Hey all! This will be the blog post for 1/24 from the “Earthquakes” group. The Economist’s twitter account tweeted an article last week that I think really relates to our class. The piece comes from a correspondent in London with the initials C.R. and is titled “Fracking and House Prices: Buyer Beware.”

In a nutshell, the piece reports on the growing trend of housing prices in the areas of increased oil fracking. Citing the research of an NBER paper which documented various housing prices in the New York and Pennsylvania areas between ’95 and ‘12, the author purports that properties close to shale-gas developments fall when they rely on ground-water sources, and are slightly boosted when the water supply is piped in from elsewhere. The author points to future homeowner’s expectations that oil reserves adjacent to their potential property could taint the local water supply as a rationale for the fluctuation in home values. This phenomenon however is not worldwide as the author notes that similar trends of housing price alterations to flood risks are occurring in parts of Britain. Finally, the author ventures that a possible cause for more acute homeowner awareness to environmental factors affecting their home is the increased availability of information about such issues. An example of this is Britain’s Environment Agency and other similar organizations providing maps of major flood zones, dangerous rivers and tides, along with locations of oil fracking zones.

On the exterior, this article may not have international implications, but there are global undertones to the issue discussed. As you all probably know, in recent years the United States has been using practices such as fracking, offshore drilling, and other new techniques to more effectively extract the wealth of oil and natural gas that sits under the North American continent. Due to this, the U.S. is tracked to become oil independent in the next few decades. While this is a great economic development for America, it is saddled with some related environmental dilemmas which I think are evidenced in this article from The Economist. Increased amounts of fracking and other new oil harvesting methods have necessitated the building of the Keystone XL pipeline to transport crude oil from sands in Canada, the Dakotas, and Montana all the way to refineries and ports on the Gulf Coast. While all the gas developments popping up have artificially manipulated housing prices in the real-estate market via consumer expectations, as written about in The Economist, they also carry with them the increased chance for an oil related disaster on the North American continent.

Although it was an offshore spill, few could forget the BP disaster in the Gulf just a few years ago, so the greatly amplified oil and natural gas activity in America’s heartland and Canada raises a few necessary questions. Namely, what are the responsibilities of the often multi-national corporations drilling and fracking oil in multiple countries? Who is to inform the people living in direct relation to these events of safety, geographic information, etc.? Who is responsible for potential disasters? These are some of the various questions that are fundamental to every potentially environmentally ruinous industry worldwide; some of these being nuclear energy, carbon emissions, or as was the focus in The Economist article, oil fracking in North America.

All of the aforementioned questions stem from a central issue surrounding disaster politics and the environment, one that was at the heart of the first chapter of Hannigan’s “Disasters Without Borders.” Who coordinates preparation for potential disasters?; who is burdened with informing the people of hazardous environmental practices?; who is responsible for the safety of those involved in a disaster?; and who gives aid to areas affected by disasters? Of course, numerous different organizations and individuals collectively shoulder this duty. Institutions such as the Red Cross, UNICEF, FEMA, etc. all contribute to fulfill responsibilities. However, as highlighted in the article, NGO’s such as the Environment Agency are also getting involved by publishing area flood maps and topography. Additionally, state governments in the U.S. and Australia are also disseminating information about the dangers of regional oil fracking to people directly involved. This trend is indicative of a change that I believe is necessary for the betterment in the international environmental disaster field. The integration of the endeavors of governmental, non-governmental, and supranational institutions in striving to alleviate the pains inflicted by environmental disasters without borders. With more extensive and industrious ventures in oil, nuclear, and other potentially environmentally treacherous industries it has become necessary for not only larger extensions of the state, but also grassroots, and local NGO’s all coordinating to prepare, inform, and relieve victims of international environmental disasters.

Here is the link to the article from The Economist  http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2014/01/fracking-and-house-prices?fsrc=scn%2Ftw%2Fte%2Fbl%2Fbuyersbeware