One nice thing about THE New York Times article, it gave me a new website to follow and to link (at the bottom of the sidebar on the right, under "external links").
Link here.
This is where I would start. It turns out the author of that story is an editorial writer who has an agenda to kill the natural gas industry in Pennsylvania based on comments at that link. The Times has exceptionally good writing, and I really enjoy the newspaper, but one has to remember their op-ed page is not on the inside like most newspapers. The New York Times op-ed page is their front page.
A big "thank you" to Mike for alerting me to the site.
Again, a reminder: my "natural gas" notes are on a separate NG page.
Here is another article of the NYTimes article.
ReplyDeletehttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/28/the-new-york-times-natural-gas-fiasco/
MONEY QUOTE: "The problem with fracking isn’t that it’s particularly new or dangerous. The methodology has been in use for decades, and it is as safe as other drilling processes. The real problem is that it could produce relatively cheap hydrocarbon energy for a very long time, and that’s what has environmentalists worried.
So it is: Natural gas just might be the energy solution environmentalists say they want, but actually can’t stand because nothing would put them out of business faster. Forbes blogger Chris Helman words it perfectly:
We would have thought that the Times would be in favor of plentiful, low-cost natural gas. It burns a lot cleaner than coal, and with nuclear off the table for now, gas is poised to fuel U.S. economic growth for more than a generation to come. I can only guess that the problem, as the Times sees it, is that as long as we have all that cheap gas, there’s precious little need for solar panels, windmills and other cornerstones of their much-heralded but slow evolving green jobs revolution.
Forbes, on the other hand, thinks it’s pretty awesome that thanks to drilling ingenuity the U.S. has proven to have one of the world’s biggest and cheapest hoards of clean-burning gas. Now that’s a story."
Speaking of fracking; On Tuesday night I was watching a show "How the states got their shape" on the History Channel. They were in Pennsylvania basically "fracking" an old seeper well. Thye equally poured two liquids that they described as "nitroglycerin" into the well. Around two gallons of each. (I would hope it in inert before the two were combined They dropped in an electic blasting cap and then topped the casing off with water. The wires were attacked to an ancient looking blasting pump box indicating the procedure has been around a while. New episode so no youtube yet but I will watch for it. Basically a water gusher that went up almost 100 foot and lasted well under one minute.
ReplyDeleteNot related but some 1950's North Dakota oil films. 1956 North Dakota oil well blowing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OixMbsn4nA
Awesome! See my stand-alone post regarding Greg's comment above.
ReplyDeletehttp://milliondollarway.blogspot.com/2011/06/real-reason-environmentalists-hate.html