Unconventional Gas Development in the USA: Exploring the Risk Perception Issues.

Unconventional gas development (UGD) is growing rapidly in the United States. Drawing on insights from risk perception and risk governance theories and recent public opinion surveys, we find that UGD is an emerging technology that is likely to be perceived as risky, even though objective risk assessments suggest that risks are low and controllable through best risk management practices. Perceived risk varies significantly depending on the state and locality but perceptions of risk appear to be increasing as the technology is used more widely in the United States and as organized opponents of the technology intensify their efforts. Risk perceptions are attenuated somewhat because of the perceived benefits of UGD and compensation schemes for individuals and communities. The types of triggering events necessary for large-scale social amplification and stigmatization have not yet occurred but awareness of UGD is growing and organized opposition has been sufficient to cause prohibitions of UGD in some U.S. states and localities. Additional directions for social science research on public reactions to UGD are recommended.

"Not in (or under) my backyard": Geographic proximity and public acceptance of carbon capture and storage facilities.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an innovative technical approach to mitigate the problem of climate change by capturing carbon dioxide emissions and injecting them underground for permanent geological storage. CCS has been perceived both positively, as an innovative approach to facilitate a more environmentally benign use of fossil fuels while also generating local economic benefits, and negatively, as a technology that prolongs the use of carbon-intensive energy sources and burdens local communities with prohibitive costs and ecological and human health risks. This article extends existing research on the "not in my backyard" (NIMBY) phenomenon in a direction that explores the public acceptance of CCS. We utilize survey data collected from 1,001 residents of the coal-intensive U.S. state of Indiana. Over 80% of respondents express support for the general use of CCS technology. However, 20% of these initial supporters exhibit a NIMBY-like reaction and switch to opposition as a CCS facility is proposed close to their communities. Respondents' worldviews, their beliefs about the local economic benefits that CCS will generate, and their concerns about its safety have the greatest impact on increasing or decreasing the acceptance of nearby facilities. These results lend valuable insights into the perceived risks associated with CCS technology and the possibilities for its public acceptance at both a national and local scale. They may be extended further to provide initial insights into likely public reactions to other technologies that share a similar underground dimension, such as hydraulic fracturing.

Hydrogeologic controls on induced seismicity in crystalline basement rocks due to fluid injection into basal reservoirs.

A series of Mb 3.8-5.5 induced seismic events in the midcontinent region, United States, resulted from injection of fluid either into a basal sedimentary reservoir with no underlying confining unit or directly into the underlying crystalline basement complex. The earthquakes probably occurred along faults that were likely critically stressed within the crystalline basement. These faults were located at a considerable distance (up to 10 km) from the injection wells and head increases at the hypocenters were likely relatively small (∼70-150 m). We present a suite of simulations that use a simple hydrogeologic-geomechanical model to assess what hydrogeologic conditions promote or deter induced seismic events within the crystalline basement across the midcontinent. The presence of a confining unit beneath the injection reservoir horizon had the single largest effect in preventing induced seismicity within the underlying crystalline basement. For a crystalline basement having a permeability of 2 × 10(-17) m(2) and specific storage coefficient of 10(-7) /m, injection at a rate of 5455 m(3) /d into the basal aquifer with no underlying basal seal over 10 years resulted in probable brittle failure to depths of about 0.6 km below the injection reservoir. Including a permeable (kz = 10(-13) m(2) ) Precambrian normal fault, located 20 m from the injection well, increased the depth of the failure region below the reservoir to 3 km. For a large permeability contrast between a Precambrian thrust fault (10(-12) m(2) ) and the surrounding crystalline basement (10(-18) m(2) ), the failure region can extend laterally 10 km away from the injection well.

Early public impressions of terrestrial carbon capture and storage in a coal-intensive state.

While carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered to be critical to achieving long-term climate-protection goals, public concerns about the CCS practice could pose significant obstacles to its deployment. This study reports findings from the first state-wide survey of public perceptions of CCS in a coal-intensive state, with an analysis of which factors predict early attitudes toward CCS. Nearly three-quarters of an Indiana sample (N = 1001) agree that storing carbon underground is a good approach to protecting the environment, despite 80% of the sample being unaware of CCS prior to participation in the two-wave survey. The majority of respondents do not hold strong opinions about CCS technology. Multivariate analyses indicate that support for CCS is predicted by a belief that humankind contributes to climate change, a preference for increased use of renewable energy, and egalitarian and individualistic worldviews, while opposition to CCS is predicted by self-identified political conservatism and by selective attitudes regarding energy and climate change. Knowledge about early impressions of CCS can help inform near-term technology decisions at state regulatory agencies, utilities, and pipeline companies, but follow-up surveys are necessary to assess how public sentiments evolve in response to image-building efforts with different positions on coal and CCS.

New onset of multiple keratoacanthomas and palmoplantar hyperkeratosis caused by the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma with a new generation multi-kinase inhibitor.

The use of new generation multi-kinase inhibitors for the treatment of various malignancies has brought unique and previously unrecognised cutaneous reactions to the attention of dermatologists. We report the case of a patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who presented to our dermatology clinic with eruptive squamous cell carcinomas with keratoacanthomatous features and painless palmoplantar hyperkeratosis while taking sorafenib (Nexavar). Dermatological toxicity from sorafenib has been well described in the literature. Herein we describe a combination of unusual symptoms due to sorafenib.

Delayed-type hypersensitivity skin reactions caused by subcutaneous unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins: tolerance of a new recombinant hirudin.

BACKGROUND: Eczema-like infiltrated plaques at subcutaneous heparin injection sites are well-documented side effects of these anticoagulants. However, surgical interventions may be problematic if heparin is urgently needed in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to perform extensive allergy skin testing in 24 patients, including a pregnant woman in whom subcutaneous infiltrated plaques developed after subcutaneous heparin injections, and to find safe therapeutic alternatives for this group of patients. METHODS: Patch, intradermal, and subcutaneous tests were performed with a panel of unfractionated heparins (UFHs), low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), and heparinoids. Since 1997, we have also been performing allergy studies in 8 patients with lepirudin, a new recombinant heparinoid; tolerance of lepirudin was investigated by means of subcutaneous and intravenous injections. The allergy investigations in the pregnant woman were limited to patch tests with heparins and intradermal and subcutaneous tests with pentosanpolysulfate, which are not contraindicated during pregnancy. RESULTS: In our study population 19 of 23 patients were sensitized to all the UFHs and LMWHs tested when intracutaneous and subcutaneous test results were read at up to 96 hours. LMWH was found to be a possible substitute in 4 patients. Five patients were also sensitized to the heparinoid pentosanpolysulfate. Sensitization to the heparinoid danaparoid was observed in 12 of the 13 patients who were tested with this substance. The administration of an intravenous bolus containing a therapeutic dose of lepirudin after negative subcutaneous provocation was tolerated without any side effects in all 8 patients. The pregnant woman was sensitized to LMWH but tolerated subcutaneous pentosanpolysulfate without any side effects. CONCLUSION: Extensive allergy skin testing should be performed to find safe alternatives. With few exceptions, all patients react to both UFHs and LMWHs, as well as to danaparoid. The subcutaneous provocation test is the most reliable diagnostic measure. Intravenous lepirudin, and in some cases subcutaneous pentosanpolysulfate, appears to be a safe alternative in patients with eczema-like infiltrated plaques at subcutaneous heparin-injection sites.