Pennsylvania

Energy. Environment. Economy.

Survey: Pennsylvanians like fracking more than New Yorkers

Most Pennsylvanians (54 percent) support the development of shale gas, while only 29 percent of New Yorkers are in favor of it.

Lindsay Lazarski/WHYY

Most Pennsylvanians (54 percent) support the development of shale gas, while only 29 percent of New Yorkers are in favor of it.

Pennsylvanians have a much more favorable view of shale gas development compared to their counterparts in New York, according to a new public opinion survey.

The two states have taken vastly different approaches to the boom in Marcellus Shale drilling. The formation lies under large swaths of Pennsylvania and stretches into southern New York. While Pennsylvania welcomed the industry, New York has had a moratorium on high volume hydraulic fracturing since 2008.

The survey looked at how citizens in each state view the gas boom. It was a joint effort by Muhlenberg College’s Institute of Public Opinion, the University of Michigan, and the University of Montreal. The three schools provided all of the funding. Researchers conducted telephone surveys via land-lines and cell phones in the spring of 2014.

Most Pennsylvanians (54 percent) support the development of shale gas, while only 29 percent of New Yorkers are in favor of it.

A majority of respondents from both states (51 percent of New Yorkers and 55 percent of Pennsylvanians) believe experts are still divided on the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing.

“New York residents are nearly three times more likely than their counterparts in Pennsylvania to give the risks to Americans’ health, safety and the environment from fracking the highest, most serious rating of 10 on a scale of 0 to 10,” said Muhlenberg’s Institute of Public Opinion director, Christopher Borick in a statement.

Respondents gave the leaders of both states low marks for their handling of the gas boom. However, Governor Corbett got substantially lower ratings than his New York counterpart, Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat. Only 19 percent of respondents gave Corbett a positive rating for how he’s handled gas development, compared to 47 percent negative. Cuomo got a positive rating from 27 percent of respondents, with 36 percent having a negative view.

A solid majority of Pennsylvanians (62 percent) believe the state should enact a severance tax on gas production. In a separate question, a majority of Pennsylvanians (57 percent) say they do not believe imposing additional taxes on drillers will cause them to leave.

 

Comments

  • Jack Wolf

    This shows me that their misinformation campaigns are working and they come from both sides political spectrum. Both political parties favor it. But, once the full effects of fossil fuel use continues to unveil itself in the form of abrupt climate change, more and more people will put two and two together. The group think will fall apart as their lives become increasingly impacted.

    • Frank Chernega
      • Jim Young

        Yes, follow the latest billionaire playbook (on “divestment” to the tune of $50 billion).

        Regarding George Wythe’s comments on “polls” or studies on who likes fracking, I’m back from the climate march (about one tenth of a percent of the population of the United States who don’t like fracking enough to show up, were there with me). The good news is another “poll” that should get your attention would be the divestment starting to happen.

        See http://www.democracynow.org/2014/9/22/heirs_of_billionaire_oil_tycoon_john

        on the divestment of $50 billion from fossil fuels (Rockefeller’s
        heirs backing out $866 million by themselves).

        How’s that for a poll, or study, that counts?

        (I hope any place my pension funds have been suckered into investing also back out.)

        • Frank Chernega

          You have got to be kidding….lol! John D. Rockefeller made his billions on OIL. All his heirs are nothing but a bunch of silver spoon- in – the – mouth ingrates who would make grandpa turn over in his grave. Here’s some great reading that turns most of what is being said about nat gas into the BIG LIE that it is – http://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/fracking/2014/09/16/fracking-study/15731735/ http://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/fracking/2014/09/15/study-leaky-wells-fracking-taint-water/15686961/ As for the climate march, I’d be willing to bet 75%+ of those in the herd use nat gas. As usual, a group of ultra wealthy hypocrites (Decaprio, Ruffalo, etc.) lead this farce. Why is it that if the Hollywood types are so against fossil fuels, they own multiple mansions, have private jets, multiple autos, etc,? They are the worst hypocrites of all and all the gullible and weak – minded people who follow them are no better.

          • Jim Young

            It’s actually just a start of what has to be coming as this bubble bursts.

            Try selling that “Landmark” study to the billionaires dumping their investments in fossil fuels. The industry, and captured government stooges, may be slicker than ever now, but I’d suggest anyone reading this go back (when they weren’t quite as slick) to the “Burning Question NBC 4 part 1 – Playa Vista Safe”? at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4O6jI2y_m4

            Why was that “the first time an energy company allowed independent monitoring of a drilling site during the fracking process and for 18 months afterward”? One well site, undoubtedly cherry-picked, doesn’t begin to cover all the other sites lower tier workers or ordinary citizens can describe where the results can’t be made to look anywhere near as perfect.

            That “Landmark” piece of misdirection on one well site (out of how many tens of thousands?) said “After those months of monitoring, researchers found that the chemical-laced fluids used to free gas stayed about 5,000 feet below drinking water supplies.” How many places on earth or even in the shallower areas of Pennsylvania get anywhere near 5,000 ft below drinking water supplies? They certainly don’t in the areas of California I’m familiar with, zones full of orphan faulty wells and riddled with earthquake fractures. What happened to much of the “produced water”? Dr. Sue Brantley described what I interpret as an amount re-injected to effectively fill the void left by the extracted gas or oil, while shipping the excess (8 gallons of water used to produce 1 gallon of oil here), being pumped into “SACRIFICE ZONES” in Ohio. Makes me wonder what a poll of informed Ohio residents would reveal, if they knew they were Pennsylvania’s dump site.

            Anyway, one cherry picked site doesn’t cut it with me (and some billionaires, I suspect), test all sites within the distinctly different areas before, during, and after fracking, and don’t give us b/s declarations like the interpretation of a USGS report that said preexisting “leaks” were detected in 78% of the tested well sites, when the vast majority were as low a level as the 1/7,000th of a level of concern.

            What would happen if one person was given 1 glass of water a week and another forced to drink 7,000 glasses of water a week? The quantities matter, and trying to make the minute amounts barely detectable comparable to the real post fracking levels of methane leaks, to me, should be, prosecutable criminal deception.

            Watch that Burning Question part 1, and the rest of the series then tell me how much we should trust the supposed regulators. The NBC 4 video also shows other historical disasters such as the Baldwin Hills Dam collapse, and Ross Dress for Less explosion (and 3 days of flaming sidewalks).

