Delineating property rights in unconventional hydrocarbon resources: Concepts from the United States and Germany

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 20, Issue , 2016, Pages 149-157

  Hanschel, Dirk ^a   Centner, Terence ^b  

^a MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Germany; Property rights; Risks; Shale gas; United States

Indexed keywords

EID: 84991209502     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. [1] Alexander, G.S., Property as a fundamental constitutional right? The German example. 2003, Cornell Law Faculty Publications, 733–788.
2. [2] Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html, 2014 (accessed 31.05.16).
3. [3] Brenner, M., Öffentliches Baurecht. 4th ed., 2014, Heidelberg.
4. [4] Bundesberggesetz (BBergG), Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bbergg, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
5. [5] Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB),Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, 2015, German Civil Code. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
6. [6] Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Schieferöl und Schiefergas in Deutschland, Potenziale und Umweltaspekte. https://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Energie/Downloads/Abschlussbericht_13MB_Schieferoelgaspotenzial_Deutschland_2016,pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
7. [7] Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie. http://www.bmwi.de/DE/Themen/Industrie/Rohstoffe-und-Ressourcen/fracking.html, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
8. [8] Bundesregierung, Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Änderung wasser- und naturschutzrechtlicher Vorschriften zur Untersagung und zur Risikominimierung bei den Verfahren der Fracking-Technologie, 23 Apr 2015, Bundestags-Drucksache 18/4713. http://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btd/18/047/1804713.pdf, 2015 (accessed 31.05.16).
9. [10] Bundesregierung, https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Artikel/2015/04/2015-04-01-fracking-gesetz-kabinett.html (accessed 07.08.16).
10. [11] BVerwG 7 C 10.08, Bundesverwaltungsgericht. http://www.bverwg.de/entscheidungen/entscheidung.php?lang=de&ent=201108U7C10.08.0 (accessed 31.05.16).
11. [12] Moers-Kapellen BVerwGE 81, 329 et seq., Bundesverwaltungsgericht. https://www.jurion.de/Urteile/BVerwG/1989-03-16/BVerwG-4-C-3685 (acccessed 31.05.16).
12. [13] Centner, T.J., Eberhart, N.S., The use of best management practices to respond to externalities from developing shale gas resources. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 59:4 (2016), 746–768.
13. [14] Centner, T.J., Petetin, L., Permitting program with best management practices for shale gas wells to safeguard public health. J. Environ. Manage. 163 (2015), 174–183.
14. [15] City of Houston, Texas vs. Trail Enterprises, Inc., 2012. 377 S.W.3d 873 (Texas Court of Appeals, Fourteenth District).
15. [16] Continental Resources, Inc., vs. Farrar Oil Company, 1997. 559 N.W.2d 841. (Supreme Court of North Dakota).
16. [17] Durner, W., Konflikte räumlicher Planungen. 2005, Tübingen.
17. [18] European Parliament, Parliamentary questions 19 May 2015. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2015-000465&language=EN, 2015 (accessed 31.05.16).
18. [19] European Union, Commission recommendation of 22 January 2014 on minimum principles for the exploration and production of hydrocarbons (such as shale gas) using high-volume hydraulic fracturing. Off. J. Eur. Union L. 39 (2014), 72–78.
19. [20] Engelhardt, M., Louis, H.W., Rechtliche Betrachtungen zum Fracking. Natur und Recht 36 (2014), 548–555.
20. [21] FPL Farming, Ltd. vs. Environmental Processing Systems, L.C., 2011. 351 S.W.3d 306. (Supreme Court of Texas).
21. [22] Fershee, J.P., Facts, fiction, and perception in hydraulic fracturing: illuminating Act 13 and Robinson Township vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. West Virginia Law Rev. 116:3 (2014), 829–873.
22. [23] Fisher, K., Communities in the dark: the use of state sunshine laws to shed light on the fracking industry. Boston College Environ. Aff. Law Rev. 40 (2015), 99–131.
23. [24] Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. See http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/energiepolitik/keine-einigung-koalition-verschiebt-votum-ueber-fracking-gesetz-13676172.html, 2015 (accessed 31.05.16).
24. [25] Frenz, W., Fracking nach dem Koalitionsvertrag. UPR, 2014, 41–43.
25. [26] Frenz, W., Überwiegende öffentliche Interessen gegen Fracking-Berechtigungen?. DÖV, 2016, 322–329.
