Over the past several months, letters on this page from opponents of the BLM's plan to lease government-owned land in the North Fork for oil and gas development have appeared but none whatsoever from those who favor such leasing. The reasons given for opposing leasing are typically that it will contaminate drinking water sources, is at odds with "our way of life," will discourage tourism and reduce real estate values, or some combination thereof.
Only the first reason here is of any particular consequence, and is invariably a facetious argument. Just as in the ongoing Keystone Pipeline squabble, these objections have nothing to do with water quality or anticipated environmental hazards. Instead, they have only to do with liberals intent on completely doing away with fossil fuel production everywhere. As an associate of WSERC once related to me (I don't recall the person's name), its goal is to eliminate coal production locally within approximately 10 or 15 years — the timeframe may have been closer to 10. With respect to water quality, as the evidence shows, there have been over a million oil and gas wells drilled and fracked since fracking was first performed in the 1940s without a single proven instance of drinking water contamination. What else do you need to know?
Here is something else that people should be aware of — an article by Pete DuPont, former governor of the state of Delaware, published in the June 29, 2013, Wall Street Journal. The title is "O'Bama's Anti-Energy Agenda," subtitled "He threatens to cut off the fuel the economy needs." A portion of the article reads as follows: "... talk in recent decades about energy shortages will again be proved wrong, as all such Malthusian predictions have. Such defeatism misses the mark because it fails to account for the incredible impact of human ingenuity and man's unceasing search for something better. In short we can see an incredibly bright energy future on the horizon. Unless, that is, overbearing government bureaucrats and misguided environmental interest groups get in the way. Unfortunately, there is a real chance of that happening. Energy producers are faced with the delay and costs from government's slowness in granting permits and it proclivity for issuing new regulations by environmental group court challenges, and by the left's almost surreal ability to reject any energy source that becomes viable — even windmills in their backyards. Well-intentioned subsidies for renewables reduce the chance for success, since producers learn to live off the subsidies and have less incentive to produce feasibly technology. Businesses and consumers feel the impact as energy costs increase."
Seems like this pretty well sums up the energy situation and definitely should encourage development of BLM land oil and gas-wise.