          • Frank Chernega

            Glad you asked about flowback water. That is only a small part of the fear campaign being waged by your side. Seems that shale is like a sponge and absorbs water very quickly. That is the primary reason that only about 30% or less returns to the surface. This link elaborates and the study was done by 3 of the premier minds in drilling and geology today. (Dr. Terry Engelder of Penn State, Dr. Larry Cathles of Cornell’s Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept. and Dr. L. Taras Bryndzia of Shell Oil. Granted they’re not as competent as Yoko Ono or Josh Fox, but they’ll have to do – http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213397614000202 Just do a search on “The fate of residual treatment water in gas shale” and there are many other links as well. Here’s the abstract for those unwilling or unable to go to the link:

            Abstract
            “More than 2 × 104 m3 of water containing additives is commonly injected into a typical horizontal well in gas shale to open fractures and allow gas recovery. Less than half of this treatment water is recovered as flowback or later
            production brine, and in many cases recovery is <30%. While recovered treatment water is safely managed at the surface, the water left in place, called residual treatment water (RTW), slips beyond the control of engineers. Some have suggested that this RTW poses a long term and serious risk to shallow aquifers by virtue of being free water that can flow upward along natural pathways, mainly fractures and faults. These concerns are based on single phase Darcy Law physics which is not appropriate when gas and water are both present. In addition, the combined volume of the RTW and the initial brine in gas shale is too
            small to impact near surface aquifers even if it could escape. When capillary and osmotic forces are considered, there are no forces propelling the RTW upward from gas shale along natural pathways. The
            physics dominating these processes ensure that capillary and osmotic forces both propel the RTW into the matrix of the shale, thus permanently sequestering it. Furthermore, contrary to the suggestion that hydraulic fracturing could accelerate brine escape and make near surface aquifer contamination more likely, hydraulic fracturing and gas
            recovery will actually reduce this risk. We demonstrate this in a series of STP counter-current imbibition experiments on cuttings recovered from the Union Springs Member of the Marcellus gas shale in Pennsylvania and on core plugs of Haynesville gas shale from NW Louisiana." As far as you wanting to test every well in the country, where else is an exercise like that being done? How about the hundreds of thousands of buried gasoline tanks across the nation? Going to ignore them, aren't you? That's because it shows just how shallow and bogus the anti – fracking side has gotten. Face it, Josh Fox, Marki Ruffalo, Leonardo Dicaprio, Yoko Ono and all the rest are big phonies with all their multiple mansions, private jets, multiple automobiles, and all the other hydro carbon – belching paraphernalia that they own and cherish. HYPOCRITES AND LIARS ALL.

          • Jim Young

            Perhaps you should try to fool Dr. Sue Brantley with that. She is a supposed neutral PSU academic on the subject, using industry self reported information to show “how safe” some wells have been operated in Pennsylvania.

            She (whom I’d assume would be an “expert” in your eyes) is the one who told us about shipping it to Ohio. Would Engelder, Cathles, or Bryndzia say otherwise? What do you think lower tier workers who do the actual job, or other observers say?

          • Frank Chernega

            I’m not trying to fool anyone. I only posted a link to a scientific paper written by three highly accomplished scientists in the field of geology and nat gas. Brantley should get together with Engelder, Cathles, and Bryndzia herself and get an education. It never ceases to amaze me how your side is oh so concerned about “lower tier” workers (sounds very elitist to me) in the natural gas field and totally ignore workers in other fields who are also exposed to dangerous conditions. They took these jobs voluntarily and all know the risks. For you and your ilk to interject yourselves into the occupations of others is laughable. That is the job of OSHA and the Feds, not a bunch of folks who would rather send our fighting men and women to the Middle East to keep the oil flowing instead of the U.S. becoming energy independent. Shame on your side.

          • Jim Young

            I’ll just start with the first one you mentioned, from one of the most heavily industry subsidized universities, Penn State (PSU) and the June 24, 2013 TEDxPSU presentation by Dr. Terry Engelder, where at about 6:49 he claims the EPA and Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had not found one shred of evidence that fracking was somehow or another contaminating groundwater with fracking fluid. (They can’t find it if they don’t look and don’t let employees accept any reports of contamination, nor talk about it.)

            Now we find an open records request found DEP had 243 water sources had been contaminated according to http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/blog/energy/2014/08/dep-finds-243-water-sources-contaminated-by-gas.html?page=all

            And this is from an agency (DEP) who’s employees were silenced on the issue.

            See http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2014/06/19/former-state-health-employees-say-they-were-silenced-on-drilling/

            …Two retirees from the Pennsylvania Department of Health say its employees were silenced on the issue of Marcellus Shale drilling.

            One veteran employee says she was instructed not to return phone calls from residents who expressed health concerns about natural gas development.

            “We were absolutely not allowed to talk to them,” said Tammi Stuck, who worked as a community health nurse in Fayette County for nearly 36 years.

            Another retired employee, Marshall P. Deasy III, confirmed that.

            Deasy, a former program specialist with the Bureau of Epidemiology, said the department also began requiring field staff to get permission to attend any meetings outside the department. This happened, he said, after an agency consultant made comments about drilling at a community meeting.

            In the more than 20 years he worked for the department, Deasy said, “community health wasn’t told to be silent on any other topic that I can think of.”…

            Since both Engelder and Brantley are at PSU, it should be easy for them to compare notes, per your suggestion.

          • Frank Chernega

            I’ve read so much about those 243 cases of “contamination” it’s enough to make me gag. Here’s a link that discusses those cases – http://wivb.com/2014/08/28/243-cases-in-pa-where-fracking-contaminated-wells/ and here’s an excerpt from the link: “The 243 cases, from 2008 to 2014, include some where a single drilling operation impacted multiple water wells. The problems listed in the documents include methane gas contamination, spills of wastewater and other
            pollutants, and wells that went dry or were otherwise undrinkable. Some of the problems were temporary, but the names of landowners were redacted, so it wasn’t clear if the problems were resolved to their satisfaction. Other complaints are still being investigated.” And here’s the latest study that states emphatically that frack fluids have NEVER been detected in aquifers that had been used in the process of shale fracturing –
            http://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/fracking/2014/09/15/study-leaky-wells-fracking-taint-water/15686961/ Additionally, here’s a quote from former EPA director Lisa Jackson on the subject – “More than a million fracking wells have been drilled over the last 50
            years, yet no evidence of groundwater contamination has ever surfaced.Lisa Jackson, the former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, testified before Congress that she’s “not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water.” So who to believe? Josh Fox or the head of the EPA and the scientists in the pressconnects link? HMMM, let me see now……..Your side has started your fear campaign by stating that fluids used in fracturing shale were introduced to aquifers during the fracturing stage of the process. THAT IS A LIE. There is no doubt that SPILLS have caused aquifer damage but not the fracturing process itself. Are we going to keep getting our energy from the Middle East or are we going to make every effort to keep spills to a minimum or try to eliminate them entirely? No man – made process is perfect, yet your side keeps trying to convince people that is what is expected from the the process of high volume hydraulic fracturing. That is an absurd expectation and demand.

          • Jim Young

            “That is an absurd expectation and demand.”

            Then why do they try so hard to quash any evidence of damage (at any stage)? I believe those few slipped through the cracks in their efforts that remind me so much of the tobacco industry “scientists” and lawyers. I really can’t believe the captured regulators that suppress even their own professional staff, going so far as to change reports authored under real scientist’s names.

            Will we find out the truth in 7 years, like it took to establish the truth about the Ross Dress for Less explosion and 3 days of flaming sidewalks?

            I guess you won’t accept any reports from real, on site, observers (like those at Playa Vista), or scientists that do more than analyze industry self-reported “data,” professing it to be unimpeachable “evidence” to support their “absurd” (to real observers on site) pronouncements.

