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.
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.