What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
19 Comments
- Metalcastr, on 07/10/2009, -1/+15I agree, because for long-term profit we need an environment to live in.
- jayjayjoni, on 07/10/2009, -3/+17environment > economy any day.
- undervalued, on 07/10/2009, -2/+15So in 50 years we all die because some companies want greater profit and are too ***** lazy to change now? How amazingly screwed up is this?
- inactive, on 07/10/2009, -2/+13We can live without hydrocarbons, but we can't live without water.
- pagno, on 07/10/2009, -0/+9So, complying with safety regulations is too costly for industry; it will eat into their billion dollar profits. Shocking. I guess we should all just drink our hydraulic fluid and be happy.
- Kaegro, on 07/10/2009, -1/+7Bah! Slick corporate lawyers and politicians doing what they do best : ***** everyone and everything up the ass and they freak out and lie and threaten if they dont get what they want. Its about time the world stops using these types of energies and stop paying these greedy bastards.
- pagno, on 07/10/2009, -0/+4I would love to. Unfortunately, theres no real alternatives. You can blame them for that, too.
- inactive, on 07/10/2009, -1/+2Not as a requirement, and as for purification systems, many of the Western regions which rely on water potentially affected by oil or gas extraction wouldn't need them if it weren't for anthropogenic contamination.
- rmcconnell, on 07/10/2009, -1/+2This seires of stories continues to amaze me -- talk about misleading. Lustgarden continues to recycle the same scientifically illiterate points -- for instance -- fracing chemicals have not caused contamination in Pennsylvania. Those water wells had natural gas in them. That, unfortunaely, as many Pennsylvanians know, is common in a gas rich area from any kind of ground disturbance. Not even close to being the same thing.
The fracing process has been used for nearly 60 years in 28 states on over 1,000,000 wells. No case of water supply contamination has ever been found. Any contamination actually reported to the proper authorities (not to newspaper reporters or so called citizen journalists) has been proven to be from other sources.
Fracing chemical information is indeed available -- you can find it in US DOE, GWPC, & NETL: Modern Shale Gas Development: A Primer http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/publicati ... Pages 56 -66, focus on 62 and 63.
The new FRAC ACT, which is supposed to help protect water supplies by ADDING the oil and gas industry to the industries regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act -- they were never exempted, they just were never regulated by it at all -- is a farce. The rural private drinking water wells the sponsors say they want to protect AREN'T EVEN COVERED BY THE SDWA!!!! In PA, your well is your own responsibility if it feeds your residence. Amazing Sen Casey didn't know that when he proposed this MISLEADING bill.
Fracing has been studied and studied -- by EPA, DOE, and the Groundwater Protection Council -- all with the same result. Even former EPA head and Obama Adminsitration Advisor Carol Browner is on record saying that fracing does not require more legislation.
Don't let people like Abraham Lustgarden and Politico encourge you through their hatred of all things related to Dick Cheney and the Bush Adminsitration talk you into wasting millions in tax payer dollars and adding yet more obstacles to gaining energy independence. - SilverBlade2k, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1Of course the energy industry will fight hard and mislead congress to protect their profits AND because they don't WANT TO spend money to follow regulations.
- warriormonk, on 07/11/2009, -0/+0Right on! One thing I noticed after reading this article is that not ONCE does it mention an incident where ground water was contaminated due to fracing. It's all about how more regs are needed despite what the eeeevil energy companies are saying. Interesting isn't it?
- Barackalypse, on 07/10/2009, -2/+2Is it a false choice because we already spent the economy dead?
- Barackalypse, on 07/10/2009, -2/+2Way less screwed up than suggesting we might all be dead in 50 years because of some oil or gas companies actions. You seriously underestimate the power of desalination and modern water treatment systems
- Barackalypse, on 07/10/2009, -2/+2It is the hydrocarbons that power the pumps and the water purification systems.
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/10/2009, -2/+0Behold the hyperbole!
- th3heretic, on 07/10/2009, -4/+2Need to deregulate more.
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/10/2009, -3/+0Uh...no. We have all of history as proof that regulation slows business, reduces GDP, and reduces employment. No amount of "try to confuse with irrelevant details" will change that.
- Moralogic, on 07/10/2009, -5/+1Within reason, some of the environmental stuff is *****, while there are serious things to figure out and fix. (Toxins my ***** ass.)
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/10/2009, -5/+0You'll change your mind when there's no jobs and no food. You'll also find when the economy gets bad, the population won't give a crap about environmental issues. The two are tightly linked.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is