            I guess I shouldn’t care that much, though, since we are getting so much closer to the financial bubble bursting (as a lot of smart billionaires start divesting from fossil fuels and investing in renewables). Have a nice financial catastrophe, which I prefer to an ecological one, anyway.

  • George Wythe

    No, NY is the ONLY state with an overabundance of anti-gas idiots who are against natural gas in more than 30 other states in the US. PA has much more sense than the citi-idiots that inhabit NY.

    • JimBarth

      Funny Mr. Wythe, you don’t live in either NYS or PA, yet, you’ve been writing nastily against anti-shale gas extraction “idiots” for about a year and a half in local newspapers in both NY and PA, and, you didn’t exist before in any internet forums in these areas, under that name. Wythe is not your real name, and, you live god knows where. Why should anyone in NYS or PA listen to you, especially when all you do is call people names? You seem to simply own property in NYS that you would like to see drilled and frac’ed. Nice. Take your investment some place else, and leave people who live here in peace and health, to decide our own fate.

      • George Wythe

        Barf, you have no idea where I live, but I know for sure, YOU are a leading moron in Beach Lake, PA!

        • JimBarth

          You are correct about my not knowing where you live, which is no surprise, since I stated such in my comment above. However, I do know where you do not live, which is also what I stated in my comment. Who is a moron? Also, I have written under my given legal name on shale gas extraction, in news sites since May of 2008. You do not need to be Sherlock Holmes to know where I live. You however, have appeared from nowhere, under a false name, in the past year and a half, throwing insults at people, calling us names. Your distinct lack of character is shown by your lack of moral courage. If you are not willing to write under your true name, why write? What kind of man are you to act in this way?

          • George Wythe

            Believe it or not Barfy, I have my home in Delaware County, NY, I won’t say where because I certainly wouldn’t like an ass like you in my area proving your stupidity.
            I see you were from NYC & Jackson Heights, certainly why you act like such a fool.
            Believe what you like, I couldn’t care less about you or your stupidity, although Jannette Barf is equally as big of an imbecile as you are, your wife, a sister? She surely is as big as a moron like you even if your not related!
            Goodbye Barf, get lost and don’t come back!

          • JimBarth

            Either you are lying now, or, you were lying back in The River Reporter about a year and a quarter ago, about where you live. Either way, it makes you a liar. Additional to this, is the fact that Wythe is not your real name.
            It is sad, but thoroughly unsurprising, that you would define all the 8 million plus souls who were born and raised in NYC, and worked most of our lives there, as “stupid, a fool, a moron, an imbicile, or an idiot” as you describe all who oppose your desire to pimp land to be frac’ed to hell, whether in Delaware and the other sacrificial NYS counties, and all of the Marcellus in PA, the various shales in the region, the U.S. the World. We oppose you for excellent scientific reasons, the studies of which, combined with the examples of the destruction shale gas extraction causes, keep appearing day after day after day, year after year, as the NYS moratorium is in place (are you reading Fred (Kilgour Farms) Peckham?).
            That you describe Jeannette Barth as an imbecile and a moron, one who has a Ph.D in the field of economics that she writes (as opposed to the genius you, who has exactly what?), is another glaring flaw in your character.
            I end again with this question, “What lowly type of man, of person, are you, who acts, and writes, this way?

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Mr Barth, like many of your antie buddies you are using informal logic, appeals to ignorance are used to shift the
            burden of proof. Frac’ing doesn’t contaminate aquifers is true because it has not yet been proven false!

            Prove me the EPA and 35 states wrong!

          • JimBarth

            Lipsky and his neighbors’s water, their aquifer, shows the exact same production gas in gross percentages, as the gas wells drilled by Range Resources. This is fact. You have laughed at Lipsky since the EPA fled the scene, but as time passes, the science emerges that proves his contamination in connection to Range. Laura Legere wrote a couple of days ago about the 243 and counting cases of contamination finally admitted to by PA DEP. One well in particular showed frightening amounts of 2-butoxyethanol, and a couple of other chemicals used in the air foam drilling process (not frac’ing), used to drill the wells that were a good distance from their contaminated water well at their home. Dimock was proof enough of contamination, to all but your kind who would deny the rising of the sun, if it suited your cause. I could go on with hundreds of serious examples, but, it is useless to a willfully ignorant zealot such as yourself. You are a climate change denier, and, you have no respect for the truth.

          • George Wythe

            First off, these are in Texas, not the northeast, but even so, like you, they were intense liars.

            “A judge has concluded that a Parker County resident, owner of a methane-contaminated water well, created a “deceptive video” that was “calculated to alarm the public into believing the water was burning.”

            You love to believe everything, like the Dimock crowd of anti-gas residents and other anti-gas schmucks who have their lies to tell.

            You Barf, are a leader in lying fools.

          • JimBarth

            Your quote is old. There are new developments that contradict the old information, and that show the Texas RR commission to be in the pocket of the industry, as you are.

          • George Wythe

            ‘new developments’, by who? Lying imbeciles like you barf?

          • JimBarth

            You are too sophisticated for me. Imagine, turning Barth to barf. What wit you possess. Are you six years old? Does “poopy-doop” make you laugh?

          • DC

            Jim, I would not even waste my time with these idiotic insults. These people clearly do not respect others with opposing views, and they are OBVIOUSLY TOO smart for the rest of us. Or shall I say smart-ass? They need to go to college because they just got schooled by you, Jim. Keep up the good work. And I will keep educating my fellow Pennsylvanians as well. Always know I have your back, brother!

          • DC

            Idiot statement. Strike this from the record, or it will come back to haunt you. Karma is a bitch.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            I thought so, you can’t!

          • George Wythe

            First off Barf, I have had my home in Delaware for over 10 years now.

            I made my complaints about holding up natural gas developments on these news sites soon after Paterson declared what NY is now suffering. Obviously, your mind has lost more facts, which isn’t surprising at all with your senile age.

            Of course, if you live in NY city, or surrounding towns like Jackson Heights, you get water from water companies and flush your garbage down a fast disposal toilet, usually. The people who live there are quite often from other countries, many who can’t even speak English, some who are not supposed to be in this country at all. They will believe almost anything, like an anti-gas attitude, if they think it will help their citizenship.

            NYC has stopped using #6 oil, which gave heat to most tall buildings, now and they will use natural gas to supply power and heat, since wind and sun power are not dependable and not even close to available or desireable. Natural gas will not last forever either, but it will cover us for the next century or longer. Hopefully by then we will discover a new energy system, but for now, natural gas is by far the best one we have.

            You might believe Vladimir Putin, as it appears, who insists ‘fracking gas’ is a bad thing to do, but his ‘Gazprom’ uses it very heavily. Why would he claim it’s ‘bad’ for us when he allows it in his own country? I think you would have to be a fool to believe that guy, but you seem to like him the way you make the same claims as he does.

          • JimBarth

            Good luck Wythe, nothing more to say, clearly.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Just because someone has a PhD next to their name means little when it comes to common sense! I thought even you would know that!

          • DC

            You are so mean. Karma is a bitch, sir. Please watch what you say to others.

          • DC

            Jim, I am praying for George to grow up. My God is an awesome God, and hopefully He will answer my prayers for adult conversations on this forum! Why are some men so mean today?

