulic fracturing fluids used to produce unconventional hydrocarbons. New regulations, recent legislative amendments, and, in some cases, new statutes have been proposed or adopted in the past few years. Most of the state and provincial laws require public disclosure of some information about the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids. At the same time, governments interested in attracting investment capital to develop their shale oil and gas resources recognize the importance of protecting the intellectual property rights (trade secrets) of those parties that have developed hydraulic fracturing fluids.

UR - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288176207_A_Regulatory_Comparison_of_Hydraulic_Fracturing_Fluid_Disclosure_Regimes_in_the_United_States_Canada_and_Australia

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 217

EP - 253

JO - Natural Resources Journal

JF - Natural Resources Journal

IS - 2

M1 - 1

ER -