Keith:
Unsure about the word "war" -- along with the associated complexity as to whom is actually doing what in regards to the powerful "dirty coal" lobby in D.C.
Nevertheless, most of us know that the less acid-rain dirty coal that is used to spin the electrical-generating grid turbines in the U.S. of A. (and the increase in power plants which do proceed to convert to the more environmentally-friendly "clean-burning" NG) . . . then that apples-vs.-apples commodity equation is simply a "supply and demand" scenario which will serve to help stabilize the higher hub price that royalty owners will be paid for their NatGas.
GD
Keith, can you give a credible source of your quote that BO said "under my plan of a cap and trade, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4
Maybe Obama himself could be my credible source.
Don't think that I care a lick about coal or the areas that produce it. I'm even in a position just as many on this forum to gain from this "war on coal". I am concerned that the "war on coal" could spread to other energy and that this EPA could grow it's power even more in a way that does adveresly affect my family. Maybe the government's full scale attack on fracking isn't too far off in the future, that would suck. I've even heard that they want to regulate road side ditches as wetlands. Come one now!
"Will Obama's war on coal help Nat Gas prices?"
Yes, but not enough to change my vote. Regarding your statement on frack attack....Maybe fracking could become a state rights issue. I bet Louisiana and Texas would be "frack friendly" If only two states allowed fracking, now that would help Nat gas prices.
I don't think this current president cares too much about states rights.
Thanks a lot. Stupid use of "skyrocket." Most of old projections on McCain Lieberman cap and trade did not show a skyrocketing electricity price as carbon pricing was phased in. I share your fear on fracking, but think we have no choice but to have industry work with government to make it safe and produce the energy.
The EPA and DEQ here in Oregon are already regulating roadside ditches, groundwater runoff and low land areas that have standing water for more than 5 weeks as 'Wetlands' and it is hurting a lot of people. In order to put a road through that will pass over one on these 'Wetlands' you may be required to build a new 'Wetland' to replace the one that you are covering. In the case of one person that I know, it ended up costing them $950,000 to put through a $200,000 road on their property. Back in the 70's we would have laided out some 6"- Pitrun rock, tossed down a few culvert pipes, topped it with some 3" - rock and called it good (that's what my 1/2 mile driveway was) and it worked fine, leaving free flowing water and 'Wetland' on both sides.
Hopefully this state of mind does not spread accross the whole country
I figured out why our current administration is concerned about the nations ditches, they are looking for the economy.
386 members
27 members
455 members
440 members
400 members
244 members
149 members
358 members
63 members
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher). Powered by
h2 | h2 | h2 |
---|---|---|
AboutAs exciting as this is, we know that we have a responsibility to do this thing correctly. After all, we want the farm to remain a place where the family can gather for another 80 years and beyond. This site was born out of these desires. Before we started this site, googling "shale' brought up little information. Certainly nothing that was useful as we negotiated a lease. Read More |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoHaynesvilleShale.com