        • JimBarth

          So Fred Peckham, you think I’m a “leading moron in Beach Lake, PA? You voted up “George’s” comment? Can’t wait till the next time I go to a UDC meeting in Narrowsburg. I look forward to seeing you. Will your “George Wythe” be there?

          • Kilgour_Farms

            That’s not proving me wrong that’s just radical rhetoric on your part. The EPA, NPS, DOE and 35 states all seem to be saying the same thing, the science behind frac’ing is solid and it is being done safely and responsibly. Since you like polls so much it seems the majority of states agree it the science.

            You need to get over the fact that your a minority and your “science” is paid for by the likes of the “kill the drill” Park Foundation.

          • JimBarth

            Then why are you “losing”? Why is there no frac’ing yet in the DRB, or NYS, if you are such a “majority”, if you are an irresistible force? You have been repeating the same false mantra for 6 years now, and, what do you have to show for it? Every day reports and studies come in that show your assertions to be false. The passage of time, as far as science goes, is your enemy. As for “paid science”, yours is oil and gas extraction money science, and don’t make us laugh by comparing the O & G based money to the Park Foundation. That is how weak minded your arguments are. Is smoking bad for your health, Fred? Does it cause cancer? Back in the ’60′s you would be carrying the flag for the “science” (doctors) that said it wasn’t bad for you.

            You are one step above “George Wythe, Mr. Peckham. Congratulations.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            You can fool some of the people all the time, all the people some of the time but you can’t fool all the people all the time! It will be here soon enough with a new ED at the helm of the DRBC!

            Learn or not, your choice!

          • JimBarth

            Is that your erectile dysfunction (ED), Fred? I thought it was up to the governor’s of the 4 states, not the “ED”. I hope you get frac’ed real soon…

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Without natural resources life itself is impossible. From birth to
            death, natural resources, transformed for human use, feed, clothe, shelter, and
            transport us. Upon them we depend for every material necessity, comfort,
            convenience, and protection in our lives. Without abundant resources prosperity
            is out of reach

          • Kilgour_Farms

            That’s a quote from Gifford Pinchot, he knew the value of using natural resources why don’t you! I forgot radical anties like you exist for your own self righteousness.

          • JimBarth

            Governor Pinchot was born in 1865, and died in of all places, NYC in 1946. Mr. Pinchot was not referring to shale gas extraction as “natural resources”, and he would certainly weigh the pros and cons of the extraction impacts, which people like you are thoroughly unwilling to do. He also would have been dead against such extraction in his parks, his forests, the Delaware River Basin, whereas, zealots such as yourself, can not make a distinction between a reservoir, and, a pissoir!

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Zealot, your calling me a zealot you and your ilk at DCS are the very definition of what it means to be a zealot!

            I guess you knew him personally to speak on his behalf. You’re so full of crap its coming out your eyes to the point to can’t see!

          • JimBarth

            Yes, you are a zealot, and, worse, as you are willfully ignorant. You write very poorly, as someone who struggled to graduate high school, while making wild eyed accusations, and derogatory comments, against people with advanced degrees in science, as well as any and all of those who hold opposing opinions to yours. I see clearly, and I have fine reading comprehension. You have very little except your desire to frac your land, which I imagine you inherited, as, I can not see you having earned anything of value in your life, which would have given you the means to purchase your property. I think you should say some prayers in thankfulness to your mother and father tonight, and, every night. I suggest you calm down, go out into the night air, smoke a pre-packaged cigarette laden with chemicals, then return to lecture us about how shale gas extraction is “safe and responsible”.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Rudeness is the weak person imitation of strength.

          • JimBarth

            You are speaking about yourself, because that is all you, “Wythe” and your new posting buddy Frank do, is call people names, and weakly attempt to mock the intelligence of your opposition. Some of us respond with strong comments about you. Are you surprised that some people strike back?

          • Kilgour_Farms

            If you really knew how to do serious research, which obviously you don’t, you would find that antie organization spend much more money then the O&G’s on “paid science”.

            Learn or not, your choice!

          • JimBarth

            What an empty and false assertion.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            “What an empty and false assertion”.
            Only in the mind of an antie!

    • NorthernTier

      It’s about choices. Today, I was held up in a small town traffic jam, unheard of pre-shale. And, the work is planned to continue through the tourist season. Otoh, there is opposition (by some) in The Finger Lakes area of NY because they value their tourist busines. Who’s to say which are the “idiots”.

      t

    • DC

      ” Anti-gas idiots”- Real mature, George. I hope your momma is proud that you run around name-calling in your adulthood.

      • George Wythe

        you are as much of an idiot as Barfy !

        • DC

          You don’t know anything about me. But the more you talk, the more I know about you. Keep talking. I love it.

  • Patrick Henderson

    The article says that a “solid majority of Pennsylvanians (62 percent) believe the state should enact a severance tax on gas production”. A few things worth observing. The question illustrates its bias by saying Pennsylvania has no severance tax but instead levies an impact fee that is “lower than severance taxes in most other states” and asks the respondent if they favor adopting such a tax. This question is actually the only question which asks for a “yes” or “no” answer, as compared to the vast majority which ask if the respondent “strongly agrees, agrees, disagrees or strongly disagrees”. The question is biased because it inaccurately leads the respondent to believe that Pennsylvanians are not receiving their fair share in taxes; it fails to advise the respondent that, unlike in other states, PA imposes a host of other taxes on drilling activity that are not matched in other states and the PA tax burden is actually right in the middle of the pack.

    The survey authors also failed to ask New York residents if they “Agree or Disagree” that New York does not impose an impact fee to benefit local communities should natural gas development proceed there. If the survey is to be unbiased, it makes absolutely no sense to query Pennsylvanians regarding a severance tax but to not query New Yorkers regarding an impact fee.

    As to how any revenue is used from oil and gas development, it is ironic that 69% of respondents strongly or somewhat agree that gas development comes at the expense of local communities. That is precisely why the Pennsylvania impact fee – which has generated $630 million in new revenue – is the best approach to not only generating revenue, but distributing it as well.

    Patrick Henderson, Energy Advisor
    Office of the Governor

    • JimBarth

      Mr. Henderson, those are a lot of words you have written in an attempt to spin a square into a circle concerning a rather simple question, which Pennsylvania residents have often overwhelmingly answered. The impact fee is strongly considered to be woefully inadequate, and in the favor of the gas extraction industry, while a severance tax is overwhelmingly considered to be a route that should have been taken instead of the impact fee, but was defeated by Governor Corbett, and the Republican majority in the legislature. This is not a reality that you, as an energy advisor to the Governor, or, the Governor, can spin into a misperception on the part of the citizens of the Commonwealth, at the last minute, during a campaign for re-election. Dishonesty is a major reason why Governor Corbett will be voted out in two months, and will most likely be employed by a major extraction industry, extraction PR firm, or extraction law firm. You all fit so well into that industry.

