Comment

Comment by Tom Copley on April 2, 2010 at 2:56pm

Bob-- Of course I was not involved back then, but my understanding is that despite everything that has been said about an exemption, there never was one. The 2005 Energy Policy Act clarified that hydro-fracturing was never supposed to be covered under the the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (SDWA), so talking how the industry managed get itself an "exemption" when none was ever required is a little like comparing apples to oranges. Please check out the WikiMarcellus page on Chemicals. --Tom

Comment by Bob Thomer on April 2, 2010 at 1:56pm

Tom
I think most Americans get the benefit of natural gas. What they don't get is how a proven technique such as hydro-fracturing gets itself exempt from the clean water act. The big guns that you referred to lobbied for the exemption. That in it self should tell you that they are not confident in their own process.

Comment by Tom Copley on April 2, 2010 at 6:57am

For anyone trying to reach WikiMarcellus, it has a new domain name. The best two addresses for it now are:

http://www.waytogoto.com/wiki

and

http://www.wikimarcellus.com

Sorry about any difficulties.

--Tom (WikiMarcellus Editor)

Comment by Tom Copley on April 2, 2010 at 6:50am

Buckingham-- Frustrating, yes, but nevertheless quite motivating. The industry has a unique opportunity to present a positive message about an environmentally-friendly fuel that has new-found abundance. Instead, it has dropped down a publicity rabbit-hole of angry environmentalists with pet peeves against every conceivable contaminant that might ever be found in the drilling waste water. The best defense is always a strong offense. Instead of dwelling on all of the negatives, my idea is that people who have a beef against the industry should merely be referred to the appropriate WikiMarcellus page that discusses every angle of the subject in question. That will tend to defuse the criticism without breathing undue life into it.

The industry's big guns should be reserved for promoting a positive impression and never get caught up in defending the industry. Almost every time the industry defends against an environmental smear, it merely strengthens the opposition by building up interest in the perceived conflict. Tempting as it may be to do otherwise, the industry should try never to react defensively, but rather promote understanding of its very affirmative story. --Tom

Comment by BuckinghamGasMan on March 24, 2010 at 6:48am

Tom, isn't it frustrating to try to talk to a lot of so-called environmentalists who will not agree with good (or even stronger) regulations, more inspectors, and more infrastructure regulations because all they really want to do is to stop all drilling? I grew up as an environmentalists, railing about using oil and wasting energy and now find myself on the apparent other side of the fence from these people because I grew up on a farm, cutting logs, Bluestone, and shooting deer and know that one can actually use the land without destroying it.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page