But ultimately we are not going to have the oil and gas, no matter what. What we are doing is guaranteeing a drop off the cliff when it does come, as well as despoiling the aquifers and much else that will be our sole resources at the end of the day.

We should do a lot more than just regulate fracking -- there needs to be a planned scale down of use of under ground resources, and a radical change in our way of life. And it doesn't even have to be that radical in the beginning because there is so much waste in our way of life.

Now I can't disagree with that. But we gotta find a realizable politica/economic/technological trajectory to get there. At this point in time even a seriously weakened climate bill will have a tough time. That is where the UNG comes in, it can alleviate the concerns about cost -at least for the first couple of decades. IMO the likelyhood that we will have affordable solar by then is quite high (at least 90%), so it is really about getting our society to begin the journey.

Where I differ from the majority of TOD readers, is that I think that energy won't be a major constraint longer term (say after 50 years), but we gotta get the world ,and especially its most recalcitrant part (the good ol USA) to agree to the first steps.

The underlying idea is that industry people know what they are doing, that the processes involved are harmless, the benefits exceed costs and the process can be repeated tens or hundreds of thousands of times without issue.

Burn me once, your fault. Burn me hundreds of times over the centuries, what does this mean?

- What is all this 'extra' gas to be used for? Do new regulations have bearing to any use?

- Regulations avoid the water issues.

- Regulators can't know what's underground:

An investigation by ProPublica, which visited Sublette County and six other contamination sites, found that water contamination in drilling areas around the country is far more prevalent than the EPA asserts. Our investigation also found that the 2004 EPA study was not as conclusive as it claimed to be. A close review shows that the body of the study contains damaging information that wasn't mentioned in the conclusion. In fact, the study foreshadowed many of the problems now being reported across the country.

The contamination in Sublette County is significant because it is the first to be documented by a federal agency, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. But more than 1,000 other cases of contamination have been documented by courts and state and local governments in Colorado, New Mexico, Alabama, Ohio and Pennsylvania. In one case, a house exploded after hydraulic fracturing created underground passageways and methane seeped into the residential water supply. In other cases, the contamination occurred not from actual drilling below ground, but on the surface, where accidental spills and leaky tanks, trucks and waste pits allowed benzene and other chemicals to leach into streams, springs and water wells

It is difficult to pinpoint the exact cause of each contamination, or measure its spread across the environment accurately, because the precise nature and concentrations of the chemicals used by industry are considered trade secrets. Not even the EPA knows exactly what's in the drilling fluids. And that, EPA scientists say, makes it impossible to vouch for the safety of the drilling process or precisely track its effects.

When will this worn- out dynamic change? Currently, the industries are adversarial to their own longer- term interests as well as those of their customers. The proven consequence is always business failure! When will the energy business -and other businesses - stop burning themselves over and over?

Unless the dynamic changes, the outcomes - production booms, devastating busts, environmental suits and large damages, eventually decline and failure of the resource - will not change. In its haste to develop new 'product' and market it, regardless of consequences, the gas industry is setting itself up for another destructive bust ... with the contamination of Wyoming/Pennsylvania/Texas/Louisiana ground water resources as a byproduct.

Once contaminated, ground water resources cannot be reclaimed.

Gail's previous post examined production over the next decade:

Where would all this gas go? Would it fuel the transition to a more sustainable energy future? Would it be used to produce more nitrogen fertilizer, or plastics and polymers; would it generate load- balancing electricity and keep more people warm until houses can be reconfigured to conserve? No, this increase would be earmarked to fuel automobiles running in circles, to keep suburbia on life support, to keep intact for a few years more the rotting financial infrastructure and the officials, oligarchs and criminals that depend on it.

Another 'last chance' to do something right for a change. A resource that can be properly managed rather than wasted.

I know how this story ends. Same way as all the other times. Regulations, Federal and otherwise will be crafted, inspectors will be paid off and business as usual will prevail.