Drilling

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) applauds the decision by the Obama Administration to temporary halt the approval of new permits for offshore drilling until the investigation of the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico is complete. However, we think the moratorium on drilling off the Mid-Atlantic region should be permanent. For four decades, CBF has taken an absolute uncompromising stand against any addition or expansion of the oil and gas industry on the Chesapeake Bay. While two huge battles against oil refineries in the '70s were met with extreme criticism, supporters in both cases later agreed that oil refineries in their particular locations (Baltimore and Hampton Roads)

To letter writer Chuck Campbell, I say: Good luck with increasing U.S. oil production, which peaked in the 1970s and led to an ever increasing fraction of imported oil to fuel your SUV ("Increased domestic oil production is crucial for the United States," April 23). If you want to frustrate OPEC, bicycle to work, walk to the store, eat locally produced food and stop buying plastics. You might also bother to read the peak oil page on Wikipedia. Theodore Houk

I thought I had heard all of the reasons for oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) until I read Robert H. Nelson's commentary "A missed opportunity on energy" (Feb. 17). After initially making an economic argument, then a quasi-religious argument, Mr. Nelson advanced his rationale for disqualifying ANWR as a protected natural resource. ANWR is not worthy of preservation because A) it has changed geologically and biologically from its original character, and B)

Last year, when Gov.Martin O'Malley signed an executive order establishing a commission to study the impact of drilling for natural gas in Western Maryland's Marcellus Shale deposit, he promised the state would be guided by "scientific knowledge. " Yet gathering that much-needed information costs money, something the state doesn't have at the moment. That lack of funds will likely mean many months of delay for the fact-finding efforts of the governor's advisory commission. The alternative - to simply not do a thorough study of such issues as the potential economic effects of fracking, the disposal of toxic waste water, and the impact on local ground water - would be wholly unacceptable.

Maryland's senators and environmental activists are vowing to oppose President Barack Obama's move to expand oil and gas exploration off the state's Atlantic coast, warning that it could hurt tourism in Ocean City, threaten fish and wildlife along relatively unspoiled Assateague Island and foul the Chesapeake Bay. Drilling off the Mid-Atlantic coast would not begin for years, if ever, and was part of a broader energy strategy the president outlined...

There is no reason that the U.S. shouldn't be energy independent in 10 years. Yes, we would have to drill some more, but as Peter Morici points out ("Obama's bad bet," April 3), we would manage the environmental issues much better than others. The geopolitical and economic upside would be enormous. Solar (I do have a solar-powered water heater) and wind can be good supplements, but we have to wean ourselves from being dependent on Middle East and Latin American countries. Lyle Rescott, Marriottsville

Let me see if I got this right. Robert Nelson is arguing for opening up ANWR because the oil companies will make lots of money, with the citizens of Alaska and the federal government getting a slice of this poisoned pie as well. Of course, the financial hit that we will all suffer due to the economic, environmental and human consequences of adding more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and compounding our greenhouse gas crisis is not computed in Mr. Nelson's neat arithmetic of profits.

A study of how or whether to allow a controversial drilling method for extracting natural gas in Western Maryland cannot be finished without funding, state officials told lawmakers Tuesday. O'Malley administration officials joined environmentalists in supporting a bill that would pay for their year-old study of hydraulic fracturing by levying a fee on the estimated 150,000 acres leased for gas exploration in Garrett and Allegany counties. Business and oil industry representatives opposed the fee, arguing that it could dampen prospects for drilling to boost the economically depressed region.

First, there was Katrina, then Haiti, and now the oil spill. The world has been hit with many disasters; this being a huge man-made mistake, and it could have been prevented. In many ways, I believe the spill is the fault of BP. They should have better prepared themselves for this. Yet again, I also believe this issue is in the hands of President Barack Obama. Since it has happened under his watch, it should partially be his responsibility to clean this mess up. The ban on expanding offshore drilling was the right policy.

The thought of exploring for oil and gas near Chesapeake Bay leaves us uncomfortable. Bay marine life is too fragile to withstand damage caused by an accidental oil spill. That could erase the many gains made to restore the bay to good health and devastate aquatic life.Yet Texaco seeks a relaxation of a two-year moratorium on drilling along Virginia's Chesapeake shores. Texaco hopes to convince Virginia officials that more domestic oil-producing sources are necessary to reduce our dependency on oil produced in the Middle East.

As part of Maryland Severe Storms Awareness Week, a statewide tornado drill is taking place Wednesday at 9:45 a.m . The alert will be issued over NOAA weather radios at that time, with an all-clear message to follow at 10 a.m. All Maryland schools are being encouraged to participate, and businesses, families and individuals can develop their own tornado plans and join in, too. Tornado plans should involve heading to the lowest small...