26. [27] Garzweiler II, Decision by the German Federal Constitutional Court; BVerfGE 134, 242, Press Release No. 76/2013 of 17 December 2013 in English. At https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/EN/2013/bvg13-076html;jsessionid=AFAB5FD32F77B643C88AA05A91208A00.2_cid370 (accessed on 27.05.16).
27. [28] Gaßner, H., Buchholz, G., Rechtsfragen des Erdgas-Fracking −Grundwasserschutz und UVP. Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht, 2013, 143–150.
28. [29] Gawenis vs. Arkansas Oil & Gas Commission, 2015 Ark. 238. (Supreme Court of Arkansas) 2015.
29. [30] P. Hahn, Wertschöpfung unter der Erde. Konfliktlagen und Zulassungsverfahren - Systematischer Überblick, Zweifelsfragen und Ausblick, in: Kment, M. (Ed.), 2015, pp. 29–42.
30. [31] Hegarty vs. Utah Board of Oil, Gas, and Mining, 57 P.3d 1042. (Utah Supreme Court) 2002.
31. [32] Hill, E.L., Shale gas development and infant health: evidence from Pennsylvania. Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, 2014, Cornell University (Working Paper).
32. [33] Hiser vs. XTO Energy Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140667 (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, 2013), affirmed, Hiser vs. XTO Energy, Inc., 768 F.3d 773. (Eighth Circuit, 2014) 2013.
33. [34] Hoppe, W., Beckmann, M., Zur Vereinbarkeit bergrechtlicher Duldungspflichten mit dem verfassungsgebotenen Grundeigentümerschutz. 41 Die öffentliche Verwaltung 21 (1988), 893–901.
34. [35] Jackson, R.B., The integrity of oil and gas wells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111:30 (2014), 10902–10903.
35. [36] M. Kment, Partizipation von Kommunen und Bürgern an den wirtschaftlichen Erfolgen unterirdischer Nutzungen, in Kment, (Ed.), Unterirdische Nutzungen - Systematisierung und planerische Steuerung, Gewinnpartizipation und Haftung, 2015, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, p. 137–149.
36. [37] Knoema, Natural Gas Prices: Long Term Forecast to 2020: Data and Charts. http://knoema.com/ncszerf/natural-gas-prices-long-term-forecast-to-2020-data-and-charts, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
37. [38] H.-J. Koch, (Ed.), Umweltrecht, 4th ed., München, 2014.
38. [39] Kramer, B.M., Oil and gas leases and pooling: a look back and a peek ahead. Texas Tech Law Rev. 45 (2013), 877–903.
39. [40] Kramer, B.M., Anderson, O.L., The rule of capture − an oil and gas perspective. Environ. Law 35 (2005), 899–954.
40. [41] Leisner, W., Bestandsgarantie des Eigentums −vom Bergrecht unterminiert?. 10 Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 12 (1988), 555–562.
41. [42] Libecap, G.D., Smith, J.L., The economic evolution of petroleum property rights in the United States. J. Legal Stud. 31 (2002), S589–S608.
42. [43] Louisiana Annotated Statutes, Title 30, section 30:28, 2016.
43. [44] G. Ludwig, Gesamtabwägung ins Bundesberggesetz! Konsequenzen aus dem Garzweiler-Urteil des BVerfG vom 17.12.2013, Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht 9/2014, 451–457.
44. [45] McKenzie, L.M., Witter, R.Z., Newman, L.S., Adgate, J.L., Human health risk assessment of air emissions from development of unconventional natural gas resources. Sci. Total Environ. 424 (2012), 79–87.
45. [46] McKenzie, L.M., Gua, R., Witter, R.Z., Savitz, D.A., Newman, L.S., Adgate, J.L., Birth outcomes and maternal residential proximity to natural gas development in rural Colorado. Environ. Health Perspect. 122:4 (2014), 412–417.
46. [47] McNeill vs. Burlington Resource Oil & Gas Company, 153 P.3d 46. (New Mexico Court of Appeals) 2006.
47. [48] Merrill, T.W., Schizer, D.M., The shale oil and gas revolution, hydraulic fracturing, and water contamination: a regulatory strategy. Minnesota Law Rev. 98:1 (2013), 145–264.
48. [49] S. Muckel, M. Ogorek, Öffentliches Baurecht, 2nd ed., München, 2014.
49. [50] Mudd, M.B., A constant and difficult task: making local land use decisions in states with a constitutional right to a healthful environment. Ecol. Law Q. 38 (2011), 1–62.
50. [51] Nolon, J.R., Gavin, S.E., Hydrofracking: state preemption, local power, and cooperative governance. Case West. Reserve Law Rev. 63 (2013), 995–1038.
51. [52] Oklahoma Statutes Annotated, Title 52, section 87.1, 2015.
52. [53] Outka, U., Intrastate preemption in the shifting energy sector. University Colo. Law Rev. 86:3 (2015), 927–990.
53. [54] Pacheco, E., It's a fracking conundrum: environmental justice and the battle to regulate hydraulic fracturing. Ecol. Law Q. 42:2 (2015), 373–395.
54. [55] Pappas, M., Energy versus property. Florida State Univ. Law Rev. 41 (2014), 435–487.
55. [56] Penn Central Transportation Company vs. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (U.S. Supreme Court) 1978.
