“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing

“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public... 1 Introduction</h5> The rapid development of unconventional sources of oil and natural gas using hydraulic fracturing has generated a great deal of controversy. Supporters have argued that fracking will spur economic growth, lead to more secure domestic energy supplies, and facilitate a rapid transition away from carbon-intensive, coal-based electricity generation ( The Perryman Group, 2008; Considine et al., 2010; Hultman et al., 2011; US Environmental Protection Agency, 2011 ). Opponents have focused on potential adverse impacts on public health, the environment, and communities in close proximity to these energy sources ( Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 2010; Osborn et al., 2011; Perry, 2012; Stedman et al., 2012 ). Given these conflicts, understanding public support and opposition is critical for planners tasked with addressing siting disputes and other issues ( Boudet and Ortolano, 2010 ); for government agencies attempting to establish appropriate regulations ( New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2013 ); and for researchers, advocates, and others interested in communicating about potential impacts ( Clarke et al., in press ). Using a nationally representative sample ( N =1061), we examine Americans' perceptions of hydraulic fracturing (i.e. “top of mind” associations); familiarity with the issue; levels http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Energy Policy Elsevier

“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/fracking-controversy-and-communication-using-national-survey-data-to-usmqCiELAN
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0301-4215
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.017
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

1 Introduction</h5> The rapid development of unconventional sources of oil and natural gas using hydraulic fracturing has generated a great deal of controversy. Supporters have argued that fracking will spur economic growth, lead to more secure domestic energy supplies, and facilitate a rapid transition away from carbon-intensive, coal-based electricity generation ( The Perryman Group, 2008; Considine et al., 2010; Hultman et al., 2011; US Environmental Protection Agency, 2011 ). Opponents have focused on potential adverse impacts on public health, the environment, and communities in close proximity to these energy sources ( Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 2010; Osborn et al., 2011; Perry, 2012; Stedman et al., 2012 ). Given these conflicts, understanding public support and opposition is critical for planners tasked with addressing siting disputes and other issues ( Boudet and Ortolano, 2010 ); for government agencies attempting to establish appropriate regulations ( New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2013 ); and for researchers, advocates, and others interested in communicating about potential impacts ( Clarke et al., in press ). Using a nationally representative sample ( N =1061), we examine Americans' perceptions of hydraulic fracturing (i.e. “top of mind” associations); familiarity with the issue; levels

Journal

Energy PolicyElsevier

Published: Feb 1, 2014

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off