Post by twotrappers on Dec 14, 2012 8:28:38 GMT -5
The issues with hydrofracking are not only its environmental impacts and its impacts on human health. It is a quality of life issue with other negatives.
It has been pitched to Americans as energy independence and an economic silver bullet. However, there has been no plan for automobile conversion to methane, and to be frank, even if there was, driving a methane automobile sounds a little bit dangerous to me.
Residents of Pennsylvania were made big promises by the gas industry and many, if not most, have found their properties polluted to the extent they want to move but cannot find a buyer. Most stay and no longer have a convenience we take for granted, that is the ability to turn a faucet for water. They now have installed water storage tanks and are dependent on water delivery. Sounds more like a third-world country than independence to me.
The ethics of the gas companies are akin to the mafia. They tell homeowners “if you do not lease your land to us we will take your gas anyway”. No whistleblowing policy with the gas companies – report an environmental violation or marijuana use by coworkers and you are fired. Do the gas companies even permit drug use by the workers who build the oft discussed “casings” – which have failed on a number of occasions?
Even without environmental and health impacts – the noise pollution, stench, and eyesores which go with the territory are sufficient reason to reject this industry. Residents in frack country complain about large volumes of traffic involving extremely heavy trucks causing unsafe driving conditions, traffic snarls, noise, road rage, and damage to roads. I guess road repair as well as installing water tanks and delivering water will be reconciled as additional “job creation”.
The gas industry already has enormous power. Allowing them to expand will only increase their power and influence to the point they will (totally) run the country.
Personally, I believe that hydrofracking is a major environmental impact; however that most important issue seems to be well documented, yet trivialized, so I won’t delve there.
It has been pitched to Americans as energy independence and an economic silver bullet. However, there has been no plan for automobile conversion to methane, and to be frank, even if there was, driving a methane automobile sounds a little bit dangerous to me.
Residents of Pennsylvania were made big promises by the gas industry and many, if not most, have found their properties polluted to the extent they want to move but cannot find a buyer. Most stay and no longer have a convenience we take for granted, that is the ability to turn a faucet for water. They now have installed water storage tanks and are dependent on water delivery. Sounds more like a third-world country than independence to me.
The ethics of the gas companies are akin to the mafia. They tell homeowners “if you do not lease your land to us we will take your gas anyway”. No whistleblowing policy with the gas companies – report an environmental violation or marijuana use by coworkers and you are fired. Do the gas companies even permit drug use by the workers who build the oft discussed “casings” – which have failed on a number of occasions?
Even without environmental and health impacts – the noise pollution, stench, and eyesores which go with the territory are sufficient reason to reject this industry. Residents in frack country complain about large volumes of traffic involving extremely heavy trucks causing unsafe driving conditions, traffic snarls, noise, road rage, and damage to roads. I guess road repair as well as installing water tanks and delivering water will be reconciled as additional “job creation”.
The gas industry already has enormous power. Allowing them to expand will only increase their power and influence to the point they will (totally) run the country.
Personally, I believe that hydrofracking is a major environmental impact; however that most important issue seems to be well documented, yet trivialized, so I won’t delve there.