Energy In Depth is a shill front for the Oil and Gas industry. Do you really trust that information?

What about...

1. Releasing of methane into the air that is done at every well site---methane is a known Greenhouse Gas--trapping 21x more heat than CO2.
2. All of the exhaust from the myriad of diesel generators that run day and night; powering the drilling rigs and compressor stations?
3. All of the exhaust from the thousands trucks each Gas company has on the road? Chesapeake energy has at least 5,000 on the road in PA alone.

Natural Gas might burn cleaner, but the extraction is just as dirty; if not more so. Read the Cornell Study.

There are so many things wrong with this industry that it's hard to write a concise response; but I will try.

• No oversight from SDWA/CWA--the Halliburton Loophole allows for the practice of Hydraulic Fracturing without the need for the oversight provided by these regulations.
• PA has cut the DEP budget to pre-1997 levels. They do not have the money (or enough inspectors) to insure the safe operation of the wells currently in operation.
• Forced Pooling---my neighbors have sold their mineral rights, so mine are sold by 'default', whether or not I want to sell them. Sure I get paid, but that's not the point--it's a direct violation of my Private Property rights.
• Huge pools of these 'frack fluids' (the exact chemical compositions are industry secrets--we know what they are, just not the mix or concentrations.) that are exposed to the elements, to significant rainfall amounts, heck to even joe squirrell or Bambi who happens along and can drink the fluids. Most of the chemicals are known carcinogens, endocrine disruptors or simply poisonous to life in general. ( visit TEDX [endocrinedisruption.com] for more information.
• Frack Fluids themselves--the 'recycling' process involves trucking vast quantities of them from well site to well site. Each well requires around 5-10 million gallons of fluids, mostly water drawn from local streams, rivers, lakes, etc. somewhere between 0-90% of the fluids stay in the ground, but the rest is being 'recycled' by trucking it to other well sites. .The chances of an accident are HUGE.
• How about just the habitat destruction caused by the creation of each well pad? These are vast wooded areas--and mountainous terrain. Soil Erosion is a very real possibility. Plus, many of the creeks and streams are considered 'high quality' or 'pristine' resources--used by fly fishermen from all over to enjoy the outdoors and catch wild trout.
• How about the very real noise pollution? Increased traffic on two-lane (and even one-lane) roads; with truckers who often do not care to provide right of way to locals traveling the same small roads who they meet head on.
• How about the social ills caused by the fact that rental units in the area have skyrocketing prices? People are being made homeless because they don't earn the amount of money that the wells pay, but their greedy landlords are increasing rents 200% or more; forcing them out of their rental units?

  The actual 'fracking' may or may not be the culprit---maybe it's the drilling process itself that releases toxins into the groundwater. The drilling process releases hundreds of elements--ranging from Radon to Barium and other radioactive material from underground where it has lay dormant for eons. The fluids themselves are poisonous--flaws in the cement casing around the drill holes can allow the fracking fluids to leach into the ground water. There is also no true 'guarantee' that the rock above the shale layer will hold the fluids (which are still under immense pressure) underground.

  Then, let's talk about the 'Marcellus Shale Commission', who's responsibility it was to produce a report for the Corbett Administration on 'recommendations' for the industry. This 'neutral' body was made up of 13 members of the Oil and Gas industry (coincidentally these 13 companies provided 1.4 million dollars to Corbett's campaign, as well as being the companies with the most violations for Marcellus Drilling), several administration and/or staffers who were appointed directly (or indirectly) after Corbett was elected, some local government staff from affected areas, and four environmental or health groups, with only one (Chesapeake Bay Foundation) that you could truly call an Environmental group. No Public Health representation, btw..

  While I would love to see a ban on Fracking (as has been done in other countries for various reasons), I'm sane enough to know the $$$ talks, everything else walks. We need safe practices, with sufficient oversight to ensure that accidents are minimal. We need trained emergency teams that can deal with well blowouts in hours; not waiting three days to get flown to Philly from Texas then driving 200+ miles at 45 miles an hour (because of their equipment) to deal with a well blowout of the type that occurred in April near Towanda. In short--we need a short term ban on new wells until the EPA report is done in 2013. In the meantime, we can educate and train the people in PA to do the work that is being transplanted in from out of state (and who don't pay state income taxes), so we can train our own emergency teams (and local responders) for well problems and accidents; and just so we can take a breather and figure out how best to protect the environment and be good stewards of the resources.

Not for Cable TV/Internet, at least in PA. The PUC has no authority over Comcast.

I think you hit upon the crux of the matter with this very sentence. Internet access to the home is a utility just as water, sewer, electricity, natural gas and should be subject to the same regulatory agencies they are. But, they are not. There was a time (before the breakup of AT&T) that the 'Baby Bells' were also subject to the regulatory authorities and could not raise prices.

I don't disagree with Free Markets----but there is still a need for regulation.

