One of the broad-brush approaches energy companies are using with respect to capitalizing on this relatively new technology in fossil fuel recovery is just buying bunches of land with the intent to go on ahead and drill everywhere, drill eventually. This is not so potentially lucrative as might be expected. (Honestly--I really have this problem with the "Jed shooting up some food" notion of striking a profitable energy source.) Also, it isn't so great for the environment, particularly the groundwater, but it turns out, how it even affects the air can become a positive liability. Or is that a negative--as in, a negative on the old balance-sheet?
Anyway--the reason this bothers me as a local matter is because energy companies are making the hard-sell on, for example Pandora radio, to persuade people of the safety of selling part of their land to the frackers for a short-term payoff--where living next to land abused by the nat-gas miners could have long term ramifications. I don't exactly know how much things like waterways are affected by fracking, or how the drilling might effect things like undermining the limestone layer a lot of homes are sitting on--causing property losses due to sinkholes in places that aren't even bought up by the energy companies.
I really would appreciate more study being done on these kinds of practical matters, though. They relate directly to the quality of life here in the Delaware, Lehigh, and Susquehanna Valley environs. I don't approve of a continuation of fossil fuel exploration just on general principles because of the carbon impact that will still contribute to global warming, but the idea that this process will have many damaging local effects on rural lands used for food production and drinkable water has a way more immediate aggravating factor in my concern.
1 comment:
The energy companies are playing the same game the tobacco companies played, back when the tobacco companies hired doctors to tell people that smoking was safe.
~
Post a Comment