The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Burning Man

Text Size

OK, so a different sort of combustion has sucked the oxygen out of the discussion room for the moment but, appropos of an earlier post of mine today, and the idiocy of touting windmills and solar panels to "reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil", what about our developing dependence on foreign sources of gas? Should Pennsylvania allow and encourage drilling for natural gas? It isn't complicated. But that' the subject of a poll which, if it turns out wrong, will surely find some use in the debate.

Thanks to technological advances and enormous discoveries we have a century of natural gas. If we are allowed to produce it. So EPA and (certain of) the states have come after it to squelch the new supplies before they guarantee that energy and feedstock needed by many domestic industries remain affordable and diminish the grave threat of the establishment's war on coal, for a long period of time.

If you have an opinion, vote. It's good practice for later.

View all comments (3) | Leave a comment

Dan McKay| 9.9.10 @ 6:21PM

How long before we , as a society, revert back to the dark ages ?

Randy| 9.10.10 @ 8:15AM

Only the loony left could find fault with discoveries of a century worth of the cleanest carbon/fossil fuel on the planet. They are possessed. Only the devil himself could confuse so many otherwise intelligent people.

Dan D| 9.10.10 @ 10:07AM

Absolutely, Pennsylvania should encourage and permit development of the Marcellus shale gas formations. There should be a reasonable and low level of extraction tax, and a reasonable amount of regulatory oversight. Pennsylvania has suffered for many decades because mining and lumbering took place without many safeguards, and the costs of clean-up and recovery have been enormous.

It only makes sense to collect a small tax to help the localities affected cope with the development, and to ensure water and land resources are restored.