NEPA — Substantive Effectiveness Under a Procedural Mandate: Assessment of Oil and Gas EISs in the Mountain West
NEPA — Substantive Effectiveness Under a Procedural Mandate: Assessment of Oil and Gas EISs in the Mountain West
复制标题
NEPA — 程序授权下的实质性有效性：西部山区石油和天然气 EIS 评估
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Capone
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Ruple;M. Capone
本文实证评估了石油和天然气田开发项目的环境影响报告书（EIS）是否能显着减少环境影响。根据我们对四个州地区项目的统计分析，我们得出的结论是，与最初提议的项目相比，EIS 准备工作确实产生的最终决策对环境的影响要小得多。影响减少主要发生在环境影响报告草案和最终环境影响报告之间，少量减少发生在最终环境影响报告和决策记录之间。虽然减少可能部分归因于其他法律要求（例如《清洁空气法》、《清洁水法》或《濒危物种法》合规性或干预性经济和技术因素），但仅靠外部因素并不能充分解释影响的减少。我们还发现，EIS 中考虑的替代方案数量会影响减少影响的程度。考虑更广泛替代方案的环境影响战略能够更有效地减少环境影响。
This paper empirically evaluates whether Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) for oil and natural gas field development projects lead to a significant reduction in environmental impacts. Based on our statistical analysis of projects within a four-state region, we conclude that EIS preparation does appear to produce final decisions that are substantially less impactive on the environment when compared to initially proposed projects. Impact reductions occur primarily between the Draft EIS and Final EIS, with minor reductions occurring between the Final EIS and Record of Decision. While reductions may be partially attributable to other legal requirements (such as Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or Endangered Species Act compliance or intervening economic and technological factors), external factors alone do not adequately explain impact reductions. We also found that the number of alternatives considered within an EIS affects the magnitude of impact reduction. EISs that consider a broader range of alternatives are more effective at reducing environmental impacts.