Here's an interesting article from Real Clear Politics citing some thought-provoking stats regarding untapped domestic energy resources. Things to consider:
- implications for alternative energy development
- implications for economic growth (and by extension poverty-reduction) at home
I think the article does a great job of illustrating the fact that there's no such thing as a free lunch. If you want more environmental quality, you're probably going to sacrifice something else. What if that something else is significant poverty reduction or world peace?
Back story reading:
The Solyndra controversy
Hydraulic fracturing (hydrofracking)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Wow. I still can't believe how Chesapeake energy and those other Fracking companies can be so two faced to the public saying how hydraulic fracking isn't at ALL bad for the environment, even with the evidence produced in Gasland (2010). Burning water isn't normal guys...And the fact that they're too lazy to make anything other than open holes in the ground, when these companies are paying top dollar (like 15,000 and up per acre!) for land leases...at least build steel enclosures for waste water - geez. I'm going to be so mad if fracking passes in our state. There are other ways of getting energy, not just poisoning our drinking wells. Solar energy, wind energy(NC is #1 in east coast!!), and others exist here! Come on!!
Let's keep it objective please.
I read the article that was embedded in the link and it pretty much said nothing besides "America has vast resources available that are not being tapped." Nowhere did the article say a single thing about hydro fracking, maybe it was supposed to be implied. This is a very one sided look that contains no real information in it.Without looking at who the article was written by you can tell that it is someone who is working for some dirty energy company.
There seems to be some speculation within this article about the possible resources that have yet to be discovered. There also seems to be speculation about how long these untappped and/or undiscovered resources may or may not last. There is also uncertainty about how dependant or not dependant the United States will be on foreign oil in the future. There is little that is for sure in the article, and a lot of speculation about resources.
I also think that if fracking and other alternative energies begin to be used, our dependancy on foreign oil could be decreased. I think with better technology and research about alternative energies, we could substitute coal wtih some alternative resources that include wind, solar, nuclear and hydrofracking. Changes in peoples' wants and needs could have something to do with alternative energies as well if more people decide they want to have a lower impact on the environment or be less oil-dependant. There are numerous factors that could affect the future of alternative energies and their potential to replace other resources that will eventually run out.
J. Embrey said..
No surprise that we are still discovering previously unknown sources of energy.
Not drilling in, or disturbing, significant areas, like drinking water sources, is a no-brainer.
Solyndra is another example of money and politics colliding.
The "hydrofracking" article does indeed do a good job of showing the sacrifices a country must make in order to acheive a goal such as obtaining more natural resources. While reading this, it made me think of a cost-benefit analysis issue in a way. The cost of hydrofracking would be potential earthquakes, pollution, etc. While the benefits of hydrofracking are jobs created and obtaining the desired resource.
I was interested to see the article make reference to the Marcellus Shale region because I am originally from Clarion (western Pennsylvania), and it is a hot topic around my town!
Post a Comment