I'd like to raise my personal debt ceiling as well and just print my own money..

to finish the thought: Removing the Subsidies then (during the Clinton Administration) would not have damaged the economy to a dangerous level; and where would we have been today with regard to Alternative fuels?

Solar is propped up far less than the dirty fossil fuel industry. Oil and Natural Gas alone are set to reap more than $1.25 Billion from Texas alone this year in subsides and tax breaks. At the Federal level, they've reaped more than $50 Billion since 2002. In order to level the proverbial playing field, the subsidies to Solar and other alternative energy forms are necessary. But the Oil and Gas companies are reaping billions of dollars in profits and paying less tax than the average wage earner in terms of a percentage of income.

Without subsides, our $4 gallon gas would be more like what they pay in Europe--nearly double that and would cripple or kill the auto industry. Of course it may well spur development of better and more efficient (and more profitable) forms of Public Transportation, but most of that would take a decade or more to put in place. This, too, would kill our fragile economy. Had this all been done during the Clinton Administration, when we were seeing 5% Annual Growth, then removing the subsidies for Oil and Gas would

China still ranked near the top for committing Human Rights violations; and even though 'personal wealth' is increasing; the wages are still no where near what they should be for 'average' blue collar Chinese workers. Plus, the mine workers are mostly slaves---because they are mostly political prisoners; forced to endure working conditions that cause even early coal mining days in the US to pale by comparison. Oh yeah, China is a WONDERFUL country.

In the long term, even 3,500 books are more sustainable---and the inks these days are mostly soy-based; so the toxicity is reduced dramatically.

Sure, 1 kindle can hold 3,500 books---but how many people will upgrade that kindle every time the wind blows? so, we're not talking , we're talking one every 2-3 years, just like Cell/Smart Phones, laptops etc. And the batteries--they're highly toxic; from manufacturing, to use (how often do you have to plug in to recharge) to disposal.

And it is not just e-readers, but *all* of the electronic devices in use, the constant replacement cycle (btw--you are aware that one of the biggest rare-earth metals used---tanatalum--is dwindling in supply) and all of the related activity is causing serious and dramatic increases in the use of fossil fuels thereby driving up the amount of poisons in our air, water, and land. Plus, disposing of these things is typically (by AVERAGE users) a toss in the garbage----so they go in the landfill.

Long Term sustainability means humans need to start ditching these items of 'convenience' and go back to the basics for the most part. I read most of the books for pleasure from the Library. If they don't have it, I scour used bookstores first, then a new Bookstore last. This is a sustainable practice.

You're a rare one that can do your own car maintenance. eBooks aren't a convenience-think about everything that goes into making one; the oil used in the plastics; the rare-earth minerals mined by slave labor in china an other countries and manufactured overseas at very low standard of living wages. Now..a book-paper made from trees harvested from the paper mill forest (pine trees usually)..most likely in a US paper plant; where the wages are at least more fair than in China. I'm willing to concede that that ecological effects of both cancel each other out (and in fact, paper *might* be more ecologically damaging) --but the human rights issues do not. I'll buy a book; not just for Nostalgia, but to keep people working at fair wages.

This is sad indeed for those of us who don't need to buy every electronic gadget that hits the market. Those of us who we spend 8-12 hours every day on our computers for work and to relax, we want to turn pages and actually READ a book. The joy is in the experience---not just in the reading of the printed word. But, the e-book generation doesn't understand that.

However, it's my generation's fault. We've raised you to do more, multitask (though scientists say there is no such thing), have instant lunch and instant oatmeal; fast food, etc. You hire a landscaper to put in plants for you, instead of digging in the dirt yourself. You don't hunt, fish, camp or canoe but you will take that $100,000 boat (that you can't fix) out and go tubing. You can't fix your own car---hell, most of you can't even change a tire. I've stopped along the highway and helped plenty of you (male and female) under thirty change a tire. You were going to call a tow truck..wasteful

In short--we've raised you to depend on everyone else...so no wonder you don't want to turn your own pages in a book.

Perfect analogy--The Doctor is still the same--minus the baggage of the stuffy old Time Lords; but still with his age-old nemeses still around. Although, they did overuse the Daleks and Cybermen a bit..

and this is exactly why I stopped reading/collecting comics long ago. Asimov didn't reboot his universe, he tied it all together rather brilliantly. Heinlein..well, he used a deus ex machina to tie his stories together with all the other pulp universes in existence; not as brilliant, but a good yarn nonetheless.

But," we've got sagging sales what do we do?" " I know....let's 'Reboot the Universe'".. bah..

move along, nothing to see here..

...or yahoo or some other account--you need a place for registration emails for forums etc (unless you WANT to be on their mailing list) or to sign up for rebates, coupons, etc.

This way all of the spam goes to an evil account you visit on a infrequent basis and delete without reading.

you missed the obvious--methane collection from humans and cows..