TV seems to have been flooded recently with ads lauding natural gas as our deliverer. Slim Pickens tells us how cheap and abundant natural gas is in the United States, and how it will release us from our dependence on foreign sources of energy. BP, which has recently re-branded itself “Beyond Petroleum,” also celebrates natural gas as key to ridding ourselves of “our” dependence on foreign oil. (BP, of course, really stands for British Petroleum; it’s touching to see our brothers and sisters across the pond identifying themselves so closely with our predicament. Instead of talking about freeing everyone on the globe from dependence on fossil fuels, they are playing on our insecurities to get us to embrace natural gas because at least it’s our fossil fuel.) We’ve even started to see advertisements for a car that uses compressed natural gas (CNG) instead of gasoline, presented as the solution to our oil addiction. Under this onslaught, those of us who oppose seeing our backyards ravaged by intensive natural gas drilling might well start feeling downright unpatriotic.
The biggest problem with the drill, baby, drill mentality that is sweeping the nation is that it takes our eye off the ultimate goal: to develop domestic sources of energy that will support our economy for the indefinite future. We may have a lot more natural gas than we do oil, but the supply is still finite—118 years worth at 2007 levels of consumption, according to a study released in July by the American Clean Skies Foundation and Navigant Consulting, which would probably translate into half that or less if we multiplied annual demand by switching our automobile fleet, power plants etc. to natural gas.
It’s possible to get kits to convert cars to CNG but they’re not cheap—an article in The New York Times reported $12,000 as the cost of one such conversion. If the nation really switched to CNG in a way that made a meaningful dent in our oil consumption, Detroit would have to switch over to manufacturing cars that can burn it, at a cost of billions of dollars. Huge amounts would also have to be spent on building CNG fill-up stations, converting power plants and the like. Do we really want to retool industry away from oil and toward natural gas, only to have that source of energy disappear in turn in a few decades?
Instead of devastating landscapes, contaminating drinking water and investing billions to convert industry to a solution that will be passé by the end of the century, we should be going straight to solutions that could last indefinitely: renewable sources like wind and solar. The countries that lead the 21st century economically will be those that understand this.
The climate change factor also gets in the way of the pleasant fantasy of a natural gas-based Utopia. CNG cars have lower emissions than gasoline cars, but only by 20 percent. Recent evidence has shown that global warming is occurring even more rapidly than the most extreme models; we need to concentrate our energies and our money on switching from high-carbon-emission sources of energy as rapidly as possible, not figure out ways to suck every last dreg of fossil fuel from the ground and then release its carbon into the air.
To be sure, while we are making the transition to truly sustainable energy sources like wind, solar and geothermal, we may have to step up our supply of natural gas to help us over the hump. But we cannot and must not think of it as anything but a short-term solution: a tourniquet to apply until we can get to the hospital and really fix the problem.
In the meantime, we need assurances that this temporary measure does not destroy our environment and watershed, and that means that the New York and Pennsylvania regulatory agencies are going to need help beefing up their inspection teams. Just having industry disclose what fracking fluids contain is not enough; we need to test them regularly to make sure those disclosures are true, and that all other procedures to protect the environment are being observed. But both states are now grossly understaffed. Bringing these teams up to speed is going to cost money, lots of it. Where’s it going to come from?
Well, if it really is our patriotic duty to allow drilling in our own back yard, then the nation as a whole ought to help us take the hit for it. If we in this region have to come to the rescue of the entire country by suffering this noxious procedure next to our homes, giving us the means to mitigate its impact is certainly the least a grateful nation could do.
Dr. Punnybone
U Tube
Letters to the Editor
[EDITOR'S NOTE: The River Reporter welcomes letters
on all subjects from its readers. They must be signed and include
the correspondent's phone number. The correspondent's name and
town will appear at the bottom of each letter; titles
and affiliations will not, unless the correspondent is writing
on behalf of a group.
Letters are printed at the discretion of the editor.
It is requested they be limited to 300 words; correspondents may
be asked to cut longer letters. Deadline is 1:00 p.m. on Monday.
The picture of the dancers on the front page of your October 2 issue is an award winner. What a wonderful image. The photographer and your paper should be congratulated.
This charming picture is such a heartwarming diversion from all the usual controversial issues that most often take priority.
Doris Dexter Roda
Otisville, NY
Not funny
To the editor:
I have been a subscriber to The River Reporter for many years. It certainly lives up to its motto, “The weekly newspaper that respects your intelligence.” In addition, the newspaper is fair and a part of the local communities.
However, the Dr. Punnybone cartoon in your last issue was in very bad taste. It makes fun of the elderly and the handicapped. We do not expect that from your paper.
