Marvelous Marcellus: Boom & boon
Marcellus shale drilling in Pennsylvania is exceeding advocates' expectations for economic and energy benefits — and doing so safely, refuting environmental extremists' alarmism.
State and federal data show shale drilling boosting the Pittsburgh region's energy-sector jobs by more than a third since 2005, to 46,644 in 2012. America's seventh-largest natural gas producer in 2011, Pennsylvania now rivals Alaska and Louisiana for second place behind Texas, producing 1.4 trillion cubic feet in the first half of 2013, up 58 percent from the same year-ago period and the most since semiannual state reports began in 2010.
Even with abundant supply lowering prices to what the U.S. Energy Information Administration says are a third of 2008 levels, the shale gas boom — enabled by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking — remains a major boon. As James Panero writes in City Journal, it's expected to yield 1 million manufacturing jobs by 2025, boost GDP by 0.5 percent and save households an average of $900 annually on utility bills.
Shale gas also helped cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 5.3 percent from 2011 to 2012. And Mr. Panero says fracking opponents' claims about methane leaks and groundwater contamination have been debunked. He even finds strong industry support in Dimock, Pa., where “Gasland” so dishonestly portrayed fracking.
Safe, responsible shale gas extraction is more than living up to its promise of a brighter future for Pennsylvania and for America.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.