The Fractivists Choice

I am all for green energy and for appropriate precautions in the petroleum industry but for now the alternative to natural gas is largely coal and with it more accidents like the recent chemical spill in West Virginia.  I believe those opposed to hydraulic fracturing bear some of the responsibility for accidents like this.  The choice is not between natural gas and some Utopian green energy but between natural gas and coal.  By almost any measure natural gas is considerably greener than the alternatives.  Three-hundred thousand people in West Virginia have been without water for the better part of a week.  Some are still without water.  Other communities down river are closing their water intakes.  Headlines like "Officials Don’t Really Know How Dangerous the Chemical Spilled in West Virginia Is" and "West Virginia Chemical Spill Poses Unknown Threat to the Environment".  The next time you encounter the fractivists put this on their plate because that's their choice.

Views: 1051

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by lynn on January 16, 2014 at 3:59pm

'Utopian green energy' will be their choice because the pollution created by its manufacture is not in their back yard.  I would love to see our environmentalists try to picket the mines in China that produce the elements for solar panels.

Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on January 18, 2014 at 7:49am

This article by the Mullers makes the pro-gas argument very eloquently:

Why Every Serious Environmentalist Should Favour Fracking
Richard A. Muller and Elizabeth A. Muller

Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on January 18, 2014 at 3:49pm

Tom; that was a very good article. Lots of good data.  A must read for every one, especially policy makers.

Permalink Reply by DLB on January 19, 2014 at 5:32am

Tom, yes, excellent article.  Natural gas really is much more environmentally friendly than the current alternative.  It upset me when our local news covered both the chemical spill in West Virginia and a protest against fracking on the same newscast and nobody seems to make the connection.

Permalink Reply by Tom Brian on January 22, 2014 at 12:06pm

Was the hole made with "Object" at the bottom of the leaking chemical tank Sabotage ?

Permalink Reply by Deb Reynolds on January 21, 2014 at 4:09am

Great article, thanks for posting! I can always use FACTS to fight ignorance and mis-information. 

Permalink Reply by Alan Emerick on January 22, 2014 at 12:50pm

First time I have seen someone else mention of the fact that the aquifer floats on the salt laden, highly polluted under water.  Due to density they don't mix and never will. The areas with gas are old seas and all have vast , natural salt deposits under the aquifer. How many people realize they mine salt under Ithaca by a method much like fracking. They have been doing it for years. If anything was possibly bad it is the pulling salt out from under Ithaca and spreading it on the surface right in front of your house and well. 200 feet under my well is a sea of poluted salt water. That's why you cant make a well too deep in these areas. It is also why fracking has not gotten into wells from the bottom.

RSS

© 2025   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service