  • JimBarth

    Marie, there are a few things missing from your article (I read one this morning in Philly.com, I think), that people should have easy access to (perhaps the info is in the link you provide to the survey, but, you must download the PDF it seems).
    I believe that the survey phoned something like 405 people in NYS, and, 411 in PA? The combined population of the states is about 32 million, so that seems a pretty weak effort in my opinion. Also, I thought the survey states that the percentages have an error margin of 5 points. That’s large in a tight race, and if 54% of Pennsylvanians “favored” frac’ing (how many of them even know what frac’ing really is?), a major question not addressed in your article is “how many are opposed”? Thanks.

    • JimBarth

      Also, I would love to see polls taken ONLY of residents (not absentee landowners), in the extraction zones of PA. Percentage wise, very few people who live in the extraction areas benefit from this terribly heavy industrial process, and it changes the lives of the large majority for the worse, for many years, once it takes hold.

      • Kilgour_Farms

        I see the drive by anties in NY to sign up non residents to vote in local elections didn’t turn out the way you thought it would, that’s funny!

        Keep talking Barth your making your self look foolish.

        The way of the anties; “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep
        saying it, and eventually they will believe it.”

        • JimBarth

          I’m in PA Peckham. It is you who make the big lies, keep repeating them, in hopes people will believe. They won’t. Your opposition just keeps growing, and the truth always eventually emerges. Time is not on your side. It is the past 60 years when the economy was built around the burning of fossil fuels, that lifts your boat. If not for that, you would not stand a chance. Your arguments are empty. Only the fact that we are trapped, and that it will be painful to withdraw and invest, keeps your hopes alive. You espouse the logic of the addict. You love the fact that it is so difficult to withdraw from the addiction, and to invest in the future. You are addicted, you are selfish, and you count on that trait in the majority of the population. You are correct. It will be impossible to overcome. Still, we persist. Something you can’t understand.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Your naive green utopia is decades away if that and that’s a reality you can’t deal with. The only people that are hurt by your fairy tale are the poor but again who cares about them when you consider yourself an elitist and your ends justify the means no matter what those means are!

            Today, one of the most powerful religions in the
            Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of
            choice for urban atheists….Increasingly, it seems facts aren’t necessary,
            because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It’s about whether
            you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be to be one
            of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are
            going to be one of us or one of them.

          • Frank Chernega

            “I’m in PA Peckham. It is you who make the big lies, keep repeating
            them, in hopes people will believe. They won’t. Your opposition just
            keeps growing, and the truth always eventually emerges. Time is not on
            your side. It is the past 60 years when the economy was built around
            the burning of fossil fuels, that lifts your boat. If not for that, you
            would not stand a chance. Your arguments are empty. Only the fact
            that we are trapped, and that it will be painful to withdraw and invest,
            keeps your hopes alive. You espouse the logic of the addict. You love
            the fact that it is so difficult to withdraw from the addiction, and to
            invest in the future. You are addicted, you are selfish, and you count
            on that trait in the majority of the population. You are correct. It
            will be impossible to overcome. Still, we persist. Something you can’t
            understand.” This has to be some of the worst meaningless psycho – babble I’ve ever read, Barf. Here’s some science you might like from Cornell’s Dr. Larry Cathles of the Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept – http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/PeoplePlaces/Faculty/cathles/Natural%20Gas/2012%20Cathles%20et%20al%20Commentary%20on%20Howarth.pdf

            He is a touch smarter than this pathogical liar who made Gasland – https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=kiHkFKeKTok#t=104

          • JimBarth

            I expected that what I wrote would exceed your ability to comprehend.

    • Kilgour_Farms

      Polls are just that polls the reality exists with elections and as we have seen in NY regions where there is potential for development pro development candidates won by wide margins some by more then 2-1.

      • Frank Chernega

        Speaking of polls, here’s a great one from the Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin which shows a solid 65% FAVOR drilling – http://archive.pressconnects.com/poll/2014-02-28/7840203/results This is out of 24,514 respondents! Frack now in NY!

        • JimBarth

          The random online “poll” you provided a link to is absolutely hilarious. Thank you for the laugh.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            A joke ifs the poll DCS did and Barth hangs his hat on it, ROFLMAO as anties were soundly defeated in the 2012 elections right in Barths backyard. So much for Barths fantasy poll!

          • JimBarth

            Don’t wear hats Peckham. Did not do a “poll” either. Researched the people who leased their land in Damascus Township (Courtesy of Citizens Voice database for Wayne County), compared it to the Damascus Township tax rolls (paid about $100 to buy that from the Assessment office). It showed that 69% of the land surface in Damascus Township had been leased, but only 33% of the owners of property had leased, and, they only paid 39% of the taxes in the Township. Majority of land, minority of ownership, minority of tax base. That you describe it as a “poll” is asinine. Sounds about right coming from your mouth.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Your survey like most of the things that come out of DCS was bogus and you know it! You are an agenda driven elitist, you have what you want, your view shed, now the rest of us should bow down to you and your pseudo elitist kin and accept it. The elections tells us the real story and the anties consistently lose to pro people something you have a hard time wrapping your tin foil hat around.

            Anties like you are so heavily leveraged with outrageous claims that you try to make yourselves the victim rather then the villain of all this tension they have created.

            You Barth are a charlatan parading as expert in the field of nonsense.

          • Frank Chernega

            Barf and his ilk are receiving HUGE sums of money from Park as shown in this spreadsheet compiled by the Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin – http://www.pressconnects.com/assets/xls/CB208780719.XLS These one and two person organizations, who hilariously claim to be “non – profit”, play a shell game by moving this Park Money from 501 c3 and 501 c4′s. This shell game is now under the scrutiny of the U.S. Senate – http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=53280dcb-9f2c-2e3a-7092-10cf6d8d08df The 92 page report – http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=8af3d005-1337-4bc3-bcd6-be947c523439 The anti – drillers are “grassroots” HAHAHAHAHAHA!

          • Kilgour_Farms

            What I find even more ironic are the people who become multiple members of all these grops and claim huge numbers when in reality they are the same people just different organizations. An Astro turf movement funded by the Park and Heinz foundations, pure “kill the drill” organizations.

            Then you have special interest groups like the Delaware Rivercreeper and William Penn Foundation who give money to the DRB for influence and even sit on committees as chairman. Hopefully under the new DRBC leadership this special interest peddling will stop, under Collier it was rampant and encouraged.

          • Frank Chernega

            While speaking of the same people who are members of multiple groups, I see this constantly. When I attend a anti – love in somewhere, it is the same people who attend all the different meetings. They are like some kind of modern era groupie who get off on hearing the clowns running these meetings and say the same old garbage over and over about nose bleeds, rashes, cancer and all the rest of the fear mongering stories. I suppose by their outward appearance, hatred of opposing viewpoints, and glassy eyes, that they are in all likelihood, just a bunch of old hippies who have had way too many bongs during their lifetimes and are now paying the price and will believe anything that is told to them that fits their drug – affected paradigm.

          • JimBarth

            I suggest you read your post, then apply it to yourself. You can leave out “love in”, and “hippie”. “Hatred of opposing viewpoints fits you nicely, as does “glassy eyes” after your alcohol intake kicks in. As far as believing “anything”, that fits you to a “T” in relation to the safe and responsible shale gas extraction claims.
            The fact you mock people who claim they have serious and negative health impacts from living near shale gas extraction wells, that just shows your shameful lack of character. What kind of jerk are you to be writing that?

