Can we focus on some real pollution?

If you ask a strident natural gas activist the largest threat to Pennsylvania’s water quality they will likely tell you –without hesitation- that hydraulic fracturing is the main culprit despite any evidence supporting this assertion. Ask someone who truly understands the challenges facing Pennsylvania and you will receive a much different answer. Mainly, an expert will tell you agricultural runoff, sewage overflows, and suburban runoff are more serious culprits as they actually pollute Pennsylvania’s waterways each and every day.

Why the stark difference between the opinions of activists and experts? It might have something to do with the fact that to date there hasn’t been an incident associated with Marcellus Shale development that has significantly impacted Pennsylvania’s waterways. John Hanger stated this eloquently on his blog this week in reference to a recent announcement concerning water pollution in the Pittsburgh area:

http://eidmarcellus.org/marcellus-shale/activists-guide-an-arc-of-m...

Views: 348

Comment

You need to be a member of GoMarcellusShale.com to add comments!

Join GoMarcellusShale.com

Comment by Jim Litwinowicz on September 30, 2012 at 10:58am

This doesn't show up on the main page. You should post it there!

Comment by Thomas J Shepstone on September 30, 2012 at 9:39am

Thanks guys!  Good insights!

Comment by Dan on September 30, 2012 at 4:17am

It is said we throw away and waste 40% of all food here in the US.  The methane produced from the massive amount of roting food waste in landfills is said to be a major componenet of total green-house gases.  When you consider the amount of energy to produce and transport to market then to the landfill and add in the petro-based fertilizers maybe ..................................?

Comment by Jim Litwinowicz on September 30, 2012 at 3:31am

Thomas; good post. Agriculture has been one one of the largest sources of water pollution for decades but the press just targets evil business and corporations. You see, they must find stories that fit the preconceived narrative that business is evil and government is good.

But if one is going to discuss the polluting affects of fracking for nat gas then they should also point out all the pollution associated with solar and wind. Solar uses large amounts of electricity just to make the panels.  I saw a college prof at Kent State say that it takes more electricity to make a solar panel than it will ever produce. Haven't been able to verify that though.  But I do know that solar produces large amounts of toxic by-products and some gasses that contribute more to global warming than either CO2 or methane.

Wind has has a huge surface impact, are noisy, and kill birds. It also takes a huge amount of steel, fiberglass, and exotic materials to construct, all of which have major environmental impacts.

Not to mention that both solar and wind are so unreliable that power companies must keep coal power plants operating 24/7 to be used as a secondary generation source.

"Clean energy" is a myth. No energy is without some environmental cost. There must be a full discussion with all costs and benefits out in the open so that we can make the correct decisions on future energy needs and supplies.

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service