< Back to results

National policies for hydraulic fracturing

  • Health and safety
  • Land-use planning
  • Permitting processes / policy integration
  • Reporting official statistics
  • Socio-economic and environmental impact assessments

Challenge the practice is addressing: ISL (in situ leaching) requires hydraulic fracturing, which has known risks: Triggering of seismic events, selection and use of large amounts of chemicals, disposal of large amounts of wastewater, large number of drilling sites, potentially high methane emissions, etc.

Concrete practice to achieve the expected goal: There are 'good practice' national policies introduced in various countries regarding hydraulic fracturing Most foresee a total ban or a temporary moratorium. Of the countries studied, only Australia has done something to counteract the negative impacts by enacting a ban on BTEX (Benzol, Toluol, Ethylbenzol and Xylole).

Expected impact/goal of the practice: Lower risks associated with hydraulic fracturing through different policies. The goal of BIOMOre is to allow ISL.

Who is the target user group of the practice/intervention or implementing the practice/intervention? Policy makers

BIOMOre Deliverable Number 5.3: Review of legislation and BREF documents for the environmentally safe exploitation of stimulated in situ bioleaching (p. 28 - 30)
Data item type
Knowledge base
Practice type
Public policy
Report / document
Learning relevance
Guidelines / guidance document
Metalliferous minerals
Extractive life-cycle
Exploitation phase
Sustainability scope
Water stewardship
Land-use and biodiversity
Waste management
System change potential
Lower risks associated with hydraulic fracturing through different policies