Share This Page

Export OK wrong

| Saturday, Sept. 21, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Senior Liquid Natural Gas Technician Timothy Nelson stands on the deck of the offshore shipping port at Cove Point LNG Terminal in Lusby Maryland, Wednesday, Sept. 13, 2012. The liquid natural gas shipping terminal is owned by Dominion Resources offshore the western Chesapeake Bay, and receives imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) and also stores gas. Dominion wants to convert this import hub into an export hub.

Per the news story “Dominion gets fed OK to export natural gas to India, Japan” (Sept. 12 and TribLIVE.com), the U.S. Department of Energy (we don't get to elect those folks) has “approved a plan to export 770 million cubic feet a day of natural gas from Pennsylvania's Marcellus shale and other formations to sell to customers in India and Japan.”

Just to say that again, that's 770 million cubic feet per day that will be leaving us and going to them. That titanic amount will be going by way of a Chesapeake Bay facility beginning in the ballpark of 2017.

Wanna take a ride down there and wave goodbye to competitive advantage and lower energy costs?

I mean, c'mon, if we have enough natural gas to export, we're paying too much! And by a bunch!

As stated, we don't get to vote the people in the Department of Energy out on their butts, but we do get to vote senators and congressmen out.

How about we do that? I know that I will vote for a rat flea over the people in office right now.

William M. Stoddart

Brentwood

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 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.