There is no reason that the U.S. shouldn't be energy independent in 10 years. Yes, we would have to drill some more, but as Peter Morici points out ("Obama's bad bet," April 3), we would manage the environmental issues much better than others. The geopolitical and economic upside would be enormous. Solar (I do have a solar-powered water heater) and wind can be good supplements, but we have to wean ourselves from being dependent on Middle East and Latin American countries. Lyle Rescott, Marriottsville

With "fracking" once again in the news, Maryland Public Television is airing a timely examination of the controversy around the controversial method for extracting natural gas. At 9:30 p.m. on Wednesday (3/21), MPT broadcasts " Fracking: Weighing the Risks ," looking at the pros and cons of drilling for gas in Marcellus shale deposits in Appalachia.  The 40-minute documentary portrays the divisions within western Maryland, where some farmers yearn for royalties from gas wells to help them stay on the land while others fear that drilling could destroy their water supply, their property and their health.

Gov.Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s column on American energy independence is flawed in several respects ("Road to energy independence goes through ANWR and Keystone," March 11). He argues we need to drill for more oil, construct a distribution pipeline and open up more offshore wells. But the fact is that today the U.S. is awash in crude oil, in greater quantities than ever in our history. The problem isn't a shortage of crude oil but our limited capacity to refine it into gasoline, which has led to shortages and high prices.

Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.thinks the "Road to energy independence goes through ANWR, Keystone" (March 11). I disagree. America has 2 percent of the world's oil reserves, and we use 20 percent of the worlds oil. So we could pump as fast as possible and what would we achieve? We would have some very happy politicians and gas customers for a few years. Once our oil was gone, the Middle East and Venezuela and Nigeria would have us in a real neckhold! And of course our children would be going off to war, losing their arms, legs and lives so we can have "cheap" oil. I don't call that cheap oil. To me having my grandsons come home damaged or not at all, just so that I can continue to drive my oversized SUV or pickup, is not cheap oil. The politicians who would give us $2.50 a gallon oil for a short time would be retired and prospering with their huge pensions, their big bribes from their lobbyist friends and the other multi-million dollar retirement packages that all politicians seem to acquire.

A study of how or whether to allow a controversial drilling method for extracting natural gas in Western Maryland cannot be finished without funding, state officials told lawmakers Tuesday. O'Malley administration officials joined environmentalists in supporting a bill that would pay for their year-old study of hydraulic fracturing by levying a fee on the estimated 150,000 acres leased for gas exploration in Garrett and Allegany counties. Business and oil industry representatives opposed the fee, arguing that it could dampen prospects for drilling to boost the economically depressed region.

Robert H. Nelson's "drill-baby-drill" inspired commentary piece ("ANWR: Obama's missed opportunity on energy," Feb. 17) claiming that the environmental movement views the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) as the Garden of Eden would be laughable if it weren't so tragically misguided. This country does not have a petroleum supply problem -- it has a petroleum demand problem. By increasing supply and surpressing prices, increased offshore and ANWR oil production would only lead to further increases in demand, ensuring that US dollars will continue to flow to oil-rich dictatorships and their terrorist clients.

Gov.Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s column on American energy independence is flawed in several respects ("Road to energy independence goes through ANWR and Keystone," March 11). He argues we need to drill for more oil, construct a distribution pipeline and open up more offshore wells. But the fact is that today the U.S. is awash in crude oil, in greater quantities than ever in our history. The problem isn't a shortage of crude oil but our limited capacity to refine it into gasoline, which has led to shortages and high prices.

President Obama's State of the Union speech to Congress last night focused largely on jobs, taxes and income inequality, but it had plenty of red meat in it for those concerned about energy and the environment. He vowed to continue to push for "clean energy" while touting the economic potential of shale gas and defending environmental regulations.  He defended government incentives for developing solar, wind and high-tech battery industries, but called for an end to longstanding subsidies for the oil and gas industry.  "It's time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that rarely has been more profitable and double down on a clean energy industry that never has been more promising," he said.  But he renewed his call for an "all-out, all-of-the-above strategy" to develop every available source of American energy, and said he was directing his administration to open up more than 75 percent of potential offshore oil and gas resources for drilling.

I am glad to see the Sunpaper via Tim Wheeler has again cast some light on the gas/Marcellus shale exploration and land leasing problems in the western part of our state ("Second thoughts on gas leasing," Jan. 1). It should come as no surprise to us that the drilling operators and contractors refuse to reveal the down side of their operations or the shortcomings of their property leases; one has only to look at our neighbors to the north and what has happened to their water supplies, their roads and streams.