Momentum in Fracking is Officially Unstoppable

Comments (3)

  1. Patricia Goldsmith says:

    Gosh, that does sound unstoppable, like money is just gushing out of the ground, and if all that stands in fracking’s way is environmentalists, clearly that’s no obstacle at all. But maybe we should look under this well polished spin. Fracking actually represents a third wave of fossil fuel extraction, and this one requires an awful lot of energy to be put in for every unit of energy pulled out. Not only that, it’s toxic, and the toxins are now literally in somebody’s backyard, not in some desert wasteland. We all need energy, but not everybody is getting rich off fracking. A lot of people are being impoverished as their water and land are ruined, and the climate we all share is being poisoned as well. If we had no other energy options, fracking would probably be unstoppable, but we actually have renewable options that actually would make 99% of the people much richer and much more independent of the multinational corporations that now control energy for all of us. When you can put solar panels on your roof and wind turbines in your field, you control a huge chunk of your own energy. When we support grids that utilize this and other renewables, like tidal energy, biofuels, and hydroelectric power, we are freeing ourselves from energy slavery. This is something that people are eager for. It’s people, not environmentalists, who are fighting to protect the value of their own property, their own water, and their own air. That’s why fracking is not only stoppable but doomed.


  2. Joanne Corey says:

    This article mixes the economics of shale oil and shale methane, which are very different. Both are questionable over the long term, but for different reasons. Shale wells are very expensive to drill and have a much shorter production life than conventional wells. The higher price of oil and, to a lesser extent, of natural gas liquids has made those wells somewhat profitable for companies. Areas with dry gas methane are not profitable to drill with methane selling for such a low price, except in a very few sweet spots within shale plays. While some in New York State are decrying the present moratorium, it is unlikely that shale drilling would be going on there because even in small part of the Marcellus in NY with the highest production potential, the break even price is over $5.20. Companies that bet heavily on methane, such as Chesapeake, wound up borrowing too much and had to sell a lot of their leases to keep afloat. Drilling rigs are now much more prevalent in oil or natural gas liquids-rich parts of shale plays, not in dry gas (methane) areas.

    Some economists believe that shale oil/gas is a bubble.


  3. Mary Thorpe says:

    When Mr. Rahemtulla said that there were some “negatives surrounding the future of fracking” I didn’t expect him to mention “the ruling in New York that allowed local governments and municipalities to decide whether or not to allow fracking operations in their own areas.” He could have mentioned the negatives of illness from toxic air emissions, contaminated aquifers and home water wells, taking of homeowners’ land by eminent domain, disruption of lives from heavy truck traffic and influx of out of state workers taking jobs rather than giving them to locals, etc. All these negatives and more explain why many communities have chosen to ban this industry. It is a wonder that some town boards welcome it, except for the ostrich syndrome or $$ blinding them to the realities. Note that I say town boards because the people in those communities overwhelmingly do not want it.


Add Comment