Now that the Blythe Solar Power Project is no more, I wonder what this will mean moving forward. This country should have short term energy goals and long term energy goals. Over the long haul, let's plan for renewable energy to lead the way, but right now, especially if Mitt Romney were to be elected president, we need a short term solution. And that solution is shale.
Both sides of the political fence need to sit down together and work this out. Regulate the industry more than it is now. Assure the American people that safety comes first. We don't want to see a gallon of water exploding over a lit match (as 60 Minutes recently demonstrated in its report on shale). Then, once the investigations are over and assurances are made and the technology improves, plunge right in.
Shale isn't going away. Let's keep it around for the next few years (at least) while we nurture solar energy and other alternatives on the side. What a major step in the direction of energy independence! I would invest in companies that are investing in shale; I believe the money to be made there will grow exponentially. (Of course, past performance does not guarantee future performance. The views expressed above are my opinions and my opinions alone.)
I remember the storm of hail during my time at Yale, and I also ate a lot of kale while I heard the exciting tale. Though out of ale and looking a little pale, I will never forget the thread about Shale.
I'm guessing... college sophomore? Way too idealistic to be in the work force.
Shale isn't going away. Neither is the corrupt government running our country. Big oil money > political will. Solar is not economically viable. I shorted some green tech companies the government invested in (all your taxpayer dollars are belong to me). I hope the Obama administration invests in shale next, that might be very profitable for me.
This has been an uplifting Easter holiday message.
What Ravenous said. I'm researching hydraulic fracturing for my senior Capstone paper and I am certain that this technology is here to stay. Look at recent reports of natural gas supply (http://ir.eia.gov/ngs/ngs.html) and you can see what fracking and shale gas has done to production.
We have over 50% more natural gas available for use than we did only a year ago, and you want us to give that up? Good luck with that, this technology generates billions of dollars in royalties and taxes and has legislators drooling over the income. You want us to regulate it at the federal level, but Congress already removed that regulation through the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/pdf/PLAW-109publ58.pdf), and rejected a 2009 bill to re-regulate it federally (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/s1215). This happened because fracturing is already regulated, I argue regulated sufficiently, by the states instead of by states because some things are best handled locally. Different frack jobs in different states, with different geological formations and consequently different chemicals, do not need to be subject to federal laws because they place unnecessary burdens on businesses. Tell me what regulations you want to impose on these companies, and I can find countless instances of states that already enforce them.
Regarding your statement of exploding tapwater.. yes that's terrible, but there are extreme cases of everything. Look at Colorado's response to Josh Fox's film Gasland, and you can see that Fox obviously omitted some information in order to strengthen his case (http://cogcc.state.co.us/library/GASLAND%20DOC.pdf). I'm tired of people watching a documentary and considering themselves experts.
And your proposed solution is...SOLAR?!?! If solar was viable, then Solar Trust, Solar Millennium AG, Solyndra, Bright Source, LSP Energy, Energy Conversion Devices, SunPower, UniSolar, Evergreen Solar, Ener1 and others would not have needed federal dollars to drag along until failure. And on top of it all, I had coffee with an alumni yesterday who worked in a company heavily invested in solar and whose office was closed because it was not profitable. He now works in... you guessed it... natural gas.
My proposed solution is not solar...at least not today. I also didn't watch a documentary and then consider myself an expert. All I was trying to say is that people have health and environmental concerns about shale; those concerns should be researched and addressed. If additional regulation is standing in the way of progress, then I would support additional regulation as a compromise to move on. If new regulation is not needed, I'm fine with that too. I don't want us "to give up on natural gas." Far from it. I'm EXCITED about shale and natural gas production. When or if solar energy becomes a viable alternative, I'll be excited about that too. Won't you?
My proposed solution is not solar...at least not today. I also didn't watch a documentary and then consider myself an expert. All I was trying to say is that people have health and environmental concerns about shale; those concerns should be researched and addressed. If additional regulation is standing in the way of progress, then I would support additional regulation as a compromise to move on. If new regulation is not needed, I'm fine with that too. I don't want us "to give up on natural gas." Far from it. I'm EXCITED about shale and natural gas production. When or if solar energy becomes a viable alternative, I'll be excited about that too. Won't you?
This is what the Financial Times had to say about shale in yesterday's edition:
My initial response was to be excited about shale-- and I still am. But who knows what the thinking will be five years from now? My hope (and my belief) is that we will be even more optimistic than we are now.
Wow.. I got a little butthurt about this topic. You see, my thought was that you wanted a "solution" to shale, as in an alternative.
And anyways, I've concluded my research on the topic and I'm fairly sure that the industry does need more regulation. At the time of my last post, I was looking to work in nat gas, and was networking with alumni basically spewing components of the post above to them with hopes that they'd help me catch a break. But now that I found a job in an industry that doesn't cause cognitive dissonance, I can look back and see that I was being an asshole.
Really though, I wouldn't call the public opinion towards shale gas "optimistic" at all. I argue that it s actually the contrary. With the number of news reports and advocacy sites out there, I'd say they're more frightened of this energy source.
Repudiandae dicta quis laborum eos. Quia et quasi eius possimus harum. Atque quo molestias pariatur dolor vero et.
Et recusandae voluptatum neque incidunt dolorem. Neque veritatis sit quis omnis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...