An understudied aspect of the “fracking” debate involves questions and challenges associated with abandoned wells and well closure. States regulators have a variety of options when it comes to policies and financial tools related to site closure and remediation including bonds, fees, and specific legacy funds. Those advocating more robust financial programs suggest that they are necessary to mitigate risks to the public. Opponents contend that they dissuade operators from investing in older fields and add costs that are passed on to consumers. Using a novel index of state financial tools, this paper assesses why some states adopt more robust financial assurance while others do not.

中文翻译：

---

（管道）行的结尾？了解国家如何管理油气井风险

“压裂”辩论的一个被忽视的方面涉及与废弃的油井和封井有关的问题和挑战。当涉及与站点关闭和修复有关的政策和金融工具时，州监管机构有多种选择，包括债券，费用和特定的遗留资金。那些主张采取更强有力的金融计划的人建议，它们对于减轻公众的风险是必要的。反对者争辩说，他们劝阻运营商投资于较旧的油田，并增加转嫁给消费者的成本。本文使用一种新颖的州金融工具指数，评估了为什么有些州采用更强大的财务担保，而另一些州则不这样做。