Moratorium: The Second Thing Closest To Eternal Life (Look at NY)

Our anti development friends continually cry that we must put a moratorium on shale development. This will give us time to make sure it is done safely. Nonsense ! This is just a ruse to stop development and prevent it from ever moving forward. Once a moratorium is in place it's virtually impossible to lift.

Don't believe me ? Just look at NY. There have been countless state, federal, and university studies performed that show that shale development using hydraulic fracturing is safe. Even the DEP of NY conducted a study which shows that it's safe. Yet the cowardly Governor of that state will not lift the moratorium. Instead the governor has found a new excuse to extend the ban, everyone must wait for a new study from the Health Commissioner's office (as if the folks in that office know more than the DEP).

So why does the Governor quiver in his shoes,fear his shadow and refuse to lift the moratorium ? Radical leftists, these folks provide millions of campaign dollars to Democrats such as the Governor. The Governor says screw the 70,000 landowners of NY, he is more interested in the millions of dollars from a few hundred extremists.

The appeal of this tactic is simple; it sounds reasonable because everyone is for safety, a clean environment and so on. It is anything but reasonable, as I stated earlier study upon study prove that shale development using hydraulic fracturing is safe. This is just another tactic in the radical quest to reduce and eliminate the use of fossil fuels. I hope you all can see it for what it truly is, a lie.

If and when you hear this idea raised in your area please fight it with every effort you can.

Views: 383

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David Mohn on February 17, 2014 at 3:58am

I couldn't agree more with your last statement Mark.  I am a landowner and in most cases, us landowners own most of the land, however, we only count as one vote.  You get to the city, you have hundreds of people living on one acre of ground and they all get one vote.  I have said it before and will say it again.  When it comes to land use, why not give each person one vote per acre of ground they own?  I know it will never ever happen but if you don't own land, you shouldn't have a say in how the land is used.  You own a half acre, you get a half a vote.  You own 700 acres you get 700 votes.  

I want to protect the enviroment as much as someone else but all these city people who take their drives in the country are adding to the polution not to mention all the garbage they throw out there windows into my fields.  There are more people killed in cars than anything else, but you don't seem them banning cars!  If I own mineral rights, I should be able to market them if I so decide to.  It is called free enterprise. 

Permalink Reply by Mark McGrail on February 17, 2014 at 4:06am

David,

It just means those non-landowners are more motivated and better organized. The landowners of NY just don't realize the power they control.

It's interesting that you bring up auto deaths; there has never been a death caused by hydraulic fracturing yet it is banned not the other way around.

Auto Deaths - millions

Hydraulic Fracturing Deaths - 0

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on February 17, 2014 at 5:53am
The bigger question would be why you have no rights on the property you own? If the landowner and the driller are willing to take the risks involved on a well than the conversation should end right there. New York landowners should demand everyone in the state pay their property taxes since everyone in the state has a say in what they do with their property.
Permalink Reply by Mark McGrail on February 17, 2014 at 6:02am

RP,

I can see the government being involved in order to secure that the environment is protected. In this instance the government has over stepped that responsibility, the science has proved that shale development is safe.

Governor Cuomo and his leftist friends are inserting their perosnal beliefs into the decision making process (they oppose expansion of fossil fuel development).

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on February 17, 2014 at 6:19am
I would agree but the line is blurring over government protection. If the landowner and driller are left economically responsible for damage occurring outside of their property I would imagine they would be environmentally responsible. This falls under the argument of whether the FDA, FAA, EPA, or any others in the alphabet soup gang actually keep us safe? The government is comprised of individuals and those individuals are not immune from bribe, graft, or greed. Without morality it matters not. The only protection I want is from the FD, PD, or USMC.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service