Skip to comments.Harry Reid pulls a fast one to sabotage shale gas development
Posted on 08/03/2010 9:14:32 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
Shale Gas has the potential to bring manifold benefits to Americans: cheap and plentiful, relatively green and clean burning, located in vast swaths underneath our feet (and not offshore or in foreign lands filled with people happy to take our money but who also hate us and who can who can turn the spigot off at will).
All good reasons in Majority Leader Harry Reid's mind to sabotage our tapping of this vast reserve of energy:
The fight over the Senate offshore drilling "spill bill" shifted Wednesday from the Gulf of Mexico to the mountains of western Pennsylvania, as Republicans slammed the last-minute inclusion of language to regulate a controversial technique to extract onshore natural gas.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) added the language last night requiring natural gas drillers to disclose the chemicals they pump into the ground as part of the hydraulic fracturing, or hydro-fracking, process.
Republicans are wary of the addition, which comes on page 404 of the 409-page spill response bill Reid wants the Senate to take up before the recess. GOP objections to any portion of the larger bill could stall its progress, since it appears likely that Reid will not allow any amendments to be offered.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the new requirements could effectively end onshore natural gas production. He noted that some states already have hydro-fracking safety and disclosure regulations, but that taking the requirements national would freeze the industry.
Why does Reid have to pull these un-democratic stunts? Because he can? Because powerful Democratic donors (including the Democratic party Sugar Daddy George Soros) wants to kill off carbon and spend tens of billions of dollars on green schemes that reward their "clean" energy ventures . These ventures only "work" (i.e., become profitable for their investors) when carbon energy becomes very expensive (hence cap and tax); or when billions in taxpayer dollar subsidies are funneled to them; or when government-ordered mandates require utilities, companies and consumers to buy "renewable" energy. And when powerful Democrats pull fast ones behind closed doors to sabotage the tapping of a treasure our nation has been blessed to have in abundance.
A primer on the benefits of shale gas appeared in the Washington Post ("Shale Gas: Hope for our energy future").
A quote from the column:
Until recently, scarce U.S. natural gas reserves suggested increasing dependence on expensive foreign supplies of liquefied natural gas. No more. Also, natural gas emits about 50 percent less carbon dioxide -- the major greenhouse gas -- than coal. Substituting gas for coal in electricity plants could temper emissions. Finally, shale gas in Europe and Asia has huge geopolitical implications. It could reduce dependence on Russian natural gas and frustrate any gas cartel mimicking OPEC.
How much shale gas exists is unknown, but estimates are huge. The Potential Gas Committee is a group of geologists who regularly estimate future U.S. gas supplies. In 2000, the group's estimate equaled about 54 years of present annual consumption; by 2008, it was almost 90 years. "This isn't the end," says Colorado School of Mines geologist John Curtis. Globally, one study estimated the recoverable supply at 16,200 trillion cubic feet, more than 150 times today's annual world gas use).
I have written about the Democratic blueprint to derail the tapping of these reserves and here .
For one thing, you can go to the drilling site and ask. Or see thackney at post #13.
I live in Hood County, Texas -- home of the Barnett shale. I'm not making any profit on it -- except for participating in the general economic health created by the drilling activity.
Even if I did, though, I wouldn't want to "take the money and run". Why, you ask? Because there is no mess to clean up.
If you're worried about what the Marcellus Shale might bring to your home area, I suggest you schedule a tour of oil & gas producing areas of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
Not necessarily "vacation country", but it would sure as hell allay your fears.
You're buying into enviro-propaganda.
Thanks for the reply.
well I guess since Harry has already wrecked the economy of his own state he is now setting about the task of wrecking it in mine
I remember reading back when gas was around $5 a gallon, T Boone Pickens was going to push to have natural gas banned from being pulled offshore.
It sounded goofy, because he had all these commercials pushing for natural gas, but one of the commentators (it was either here on FR or another site I visit) made mention that T Boone does not own any offshore stuff, but he owns vast thousands and thousands of inland acreage that he wants government subsidy for, in which to draw from his natural gas wells.
I don’t know if these two are related, and I don’t even remember the details so much of the article, but the jist of it seems related.
I’m sure one of the sharper Freepers will know of the article and more detail of it.
An amazing attack and leap from “I don’t see the problem” to “shut it all down.
We have been drilling gas wells in Western PA for nearly 150 years.
I bet this will get Harry re-elected!/s
This will finish Harry off.
Nice photo of Black Jack Ketchum. Do you know when he was hanged the rope pulled his head off and it went rolling around on the ground? I used to have pictures of the aftermath of his hanging.
I lived there in Clayton,NM.
How is this hamstringing? I’m assuming every company has a list of the fracking chemicals they use. If not, they can spend 20 minutes typing one up. Send the list to the govt and be done with it.
Still shucking and jiving I see
You're kidding, right?
It will take the EPA at least two years to come up with a process for that to happen, and in the meantime the Obamabots will use the lack of a process as justification for an illegal moratorium like we've seen with offshore drilling.
This is where they need to modify the legislation to allow disclosure, but to state that the clause is only valid when there is a defined process and a mandatory EPA response within 5 business days. No response from the EPA to be interpreted as an approval. This type of modification is called leadership. You don’t hand the other side the adavantage of allowing them to say that Rs want to cover-up the chemicals that are going into your drinking water.
The left HATES, DESPISES self reliance and self sufficiency.
You are making the mistaken assumption that this is about actual protection of water resources, as opposed to being another Dem roadblock against domestic energy development.
This type of modification is called leadership.
From Harry Reid? Once again, are you kidding me?
You dont hand the other side the adavantage of allowing them to say that Rs want to cover-up the chemicals that are going into your drinking water.
Guess what? Liberal agit-prop does that no matter what the Republicans do.
Here you go..
Whoa! Stopr right there. And think.
If the list of fracking chemicals is already open and available for inspection...and, if it's so easy to find out what they are...why do you suppose the federal government is inserting themselves into the process?
To insure "openess"? Hardly. It's already there.
To begin the process of asserting increasing regulatory authority and control? Now, why would they want to do that?
It is an inarguable fact that this administration is at war with fossil fuels and the companies that produce them. The aim, obviously, is to eventually restrict the use of the fracking technique and, thus, terminally cripple the onshore oil & gas industry.
Harry and Nancy, et al, are about more than "hamstringing", they're after "kneecapping".
You really need to understand this.
At least you need to expose the D’s and word it in such a way that they can’t use disclosure as an excuse
so why automatically concede the moral high ground to the Ds, unless maybe you secretly want the provision to pass as is?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.