The economic impact of shale gas extractions: A review of existing studies
by Thomas C. Kinnaman in Ecological Economics April, 2011
The Truth About Those Industry-funded Studies
Economist Jannette Barth, Ph. D., takes a hard look at the industry-funded studies that extol the economic benefits of gas drilling. March 2011.
Preliminary Comments on a report by the Empire Center for New York State Policy (A project of the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research), titled “The Economic Effects of Hydrofracturing on Local Economies: A Comparison of New York and Pennsylvania,” May 2013
Comments prepared by: Jannette M. Barth,Ph.D., Economist, Pepacton
Institute LLC, May 7, 2013
Critique of PPI Study on Shale Gas Job Creation by Jannette M. Barth, Ph.D.
A Critique of the Flawed Economic Study Cited by the NYS DEC
Economist Jannette Barth critiques “Potential Economic and Fiscal Impacts from Natural Gas Production in Broome County, New York”, the flawed study cited by the NYS DEC in the Draft SGEIS. July 31, 2009.
The Economic and Employment Contributions of Shale Gas in the United States
Prepared for AMERICA’S NATURAL GAS ALLIANCE, IHS Global Insight (USA) Inc., December 2011.
Comments on IHS Global Insight’s study,
Jannette M. Barth, Ph.D., January 27, 2012,
An Emerging Giant: Prospects and Economic Impacts of Developing the Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Play
An industry funded study paints a rosy view of economic impact. Penn State Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering, August 2009.
How Could President Obama Have Been So Wrong? Economist Jannette Barth Thinks She Knows the Answer
Press Release from Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy — Feb 6, 2012 announcing Barth’s analysis of IHS Report.
The Global Anti-Fracking Movement: What it wants, How it operates and What’s next
White Paper by Control Risks. Posted Dec 10, 2012
As unconventional gas development spreads worldwide, and becomes more central to government energy policy and corporate investment
strategy, a better understanding of the anti-fracking movement – its goals, structure, methods and trajectory – is essential for companies,
policymakers and other observers of the emergent energy boom.
The UB Shale Play: Distorting the Facts about Fracking
A review of the University at Buffalo Shale Resources and Society Institute’s Report on “Environmental Impacts During Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling” May, 2012 by The Public Accountability Initiative
An Analysis of 10 Research Collaboration Contracts Between Leading Energy Companies and Major U.S. Universities
The world’s largest oil companies are showing surprising interest in financing alternative energy research at U.S. universities. Over the past decade, five of the world’s top 10 oil companies—ExxonMobil Corp., Chevron Corp., BP PLC, Royal Dutch Shell Group, and ConocoPhillips Co.—and other large traditional energy companies with a direct commercial stake in future energy markets have forged dozens of multi-year, multi-million-dollar alliances with top U.S. universities and scientists to carry out energy-related research. Much of this funding by “Big Oil” is being used for research into new sources of alternative energy and renewable energy, mostly biofuels.
“ Frackademia” Industry Influence on Fracking Research and Academia
Food & Water Watch Fact Sheet, May,
Industry Partner or Industry Puppet? How MIT’s influential study of fracking was authored, funded, and released by oil and gas industry insiders
Ernest J. Moniz, Obama’s nominee for Energy Secretary, took a lucrative position on the board of ICF International, a consulting firm with significant oil and gas ties, just weeks after he chaired the study group that authored “The Future of Natural Gas”, a report promoting shale gas.
|
|
