Comment

Comment by John Reed on March 15, 2010 at 12:55am

a working farm?

Comment by Country Bumkin on March 15, 2010 at 12:53am

Marie,

Your situation will always be worse than anyone else's. The train usually causes a fire every summer when it's dry, but again, that's not as bad as what you are saying. NG is ruining everything--RUN FOREST, RUN!

Give me a break. How do you carry on with such stress and hatred in your life for everyone else's problems?

Comment by John Reed on March 14, 2010 at 11:01pm

Marie, do you own a farm or live on a farm?

Comment by Country Bumkin on March 14, 2010 at 10:59am

Hey Dan,

James was being clever and tying his points together in a comedic way...At least that's how I took it.

Hey Marie,

If you live along a busy highway and hate the noise, what would you do? Move? We live less than 50 yards from a rail road. The beauty of our farm far out weighs the "industrial" noise of the railroad. We actually like watching the train-my young son loves the train. The traffic on that rail line is hauling chemicals to a local business that makes drilling "mud"....We are all supportive of the activity on a rail line that has been idle for many years.

I don't know how other counties are in the state, but Clearfield is always noted for having people that say NO to everything! Natural gas is just one more industry that no one wants. However, when a prison or whatever starts accepting applications, it's flooded with local applicants. Weird how that is....Hmmmm...

Comment by daniel cohen on March 14, 2010 at 8:10am

Dear James,
Your last comment puzzles me. You're a passionate advocate for your position, that I can accept and indeed appreciate. You are not emptyheaded, yet your last response wasn't worthy of your intellect.
What can you possibly object to in the following quote? "But our goal is to make it possible to extract the gas in a way that doesn't damage the residents, their property or the environment and that preserves the rural character of Mount Pleasant." (Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10073/1042737-58.stm#ixzz0iBAy4Yi6)

Comment by daniel cohen on March 14, 2010 at 7:53am

Dear James & Gasman,
On a different site Marie has called our attention to a You-Tube presentation. I wonder if you saw it, and what you would think about it. It addresses what appears to be the fallacy of relying on government oversight to protect out interests.

Dear Marie,
You have done us all a wonderful service. Let me try to frame it for those first tuning in:
Marie has brought to our attention a conference held by some local folk, utilizing Duquesne University experts in different fields to inform the public about issues they have become aware of related to Marcellus Shale drilling. The first speaker was John F. Stolz, an environmental biologist, with much to share.

The overall presentations , there are 7 of them, is not a glitch free slick presentation, but they do go one into the other if you have the patience to click them through. There is much lost in poor video and poor chart work, and in going from one site to the next. Having said all that- you cannot afford to miss this. No axe to grind-just the facts as they occurred.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjIG9PTZLTg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6arAzJbymYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGSVaY9JLcs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfJr1UGD-RI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmiePoWfjvA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=002zWq4bUS0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Cf…

Thanks again Marie.
Dan

Comment by BuckinghamGasMan on March 14, 2010 at 6:25am

Daniel, I think that we are seeing things a little differently. Strong environmental regulations already on the books in Pa (and being reviewed as we speak) create a business climate where it is most profitable for NG companies to produce gas without associated pollution. There are companies who think that they can cut corners in the short run to make the profit that you describe. These are the companies that strong regulations have to train and, if necessary, run out of business. I also believe that they are in the minority not majority.

Since I think we have good regulations in place (and probably getting tougher), I think we should allow drilling under these closely monitored conditions. I also have no problem supporting an increase in the number of monitors/inspectors watching over the industry.

Comment by daniel cohen on March 14, 2010 at 5:27am

Dear Bonnie and James,
I believe that we are in agreement here about the concerns you express. James is looking at the big picture of energy independence from foreign sources, and points out that the future for the U.S. belongs to NG and Green energy. Bonnie is concerned about contamination of our food supply from foreign producers and has a focus on passing on the land to her grandchildren and great grandchildren.

Guys, I am in agreement with these concerns, and dearly want to address those issues that would interfere with those desires. Perhaps you read proposed solutions that might make it appear otherwise, but I assure you that our goals are the same if indeed I read you correctly. Perhaps our conversation needs now to focus on how best to accomplish what we all want.

Dan

Comment by Bonnie M on March 14, 2010 at 4:31am

Are the people that are fighting against hydro-fracing also fighting that hard against our contaminated food supply that is coming from the foreign countries? I don't think so....Please leave the decision up to the educated land owners. Most of us are just as interested in the land and the future as you are and are making informed decisions based on all the information that we have taken the time to learn. My grandchildren and great grandchildren depend on us taking the time to become informed and signing a lease that protects them as well as yours. We have researched the previous states of drilling and the consequences and read many articles by EXPERTS but, again, it is each EXPERTS interpretation of what they assume to be correct just as it is ours. EXPERTS still only put out there what is their opinion and interpretation no matter what the issue.

Comment by daniel cohen on March 14, 2010 at 2:41am

Dear Gasman,
The exact equation of the two are not equal, as you point out. The analogy, however, is unfortunately much closer to the truth than not. We need to learn from that which has gone before, in order to prevent the errors from catching us. In both cases(Coal & Gas/oil mining) the bottom line is profit, the companies are in business to look out for themselves, pollution is a side effect of that pursuit and the landowner ultimately is left with the results. Have I gone astray in my thinking yet? The controls upon the industries (government,state,federal) have not in the past successfully held the vested interests in check enough to avoid terrible contamination from occurring. Have I overstated the logic case yet? And if I recall properly, didn't you in a much earlier post indicate that landowners need to look out for themselves, since industry is just doing what any business does-make profit for its shareholders.?(If I am misremembering and improperly attributing that thought to you I apologize in advance)

Don't you agree that a balance of responsibility is needed so that the errors, from whatever source, can be controlled to a much greater extent to avoid the pitfalls? Can we both agree, here & now, that our shared goal is for a win-win situation where the Gas/oil interests are met and the landowner is protected? To the extent to which we can agree, I'd look forward to hearing your thoughts on how best to achieve that goal.

Your comments in the past on other posts have been helpful to me personally in formulating my own views. I look forward to our continued discussion.

Dan

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 36
• 37
• 38
• 39
• 40
• …
• 46
• Next ›
• Page