Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by P.G. on October 22, 2009 at 4:17

Yes encouraging but he's been for this Cap and Scam stuff all along. I'm curious to see just what bill he's fixing to introduce.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on October 22, 2009 at 4:27

I was actually at a luncheon yesterday that he spoke at. He spoke on this and I was dissapointed. No mention of natural gas, shale-gas production specifically. These politicians aren't getting it or else the natural gas industry is doing a lousy job at getting our product and its virtues out there. This has hit home especially after my efforts to contact ANGA, or American Natural Gas Alliance, for an interview. You would have thought that I was trying to get an interview with the President of the United States. They out sourced their PR to an outside firm, Brighton-Knowles, and after 3 emails and 2 phone calls - I have given up!

I'm in the process of sending a letter directly to ANGA...unbelieveable!

You never out source your PR - you have to have the fire in the belly. Also, they seem content to throw money at it in advertising. This aint gonna do it either.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rosebud on October 22, 2009 at 6:13

Keith,

Would our sending letters to ANGA help anything? I've been wondrously impressed with the fact that most of the attempts I've made recently to contact various political figures are at least getting replies. They may or may not be form letters but I still think it's important to make the effort.

I've been out for the past couple of hours but will try to listen for Senator Graham's interview again. I thought he did mention U.S. natural gas and oil production but it was early when I heard the report on FOX - maybe I was just hearing what I wanted to hear!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on October 22, 2009 at 7:31

I heard him mention off shore drilling, which I agree sure agree we need to do, but no mention of shale gas. But he is sure singing the praise of unproven carbon capture technology for coal!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on October 22, 2009 at 17:23

Please refer back to the blog by LP (NEW YORK TIMES) oct. 12...hey, says it all!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David on October 22, 2009 at 6:32

Keith,

I totally agree with Rosebud. The power of a letter to a politician cannot be underestimated, as long as it is to the point and, above all, civil... And I would assume the same would be true of ANGA officials.

Please let us know if there is anything you think the Shaler's can do to help.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Terry L. Antee on October 22, 2009 at 11:04

I was at a talk yesterday where the president of Questar spoke and he said the coal lobby had the fix in as far as natural gas was concerned and that they are not even looking at natural gas in congress as a way out of our energy problems. Peek oil conference in Denver had a good point we are running out of oil look at the price, if we had a lot of oil we would have a lower price.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on October 22, 2009 at 12:14

"they are not even looking at natural gas in congress as a way out of our energy problems"

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09295/1007432-84.stm

House caucus hopes to call attention to natural gas resources
Thursday, October 22, 2009
By Daniel Malloy, Post-Gazette Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- "We are swimming in natural gas," declared billionaire oil man T. Boone Pickens at a House of Representatives hearing yesterday.

And Pennsylvania is the deep end of the pool.

The Marcellus shale deposits constitute enormous potential for domestic fuel production, and Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair, formed a natural gas caucus in the House to call bipartisan attention to the issue.

At the caucus' first hearing yesterday -- borrowing a room from the Science and Technology Committee -- the keynote witness was Mr. Pickens, whose high-profile "Pickens Plan" advocates energy efficiency and domestic resource production as near-term goals.

"Natural gas is going to be the bridge to the next transportation fuel," Mr. Pickens said.

Mr. Pickens said the United States is home to the equivalent of 350 billion barrels of oil in domestic natural gas reserves, and much of that is in Pennsylvania. Penn State professor Robert Watson estimated that in 10 years, the Marcellus shale could generate 175,000 jobs per year and $13 billion in the commonwealth.

In order for that to happen, the gas advocates argued against strict regulation for the industry and for incentives to promote the fuel.

Ray Walker, vice president for Marcellus shale driller Range Resources, said federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing, a method of extracting natural gas, would be a mistake, because it is already regulated at the state level and, he claimed, is environmentally sound when done correctly. He also argued against a proposed change in tax accounting methods for the industry.

Mr. Pickens said government can promote natural gas by giving incentives for companies to switch their diesel trucks to run on the cleaner-burning fuel over time. Such a measure, he said, can cut America's oil imports in half.

"I went to the White House and they said, 'It can't be that simple,' " Mr. Pickens said. "But it is that simple."

Advancing legislation is not that simple.

Natural gas is not addressed in the Waxman-Markey climate change bill that narrowly passed the House in June, and Mr. Murphy introduced a bill in May pushing for more efficiency and domestic fuel production from natural gas and offshore oil rigs -- but it went nowhere.

He's still holding out hope that some provisions for natural gas can make it into a final compromise energy bill, as the Senate has yet to move very far on climate change.

Mr. Murphy was able to bring in Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., as co-chair of the natural gas caucus, which now boasts 45 members, Mr. Murphy said. More than a dozen congressmen from both parties attended the hearing -- including Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Centre.

"This is what I think the nation expects us to do," Mr. Murphy said after the hearing.

"There was no jockeying for position there. Everyone just wants to be on board. We have almost a 50-50 split of Republicans and Democrats, and we expect it's going to continue to grow.

"This is good news. You've got people who, if you didn't know what initial was after their name, you couldn't tell, in terms of what questions they were asking, the support that they were offering and the optimism that they feel for America. That's really something."

Daniel Malloy can be reached at dmalloy@post-gazette.com or 202-445-9980. Follow him on Twitter at PG_in_DC.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09295/1007432-84.stm#ixzz0Ui22CNKN

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Red Fuller on October 22, 2009 at 5:57

It amazes me how they will reword or change a subjects name so that they can get a bill through and whole time they don't think we can see what they are doing. Global Warming is now Climate Change. This so they can still tax compaines on the amount of CO2 they emit into the atmosphere. This way, with the new wording, it matters not whether the average temps go up or down. This way they can still blame CO2 emmisions for it.

• ▶ Reply