          • JimBarth

            Chernega, you just wrote something blatantly false about me. I have not received anything, let alone “HUGE’ sums of money, from any source. Rather, I have donated my personal time, and money, to fighting shale gas extraction as practiced. What kind of a nasty, idiot are you? Stop writing things about me, or other real persons, that are untrue. Is that possible for you? Also, should I refer to you as “Skank”? Are you an adult?

          • JimBarth

            You wrote that the results of the study I presented is bogus, yet, you have never offered anything in rebuttal, these past 4 years?. This is not because you are intellectually challenged, which you are, or, lazy, which you are, but rather, because there is no rebuttal. I performed a straight forward comparison of data provided by very reputable sources, one that even sounded “right” to Marian Schweighofer (remember your gas buddy Peckham?). This does not stop you from making angry, personal attacks against me, though, does it? I congratulate you on your last sentence. It has a little (flare), or, is it just more (venting) on your part?

          • JimBarth

            Not “is”, “are” bogus.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            I see no point in arguing with you. You do a
            fine job of proving your ignorance on your own

          • Frank Chernega

            Nice, albeit feeble, attempt to deflect the OVERWHELMING vote in favor of drilling. This wasn’t some engineered poll of 200 – 300 people like most polls are, but rather a poll that was put out by a news paper, Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin largely viewed as anti drilling and quite liberal. It was online for a number of months and had over 24,000 people vote. Please elaborate why you discredit something that is obviously highly reflective of what a large number (65%) favor – DRILLING. Frack now! BTW, here it is again for your reading pleasure and a little salt for your oozing wounded ego :>) – http://archive.pressconnects.com/poll/2014-02-28/7840203/results

          • JimBarth

            Chernega wrote: “Please elaborate why you discredit something that is obviously highly reflective of what a large number (65%) favor – DRILLING.”

            Are you that simple that you can not understand the difference between a website that asks and allows anyone to click a vote, and any kind of poll where people are selected and phoned in order to represent a “sampling” of the population?

            If the MSC, or, JLCNY, or, industry itself, sees such a website vote request, emails circulate to their membership requesting people to go online to “vote”. These people are not readers of The Binghamton Press. The “vote” gets stacked according to whomever has larger email lists, and whomever is more motivate to stack the numbers. Also, people have multiple email addresses, and as such, may “vote” that many times.

            Also, the question asked in that “poll” was broad and simple, and stood alone.

            That “poll” represents nothing of value.

          • Frank Chernega

            One need only to go to all the anti – drilling, pro – Russian, Park Foundation – subsidized websites that do what you accuse us pro – drilling people of doing. Go to Toxics Targeting’s website and tell me what you see.

          • JimBarth

            That’s my point. The “poll” that you linked us to is worthless.

          • Frank Chernega

            prove it.

          • JimBarth

            Frank, get a grip on yourself for goodness sake.

  • Kilgour_Farms

    PA has experienced the benefits of development NY hasn’t! Start development in NY and watch the polls swing in favor of it!

    • JimBarth

      Golly, Fred Peckham, thanks for that opinion! What exact benefits will the 19 or so million residents of NYS “experience”? Or, will it just be landowners such as your self, who have large acreage in the target zones? After all, your faux named buddy George thinks that all 8 million plus residents of NYC are idiots and morons, so what benefit would they receive that they are not currently receiving? Then, there are the people in the target zones who are not like you, and who vehemently oppose such toxic industrialization of the rural residential land and landscape, and in most places, they are the vast majority of the property owners. Do they just disappear?
      Fred, are there possibly any negative impacts? Tell us about them, and, how the industry, and landowners such as your self, will prevent these negative impacts from…impacting your neighbors, who are against you and your frac’ing desires. Should we all just, disappear?

      • Kilgour_Farms

        Eight million NY residents that would rather freeze to death then use “fracked” natural gas, yeah right what planet are you from! Your friend Ono is right at the top of a long list of hypocrites along with your buddies from chef against frac’ing and of course Liar Faux. By the way Gasland is the least trusted source there is on oil and gas development. It must be true the polls says so!

        Radical zealots like you will never get it, The world doesn’t exist on fairy dust and Unicorns. Your hope for a naïve green utopia is just that naïve!

        You obviously have chosen to ignore all the draw backs from the not so green energy including destruction of ecological habitat, killing of endangered birds, toxic lakes created by the extraction of rare earth minerals, REM and the toxic pollutants when solar panels catch on fire. That’s not even mentioning the inefficiencies of both wind and solar, 15% and 20% respectively that’s when the sun shine and wind blows.

        Mr. Barth, nothing in the world is
        more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity and you have shown both!

        Learn or not your choice!

        • JimBarth

          Nothing is more dangerous, Mr. Peckham, than those who believe their opinion is fact. You are the classic example of a person who does research only to support his belief. If anyone is a zealot, it is you, and “Mr. Wythe”. Mr. Peckham, you do not even believe in “climate change”, and, you quote “science”. I believe your science is really just “Christian based”. Good luck getting frac’ed, Mr. Peckham.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Facts are something you and your ilk are short on, propaganda is more like it.

            Your losing, it just a matter of time before people realize you and your organization are nothing more then a propaganda machine, radical anties seeking a naïve green utopia at the expense of the poor!

            This from the radical left dailykos, oh the irony!

            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/07/1221731/-Fact-Checking-Josh-Fox-Gasland-2-Oil-Gas-Industry-NOT-Exempt-from-Clean-Air-Clean-Water-Acts

          • JimBarth

            Losing? We have fought Goliath, who has billions of dollars, and thousands of politicians in it’s pocket. Yet, NYS, and the DRB, six years later, still do not have frac’ing. It may come, and then we will see what comes after that. None of this is pretty, and it won’t get any better. People like you, however, are delusional. You have been predicting this and that for six years, and, where are you? As I wrote, the passage of time is the enemy of your cause. Every day, more horror stories emerge, when people like you have never admitted to any harm.

          • Jim Young

            The results are starting to come in from years of fracking. Deborah Rogers of the Energy Policy Institute (and some investors) are seeing the production rates drop quickly and, despite an average 40 fold increase in well density (multiple bores from one site), only a third or so of the predicted long term output coming out of the tight, expensive to develop and operate unconventional wells. Couple that with a lower than expected demand, finally becoming painfully aware to the speculators, and the economics alone will collapse this bubble. I just hope it happens before too much more damage is done to the environment, health, and especially damage to water resources that even relatively abundant north eastern watersheds can ill afford.

          • Jim Young

            I’m back from the climate march, with some good news. See http://www.democracynow.org/2014/9/22/heirs_of_billionaire_oil_tycoon_john on the divestment of $50 billion from fossil fuels (Rockefeller’s heirs backing out $866 million by themselves).

            How’s that for a poll that counts?

