Natural gas is mainly used as a fuel to heat buildings, and to make synthetic fertilizer. In recent years, when it was cheaper, it was also used to fuel an expansion of electric power plants and is useful for adding capacity to the grid on short notice. We can figure out other sources of making electricity, so it isn't about burning coal if not natural gas. We aren't locked into that choice. However, how are we going to heat the homes in NYC and elsewhere? How are we going to supply agribusiness with its cheap nitrogen fertilizer? Those questions need to be answered in order to shift market demand for natural gas. There are many entrepreneurs and institutions looking to answer those questions, but I don't know of a cheap or quick way out of here.
I'm not sure that making another "national sacrifice zone" out of the Southern Tier solves the problem of people taking responsibility for their consumption. We might learn our lesson locally, but that doesn't mean the buyers of the natural gas are anywhere near the destruction. Across the country, people have shrugged off mountain top removal -- it leaves their consciousness quickly because so many don't understand what they could be doing to reduce their reliance on coal. So many economic and psychological issues to address! Andrejs -- I would not assume that regulations and controls in Central New York result in a less damaging footprint for fossil fuel extraction. Just look at Appalachia and the Rocky Mountains for your answer about how well communities are protected in the US. Gay On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Andrejs Ozolins <[email protected]>wrote: > A part of Andy's question remains: Which creates more environmental > destruction, fuel obtained by current means in various faraway places or > fuel obtained in our back yard by the proposed means. Granted it all goes > through the same convoluted chain of processing and distribution; still, the > extraction processes at origin might be very different. It seems possible > that the vigilance and regulation applied in Central New York would keep the > destructiveness of the extraction process significantly less harmful to the > earth (as a whole) than the process used in the Middle East or elsewhere. > Any facts pertaining to this? > > Andrejs > > Hilary Lambert wrote: > >> Andy, >> To answer your specific question: >> Gas that is being extracted here or will be extracted here via >> hydrofracking >> is not being 'used locally.' It goes into small feeder pipes that go to >> larger and then larger ones, and becomes part of the global supply, sold >> and >> shipped to whoever buys it wherever. It is not a 'local' resource like >> home-grown vegetables. >> > > _______________________________________________ > For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, > please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ > > RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: > [email protected] > http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins > Questions about the list? ask > [email protected] > free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Gay Nicholson, Ph.D. President Sustainable Tompkins 109 S. Albany St. Ithaca, NY 14850 www.sustainabletompkins.org 607-533-7312 (home office) 607-220-8991 (cell) 607-216-1552 (ST office) 607-216-1553 (ST fax) [email protected] _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins Questions about the list? ask [email protected] free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
