I have seen many Gasland comments in the chain and responded to one but want more people to read my response. Also, agree with the person on penetration of renewables. It will take decades and breakthroughs to reduce costs. I think solar is the long term winter but it is an order of magnitude more expensive than gas. Someoned cited California as getting 31% of its energy from renewables. Without looking, I can tell you California generates most of its electricity with gas and uses alot of hydro. I suspect there is corn ethanol in that figure as well. At any rate, this is a fairly erudite discussion so I am surprised that any one is fooled by the muckraking in Gaslang. My comments on Gasland follow: People who believe what they see in Gasland must also believe in the tooth fairy. It is an advocacy piece, discredited by anyone who knows anything about energy, including the New York Times. Please, I do not work for the gas industry and I am a Democrat, not a Dick Cheney supporting republican. I do know that there are environmental impacts from all energy production, including concentrated solar and ethanol (both of which use far more water than natural gas production). If you had read the study from a world class research institution (which receives money from many industry and foundation sponsors but remains respected for its objectivity), you would know that it recommends that we require full disclosure of fracking fluid contents as well as regional water planning and disposal, two positions strongly opposed by the industry but in the public interest. On Gasland, you should know that much of focus on Colorado has nothing to do with shale gas, they don't produce shale gas in Colorado. Also, natural gas in tap water is a perennnial problem when you do any kind of shallow drilling to, for example, install geothermal heat pumps for your house where there have beein similar documented instances of gas in tap water. There is a lot of gas at shallow depths. Shale production on the other hand occurs at depths of 8-10,000 feet below the surface whereas aquifers are seldom deeper than 1000 feet. There are thousands of feet of impermeable rock between a frack and groundwater. there are clear surface and shallow aquifer issues but this is from produced water that comes up through the borehole, not from fracking. That's why you need regional surface water management, which most states that have a history of gas production already have. Read the report, think, don't respond to cheap shot advocacy pieces that are designed to appeal to people who know nothing.

People who believe what they see in Gasland must also believe in the tooth fairy. It is an advocacy piece, discredited by anyone who knows anything about energy, including the New York Times. Please, I do not work for the gas industry and I am a Democrat, not a Dick Cheney supporting republican. I do know that there are environmental impacts from all energy production, including concentrated solar and ethanol (both of which use far more water than natural gas production). If you had read the study from a world class research institution (which receives money from many industry and foundation sponsors but remains respected for its objectivity), you would know that it recommends that we require full disclosure of fracking fluid contents as well as regional water planning and disposal, two positions strongly opposed by the industry but in the public interest. On Gasland, you should know that much of focus on Colorado has nothing to do with shale gas, they don't produce shale gas in Colorado. Also, natural gas in tap water is a perennnial problem when you do any kind of shallow drilling to, for example, install geothermal heat pumps for your house where there have beein similar documented instances of gas in tap water. There is a lot of gas at shallow depths. Shale production on the other hand occurs at depths of 8-10,000 feet below the surface whereas aquifers are seldom deeper than 1000 feet. There are thousands of feet of impermeable rock between a frack and groundwater. there are clear surface and shallow aquifer issues but this is from produced water that comes up through the borehole, not from fracking. That's why you need regional surface water management, which most states that have a history of gas production already have. Read the report, think, don't respond to cheap shot advocacy pieces that are designed to appeal to people who know nothing.