          • Jim Young

            They do use what friends and I call “industry scientists,” ones that seem honest and independent, but use industry self reported data, and exclude anything that might need waivers of non-disclosure agreements to get anywhere near a comprehensive view of the problems. At least a few will admit that they have very limited data, and some will admit it is inadequate to do anything other than say it looks of from what little they can see. See (and read between the lines) http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-fracking-report-20140829-story.html

            …Authors of report on fracking acknowledge they had little information on which to base conclusions…

            Seems just like PSU’s Dr. Sue Brantley slipped into her presentation, How Fracking Impacts Our Water: The Pennsylvania Experience,” April 9th at UCR. I’d ask how many of these “industry” or respected (but careful) academics (at educational institutions that receive substantial industry contributions) actually go out to the field (get to see non-disclosure agreements) and look for the more comprehensive data they would deem at least adequate to base conclusions on.

        • JimBarth

          I “ignore all the drawbacks from not so green energy”? This coming from someone who refuses to acknowledge any negative impacts from shale gas extraction, that far overwhelm any and all that you think exist in the green energy world, and while you refuse to show any concern for the thousands of people who have been negatively impacted, health wise and other wise?
          You are a climate change denier, and, you say your opinions on shale gas extraction are “science” based?
          You still are addicted to chemically laden, prepackaged cigarettes, are you not? If not, how recently did you stop (last time I saw you, you were still sucking away). How old are you, 65 or so? How long have you smoked? How stupid, how immature, what level of impoverished mind and judgment you show, and yet, you expect anyone to believe you have the capacity to evaluate risk that others should be exposed to? What environment and treatment others should accept? I’m not surprised at all that you care nothing about the health and welfare of your neighbors, except the ones, who, like you, want to benefit from this outrageously polluting industrial activity. Peace be with you Peckham, but I doubt you’ll find any.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            By the way I guess you’ve heard from the recent headlines, probably already knew, that Liar Faux’s boy friend Gee of Gasland fame, and his family in Tioga County, PA are raking in the $$$ from the wells drilled on their property. Talk about a hypocrite, LMAO if it wasn’t so pathetic.

    • JimBarth

      What a surprise, “George” supports his buddy Fred Peckham! Good little boy, “George”.

    • Jim Young

      What benefits? Would they be like the “benefits” from the Stringfellow Acid pits 5 miles from my home? They quit dumping toxic waste in them 40 years ago and are still trying to clean them up.

      I attended a presentation at UCR by PSU’s Dr. Sue Brantley on how fracking impacts water in Pennsylvania, but noticed she mentioned the same lack of information (seeming to use only industry self reporting, and not mentioning the USGS study results). Those results were deceptively described using minute traces (1/7,000th of actionable levels) of methane detected in 78% of wells to imply that there was much more common leakage. It seems the post fracking levels were 10,000 times, or more, higher than the minute detectable levels that pro-fracking promoters try to disguise as evidence of preexisting methane (with no mention of the 4 or more orders of magnitude greater percentages).

      At least the tobacco lawyer like PR campaigns make me dig deeper into how some are deliberately misleading the public taht won’t do their own due diligence. What I learned today, for example, came from looking into supposed benefits like the Severance Tax the NaturalGasNow organization fights against (to me a good idea I wishwe’d had when they started dumping at the Stringfellow acid pits). It led me to discover that California has the least taxes (none in some cases) on the resources they profit from extracting, while using what has to be massive amounts of our critical water.

      Do you have any insurance companies willing to sign up for compensating us for the damage that may only be recognized so much later, given examples like the Stringfellow acid pits?

      • Kilgour_Farms

        Its obvious your source leave something to be desired. Theres methane and other chemicals naturally occurring in water wells all over the Delaware basin, choose to ignore it at your own risk of looking foolish!

        • JimBarth

          Fred is like a circus parrot who has been trained to write all the industry’s PR lines. Fred calls that “research”, and “science”.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Its better then your radical Park Foundation “kill the drill” paid for voodoo science with Ingraffea. Hes been delegated to the dust bin of history by main stream science, rejected by his peers
            .

          • Jim Young

            You wish that characterization would stick.

            Anyone that follows up such as by actually meeting these people in person, or trying to find out why their University public affairs office won’t dare risk the industry funding by letting both pro and anti-fracking scientists share the same stage at any event they sponsor. Dr. Ingraffea is more than willing to participate in such comprehensive public events, while those friends and I consider “industry” scientists (whether they are directly employed by the industry or are “academics” at educational institutes that seem unduly influenced by industry funding).

          • Kilgour_Farms

            You sir are in denial about Ingraffea, good luck with that!

          • Jim Young

            I wonder how many others would fall for your baloney if they met these people in person or attended events where they interacted with real people.

            Since I’ve retired, I’ve started going to these events and seeing as many as I can, eye-to-eye. I get an entirely different impression than you would like to create on who is blowing smoke. I can only suggest as many people as possible do the same, or at least ask friends they trust, who have done such personal evaluations of the people you would like discredited. They may find, as I did, that you should be the one discredited, and never trusted to be the basis for general opinions.

            Personal observation, in person, at the scene, may have the same effect Walter Cronkite’s trip to Vietnam had.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            I have sir, for six years now and counting!

          • JimBarth

            You have been repeating the same words for the past six years. You wanted the red carpet, green light given to the industry then, while vehemently denying any negative health or environmental impacts from the process. The past six years have provided massive amounts of experience and data that contradicts your Pollyanna-ish, pro-frac propaganda, yet you persist, all the while accusing your opposition of the very gross personal behavior you exhibit. Your friends and supporters circle their wagons and scratch each other’s backs, but, whom else is fooled? You haven’t learned anything, or, admitted any damage during this entire time. You speak of reputable scientists, professors, and economists in grossly derogatory terms (men and women with Ph.D’s and 40 years of experience), as if their intelligence, logic and motives are vastly inferior to yours, and your fellow JLCNY landowners! If you looked in the mirror, you would drop from shame. Don’t worry though, that level of self examination is as alien to you and your want-to-frac landowners, as science and critical thinking are.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            Many are bought and paid for by the likes of the Park and Heinz Foundations to name just two. I could give you a whole list of “kill the drill” organizations that fund most of these antie papers but you already know them since DCS has itself funded some of these bias result driven papers.

          • Kilgour_Farms

            By doing so he makes himself even more irrelevant to the scientific community.

          • JimBarth

            Explain how.

          • JimBarth

            You sir are in denial about yourself.

          • JimBarth

            What “main stream science”? Which “peers”?

          • Kilgour_Farms

            If you don’t know by now then you truly are in the tank and refuse to look beyond your misguided propaganda! Good luck you’ll need it!

          • DC

            If you cannot give specific information to prove your point, your argument is meaningless. Jim Young brings accurate data and insight into your conversation. By saying “You are truly in the tank…” -does it make you feel smart to put others down? I think Jim looks smarter than you right now. Stick to facts, sir. The truth shall set us free.

        • Jim Young

          Your sources leave very much more to be desired, especially when the reputable scientists cover their research with comments on the inadequacy of the data, use only industry self reported data, have not commented on why the EPA regional Libraries were shut down and the data either destroyed or made much harder to access.