56. [57] Pennsylvania General Energy Company vs. Grant Township, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129921 (U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania) 2015.
57. [58] Pierce, D.E., Minimizing the environmental impact of oil and gas development by maximizing production conservation. North Dakota Law Rev. 85 (2009), 759–779.
58. [59] Rabe, R.L., Hampton, R.L., Taxing fracking: the politics of state severance taxes in the shale era. Rev. Policy Res. 32:4 (2015), 389–412.
59. [60] Ramsauer, U., Wendt, H., Einsatz der Fracking-Technologie insbesondere aus der Sicht des Gewässerschutzes. 2014, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 1401–1409.
60. [61] Rawlins, R., Planning for fracking on the Barnett shale: soil and water contamination concerns, and the role of local government. Environ. Law 44 (2014), 135–199.
61. [62] Reins, L., A research agenda for shale gas: challenges to a coherent regulation in the European union. RELP 2, 2014, 167–171.
62. [63] Reins, L., The Coherent Regulation of Energy and Environment in the European Union –using Shale Gas As a Case Study. 2015, KU Leuven Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid, Leuven.
63. [64] Robinson Township vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 83 A.3d at 901 (Pennsylvania Supreme Court) 2013.
64. [65] Rodriquez, R.S., Soeder, D.J., Evolving water management practices in shale oil & gas development. J. Unconv. Oil Gas Resour. 10 (2015), 18–24.
65. [66] Roth vs. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation, 919 F. Supp. 2d 476. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania) 2013.
66. [67] Schenke, W.-R., Bergbau Contra Oberflächeneigentum und kommunale Selbstverwaltung? – Zur Bedeutung der verfassungsrechtlichen Garantie des Eigentums und der gemeindlichen Selbstverwaltung bei der bergrechtlichen Betriebszulassung. 1994, Duncker&Humblot, Berlin.
67. [68] Schirrmeister, M., Controversial futures −discourse analysis on utilizing the fracking technology in Germany. Eur. J. Futures Res. 2:38 (2014), 1–9.
68. [69] R. Sparwasser, et al., Umweltrecht, Heidelberg, 2003.
69. [70] Spence, D.B., Federalism, regulatory lags, and the political economy of energy production. Univ. Pennsylvania Law Rev. 161:2 (2013), 431–508.
70. [71] Squibb, C.A., The age of allocation: the end of pooling as we know it. Texas Tech Law Rev. 45 (2013), 929–958.
71. [72] Stone vs Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71121 (U.S. District Court, Northern District of West Virginia) 2013.
72. [73] Sumi, L., Breaking All the Rules: The Crisis in Oil and Gas Regulatory Enforcement Earthworks’ Oil and Gas Accountability Project. 2012, Earthworks, Washington, DC.
73. [74] Swepi, LP vs. Mora County, New Mexico, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13496.(U.S. District Court, New Mexico) 2015.
74. [75] Texas Natural Resources Code, Title 3, chapters 52 and 102, 2015.
75. [76] The Trees Oil Company vs. State Corporation Commission, 105 P.3d 1269. (Supreme Court of Kansas) 2005.
76. [77] US Energy Information Administration, Natural Gas Data: Number of Producing Wells, 2013, Released 29 April 2016. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_prod_wells_s1_a.htm, 2016 (accessed 31.05.16).
77. [78] Utah Code Annotated, Section 40-6-6.5, 2014.
78. [79] Vengosh, A., Jackson, R.B., Warner, N., Darrah, T.H., Kondash, A., A critical review of the risks to water resources from unconventional shale gas development and hydraulic fracturing in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48:15 (2014), 8334–8348.
79. [80] Vetter, A. Shale Gas in Germany – the Current Status, Shale Gas Information Platform. http://www.shale-gas-information-platform.org/areas/the-debate/shale-gas-in-germany-the-current-status.html, 2015 (accessed 31.05.16).
80. [81] H. Weller, Kullmann, U. Bundesberggesetz, 1st ed, 2012.
81. [82] Wiggins, S.N., Libecap, G.D., The influence of private contractual failure on regulation: the case of oil field unitization. J. Polit. Econ. 93:4 (1985), 690–714.
82. [83] K. Windthorst, Entschädigungsfolgen unterirdischer Nutzungen, in Kment, M., 2015 (Ed.). Unterirdische Nutzungen – Systematisierung und planerische Steuerung, Gewinnpartizipation und Haftung. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp. 151–173.
83. [84] Wiseman, H., Remedying regulatory diseconomies of scale. Boston Univ. Law Rev. 94 (2014), 235–304.
84. [85] Wiseman, H.J., The capacity of states to govern shale gas development risks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48 (2014), 8376–8387.