Comments for Natural gas getting fired up at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments http://www.theind.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:36:37 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/home/5133#comment-3857 I agree with JP's assessment. While the art of the political process is quite an interesting one to watch from afar, and even more interesting to see up close in a Congress member's conference room, or at a townhall forum, that does not necessarily imply that the only outcome will be the outcome one person expects to occur, filled with name calling and petty behavior. I fully expect that even with the President's campaign statements in favor of so-called "Clean" coal, that such statements on other issues have not shown that he is completely inflexible when the time for policy making comes around, (as evidenced by his willingness to pick up John McCain's position for taxing health insurance benefits, which were initially given exemption in the early 20th century as a perk benefit, because employers in large industrial manufacturing businesses were subject to a wage freeze at the time.) With that flexibility in mind, I expect, at the end of the day that Methane production will be enhanced in the national energy portfolio, along with significant incentives for efficiency and conservation, and solar, wind, geothermal and other alternative developments. I expect agricultural biofuels to be of a lesser importance than we thought several years ago, while Algae based fuels will see expanded research, as they are expected to be the greatest area of liquid fuel from living sources available in the future. One has to keep in mind, that all our gains in production of other sources of energy are going to be wiped out if we each personally keep consuming more and more every year (when the economy fully recovers) and all of our gains are going to be wiped out if this country does continue to grow to 400 million persons living as the 300 million of us have been. Methane is a valuable resource, let's hope we continue to use it in a wise manner. Burning it directly where it is needed usually, in a thermodynamic sense, is more efficient than buring it in a power plant, to send electricity down a line, where someone might happen to cook or heat with it. Buring methane in a car directly, rather than plugging that car into the grid, powered by CH4 burnt at a central plant, would be more efficient. Prioritizing for example, solar water heating 1st, natural gas water heating 2nd, electrical grid powered water heating 3rd, would then be an example of where policy should follow the science and guide our decision making process as a society. Speaking on Coal for a moment, which is why I mention the President's flexibility on policy, vs. electoral politicking, is an example of a fuel source which is horribly polluting. The by-products from scrubbing coal smoke stacks are not regulated now as a toxic waste, which they are. The open pit mining of coal is a hazard to the communities, and wildlife (including the migratory birds) where it is performed, particularly when the open pit mine, measuring in the hundreds to thousands of acres, fills in with water after the active operating life of the mine is concluded. Picture something the size of Lake Chicot or larger, full of heavy metals laden water, filthing your drinking water? Does that help? So let's drill the gas for now, but keep a mind towards where this is all leading us. Also, let's keep a mind to how long this is going to drive revenue to the State of Louisiana and federal governments....when does it run out? What is our back up plan? Let's do as Mark Zappi called for, and develop our alternatives as well. If we don't now, it's akin to developing a hurricane evacuation plan the night before the storm hits. - Jason D Faulk Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:58:21 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/5133#comment-3825 Even though the bill would give incentives for natural gas fired electricity and is expected to increase demand for natural gas, some would rather buy into partisan talking points. This is the cognitive dissonance that Fox News "conservatives" embrace. Reducing a complex issue into empty cliches like "Obama thinks oil and gas is evil" doesn't serve anyone's interest except partisan hacks. If the information in this article is correct, then I look forward to a boon for the Louisiana economy as natural gas makes up a huge portion of our production. - JP Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:26:24 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/5133#comment-3822 Sorry, the Obama Administration won't go for this promotion of natural gas, even though it burns clean and would help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Why? Because with increased use of natural gas, the "evil" oil & gas industry would benefit, especially the domestic independents here who hedge most of their success on natural gas exploration and production. This is not the industry that the Obama Administration wants to see profit. - Cajunrunner Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:16:24 +0100