          Care to share any actual levels detected (and ranked from being minute detectable levels or far higher than preexisting conditions)? See http://ecowatch.com/2013/11/08/industry-mislead-americans-on-fracking/

          …Is drilling and modern fracking the cause? In many cases we just don’t know because pre-drilling water quality and public health studies don’t exist, and the information is simply not available to the public…

          The snow job after the Ross Dress For Less explosion in 1985 didn’t hold up any more than I expect your characterizations to. See http://web.stanford.edu/~meehan/class/ce2942000/press.htm (2000, 15 years after) and http://web.stanford.edu/~meehan/la/pubs/pubross.pdf (1992, 7 years after).

          God help us all if it takes 7 years to find the true causes of such dramatic failures, when the industry people who had to have known, or strongly suspected, the almost undeniable facts immediately after the explosion, during the following 3 days of fires from methane releases, or later releases in 1989. Do you think they were really that stupid, or extremely slick in covering it up for so long?

          Perhaps their getting away with it for so long made them think they could be as brazen as they were in the Playa Vista Development fiasco 20 years later. See the whole series of NBC reports on those shenanigans starting at Burning Question NBC 4 part 1 – Playa Vista Safe? Part 1

      • DC

        Good argument.

  • Ed

    Everyone who is against fracking should have there gas and electricity turned off. If your so against it why are you using iy!

    • JimBarth

      My electricity is from wind, and I don’t have gas at home. The generation of electricity does not equal shale gas extraction. One can be pro electricity, and anti shale gas extraction. Do you have any other non related opinions, Ed?

      • Kilgour_Farms

        I see by your statement you know little to nothing about the toxic extraction process of REM’s and the not so green energy you trumpet! I bet you think wind and solar are free as well, yet it takes fossil fuels to create these not so green forms of energy.

        With out heavy government subsidies these alternate forms of energy could would not exist. All one has to do is look to Germany and Spain as examples of the failed policies of green energy!

        Learn or not, your choice!

        • JimBarth

          “I see no point in arguing with you. You do a fine job of proving your ignorance on your own.”

    • Jim Young

      I’m sorely tempted to have the gas turned off, and use only renewable sources for electricity. If grid operators don’t want to totally lose us as customers, they should use their economy of scale to get us the solar they can build for half of what we can get totally off grid sources for. I’d almost rather go totally off grid, or to small resilient grids, paying a little extra now to cut them out of the loop. With the rapidly dropping prices of solar already going lower than the rising costs of ever harder to extract fossil fuels, the tipping point will be reached for many more individuals that want to get off that freight train headed for disaster.

      • Aidan Benelle

        I’m with Jim. Renewables are the only health future.

    • Jim Young
    • DC

      Because alternative energy is available, but the industry leaders prevent us ‘little people’ from getting it at accessible prices.

  • George Wythe

    Well the nicest thing about this article, which was taken by the University of Michigan, is that it shows the fact, that most of Pennsylvanians LIKE gas which uses ‘fracking’!
    Too bad there are so many ignorant fools in this area who can’t see the best power we have available.

    • Jim Young

      See https://ethicalelectric.com/Partners/SolutionsGrassroots#/ We are getting the opportunity to choose who supplies our power. I’ve been visiting the Rutland Vermont area, admiring their solar installations, and will look into switching to such sources (even the easiest, in simply choosing to use only energy from clean sources). Though the Solar is already cheaper to produce, the politics seem to have the amount of solar I could get by with, through the grid, costing an extra $3 a month, well worth the cost to start further bringing down the fossil fool stranglehold on our energy sources. I’d suggest others see what is possible in their areas.

      I’ll trade the relatively small negative consequences of solar for the disasters fracking brings any day. I predict your fracking frenzy will prove one of the worst financial bubbles soon enough anyway.

      Just too bad the fossil fool advocates won’t be made to pay for all the damage they cause in their grab for profits

      • George Wythe

        Of course you realize making a solar panel produces hazardous waste don’t you? Solar panels don’t last very long, maybe 15-20 years. What do you think will happen to them then? Going into a landfill, toxins will leach into the soil. Remember Solyndra?
        Solar production, when the sun shines, may actually be clean, AFTER it is produced and BEFORE it is discarded. These are facts, not like a guessing that drilling natural gas will make any pollution at all.
        Your choice.

        • Jim Young

          Compared to what I see with fracking, solar panels are far more affordable and far less environmentally damaging, especially if they are treated like the electronics industry has learned to do in California.

          Try finding out where they are getting the water for fracking in California, and how much agriculture is already sacrificed for lack of adequate water. Do you suppose they are still being as reckless and creating hazards with the solar panel production and recycling as they were with the toxic waste as they dumped them into the woefully inadequately protected Stringfellow Acid Pits (about 5 miles from my house)?

          I consider what I can see of the fracking mess in the LA area (70 sites within LA county I believe) far worse. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4O6jI2y_m4 and related videos on the Playa Vista fiasco concerning aiding and abetting abuses by the oil and gas industry, then tell me of anything comparable in size or potential damage done by the solar industry.

          Solyndra was tiny small potatoes as far as support and financing corruption, and was, to me, more like trying to make a more expensive technology work as the prices were dramatically falling. Any computer company that couldn’t compete with the falling prices of computers in the 90′s would have (and did) suffer the same fate. The prices were falling so fast, any bleeding edge company was at risk (without the types of government backing people like George Mitchell got in the early, unprofitable days of fracking). It would be interesting to see if that money was used as intended, by the way, or if the tax payers ever got repaid.

          The unconventional oil and gas isn’t that new either, it has just been able to get the massive financial backing to get the much more expensive extraction methods “affordable” if only relatively. It will keep getting even more expensive with tighter and tighter resources in ever more complex geology that even the latest horizontal and snake drilling can’t follow at less cost than the resources they extract will sell for. Solar is already cheaper, and keeps getting more so. I suspect old solar panels can be recycled into even more efficient designs in the future, or, like aluminum, recycled as a much cheaper source of material than refining the original ore.

          How do you plan on recycling the fossil fuels being burned?

          Simply put, fossil fuels are climbing in price, solar is dropping.

          Don’t over use fossil fuel, save most of the fossil fuel or what it is good for, such as lubricants that can be re-refined indefinitely (if you don’t burn it).

    • Jim Young

      Regarding your comments on “polls” or studies on who likes fracking, I’m
      back from the climate march (about one tenth of a percent of the
      population of the United States who don’t like fracking enough to show
      up, were there with me). The good news is another “poll” that should
      get your attention would be the divestment starting to happen.

      See http://www.democracynow.org/2014/9/22/heirs_of_billionaire_oil_tycoon_john

      on the divestment of $50 billion from fossil fuels (Rockefeller’s
      heirs backing out $866 million by themselves).

      How’s that for a poll, or study, that counts?

  • DC

    This article is vague at best. Who were surveyed? What were the demographics? Where did the respondents live? Are they close to drilling stations? This article is not so helpful. But I do applaud those who continue to educate our fellow Pennsylvanians on various effects of drilling. Keep up the good work.

About StateImpact

StateImpact seeks to inform and engage local communities with broadcast and online news focused on how state government decisions affect your lives.
Learn More »

Economy
Education