Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Poll results show state resident see beyond propaganda

February 7, 2014

The people of Pennsylvania, by a large margin, like the presence of the natural gas industry in the state. They just are concerned that the drilling be done in an environmentally safe manner....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-14-14 1:10 PM

I think my big issue with this editorial is the author thinks that "kneejerk drilling-is-evil propaganda" is more prevalent than the millions of dollars spent daily by the fossil fuel industry to brainwash the populace. Why is it so easy to believe that millions of people worldwide that oppose fracking, that sponsor their efforts with their own meager funds and work through grassroots organizations and donate their time are crazy and that the gas companies that spend billions every year to misinform the masses are stand up people and are looking out for our best interests? It is lunacy!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-10-14 4:03 PM

Thank you, I watched the video on the lecture and yes I learned more about the industry and many of my questions were answered. More people need to watch this video instead of listening to the fabrications told by the industry.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-10-14 10:57 AM

For those who really want to know some facts, I would suggest they Google search for The Science of Shale Gas Ingraffea - which will take you to a comprehensive lecture by one of the national experts on fracking. This guy is not an environmental propagandist. He taught fracking to a generation of students and worked for the oil services giant Schlumberger. I doubt the writers of this editorial will actually consider Dr. Ingraffea's presentation, but it does not hurt to mention it to others who may read this editorial.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-08-14 2:10 PM

Nobody, not ony the people that work for the gas industry but anyone that signs a lease also signs away their right to speak out about the gas industry. PGE wanted us to sign a lease (first of all they got an earful when they came to our home about signing a lease) anyhow it was written in their sample lease that if we would sign and then our well would get contaminated, that we were not allowed to say anything to anyone about it. Right there told me just what the gas industry was like and we sent them packing. Its just too bad that everyone in the area wasn't just thinking about money and actually looked ito the fracking process...I don't think anyone would have signed a lease then, but money always has a sad way with people.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 7:19 PM

rick, pro gas people do not like it when you use "facts" especially when those "facts" come from someone within the industry, even though sometimes they will try to discredit what you said a "fact" is a "fact" and they know it.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 6:55 PM

Rick424: By the way, where are those pro gas people?

That's a very good question.

One thing I know, the people who are, or were, employed by the gas industry sign away their rights to speak during or after employment. If they speak, they will be sued for everything they own and will ever own.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 5:53 PM

Good post nobody. Looks like they care about the investors and not the local area. But, hey, there were some of us that knew this all along. Boomtown... So funny. By the way, where are those pro gas people?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 12:26 PM

By the way, don't expect this to be reported by the Sun-Gazette any time soon.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:50 AM

Thanks Nobody, "BOOMTOWN" LOL

Here's some more information. BP Wind Energy owns 16 wind farms in 9 states, and now they are getting out of the wind farm industry because they are attempting to recover from the BP oil spill that cost them $42 billion.

So I guess it does not matter when BP kills birds huh those nasty wind mills anyway.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:17 AM

There you have it folks, from the AP and other sources on January 31, 2014.

It did seems quieter this past six months, and it was. This is why.

Bye Bye Boom. Now, what to do with all those hotel rooms and lack of "impact Fee's?"

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:14 AM

"Van Beurden said his main focus will be on cutting spending elsewhere to focus on offshore natural gas projects.

"Our ambitious growth drive in recent years has yielded a step change in Shell's portfolio and options, with more growth to come," he said. "But at the same time we have lost some momentum in operational delivery, and we can sharpen up in a number of areas."

He also said North America is point of concern for the company. While oil prices remain high globally, "North America natural gas prices and associated crude markers remain low, and industry refining margins are under pressure."

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:12 AM

"Morton predicted further writedowns in the value of Shell's North American shales assets.

Shell purchased nearly $7 billion worth of shale assets in the U.S. on Voser's watch, only to write down their value by $2 billion last summer.

A more detailed look at the fourth quarter earnings figures showed net profit was $1.78 billion (130 billion euros), down 74 percent on the $6.73 billion reported a year earlier. The big fall was due to higher production costs, lower production, and worse refining margins. The swing was also exaggerated by one-off items during the two periods."

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:10 AM

"Incoming CEO Ben van Beurden said Royal Dutch Shell PLC will cut capital spending by around $10 billion this year and sell assets to become more efficient."

"Van Beurden took the helm from outgoing CEO Peter Voser on Jan. 1 and issued a profit warning a little more than two weeks later. Many analysts took that as a signal Van Beurden was ready to clear the decks and set a new course for the business."

"Future investments, he said Thursday, would be "dominated" by liquefied natural gas projects in places such as the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil.

Investors generally cheered the company's plans, and shares were up 2 percent at 26.27 euros in early Amsterdam trading.

Van Beurden's plan "Is pretty much what we believe the market wanted to hear," said Investec analyst Neill Morton in a note.

"After Shell's growth drive of recent years, it is 'changing emphasis' in 2014 'to improve our returns'." in the value of Shell's North American

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 11:07 AM

It doesn't matter. As you will read, Shell is severely cutting Marcellus gas production starting immediately, and for the next few years or until NG prices ride:

Read my next post please.

Goodbye Boomtown for now:

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 10:15 AM

sorry, should say "the".

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 10:07 AM

I wonder if those 580 registered voters would have voted they way they did if they knew about the Delaware Loophole and how the gas industry has been "ripping off" the state of Pa. in the tune of $500million/year since 2005 by avoiding paying state taxes.

That money could have been used to fix the roads and bridges instead of making the tax payers pay for it.

It seems to me that the gas industry really enjoys their "LOOPHOLES".

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 9:57 AM

MrShaman, what is the reason why they are not running the pipeline due west to British Columbia? My husband and myself were just discussing that the other day with some friends of ours.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 9:55 AM

more gas industy Cabot's commercial on tv telling us how concerned they are for our area...what a bunch of crap. They weren't too concerned when they ruined water wells for many people and then went to Court so they wouldn't have to provide the people with drinking water...that tells it all for the likes of the gas industry.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 9:06 AM

"Well Sham the pipeline would be safer than trucking the oil which is what happens now." - hopeforfuture


Then, run that pipeline British Columbia...rather-than down, thru the lower-48. That'll put the Canadians closer to their market, anyhow.

The Texas-refineries HAVE no "divine-right" to process all oil, in the Western their lobbyists/lawyers/bankers tell everyone.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 7:39 AM

Again the poll is available on line. It was a pretty generic poll. Only 46 percent favor selling liquor stores down from 53 percent from the last poll. 81 percent favor legalizing marijuana for medical use. I somehow feel this would not qualify as how people really feel about gas drilling.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 6:32 AM

Well Sham the pipeline would be safer than trucking the oil which is what happens now. Follow the money and they lead to why the pipeline is not being built.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-14 5:26 AM

"The same can be said, we might add, for the Keystone Pipeline proposed in other parts of the country."


I'm sure the refineries (in Texas)...and, their (eventual) China...appreciate your support.

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 22 of 22 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web