Letters: Fracking and the Delaware River Basin, Biden's carbon order
Projects' environmental impacts ought to be examined
Is it a coincidence that three scenarios which would ruin the rural nature of our watershed are pending? Are the Delaware Water Gap Rockfall Mitigation Project, River Pointe development and the Delaware River Basin Commission’s Draft Fracking Regulations connected?
Is the public aware that current DRBC regulations allow for fracking wastewater to be transported on the Delaware River, and/or for pipeline construction to carry same? Why did the DRBC ban fracking within our watershed but not frack wastewater? Why did they stop short of enacting a full frack ban?
Will water from the Delaware River be exported to western Pennsylvania to supplement wells that contain less than the 10 to 20 million gallons needed for fracking?
Wouldn’t a truck fleet carrying wastewater into our area and/or exporting Delaware River water need to maneuver the s-curve through the Gap? Is this why the Rockfall Mitigation Project, with multi-lane expansion, was initiated?
What are the ethical and ecological ramifications of removing the top of Mount Tammany? Will due consideration be accorded the rights of nature before this debacle occurs?
Were the Susquehanna to Roseland Power Line and the Warren County/Lehigh Valley mega warehouses precursors for plans to store toxic frack wastewater here? Why is a 1 million square foot warehouse necessary in Mount Bethel?
Whether or not these three operations are related, what will be their collective impact upon the ecological integrity of this region? Where is the local, state and federal leadership to protect the Delaware Water Gap and the drinking water of four states before it is too late?
Anna Maria Caldara, Bangor
Biden’s carbon-neutral order is not enough
On Dec. 8th, the Associated Press reported that President Joe Biden signed an executive order that directs the federal government to be "carbon-neutral by 2050." After the less-than-adequate pledges coming out of COP26 in Glasgow in November, the executive order seems like good news.
Here’s the problem. Presidential executive orders can be easily reversed by the next administration; and with inflation, Ukraine, and drastic upticks in COVID infections consuming the headlines these days, a new administration seems likely in 2024. And so it’s probable that the executive order will quickly disappear.
In early November, Bloomberg Green reported that "(t)he White House and at least 49 senators support a proposal to impose an almost $20 per-ton fee on carbon." And that mechanism must be included in the Build Back Better legislation now being debated in the Senate. Implemented legislation is not so easily undone.
Forty-nine votes is one shy of what is needed to pass a "carbon fee." I’m sure you can guess who holds the 50th vote.
Regulations and trees and carbon capture and wishful thinking are not enough to solve the climate emergency. And while Joe Manchin might not be your senator, I urge you to contact his office (202-224-3954) to let him know that you support "putting a price on carbon" as the most important step we can take to keep the planet livable for our children and grandchildren.
Bruce Cooper, group leader of the Slippery Rock chapter of Citizens’ Climate Lobby