Kamala Harris does not need to back track on her fracking position.

[merrill]

Kamala Harris does not need to back track on her fracking position. Apparently it is a dying breed. So some think.

“Fracking is really expensive,” Jerolmack said. “It often costs more to drill and sustain the well than the gas that comes out of it [is worth], but money keeps being pumped into it because petroleum companies have to answer quarterly to shareholders and part of what boosts the value of the company is to have proven reserves.”

Even as Big Oil continues to tout…

See more



THENATION.COM
Kamala Harris Doesn’t Need to Backtrack on Fracking
In 2019, Harris said that there was “no question” that she would pursue a federal ban on fracking. In 2024, she’s taken a different—and unnecessary—stance.

 

[toobfreak]

Kamala Harris does not need to back track on her fracking position. Apparently it is a dying breed.

Better check again.
Last I heard, fracking was now the major means of supply crude to the American market.

 

[1srelluc]

I wonder how much of that expense is due to unneeded .gov regulation?

 

[surada]

Better check again.
Last I heard, fracking was now the major means of supply crude to the American market.

Most US wells produce fewer than 50 barrels a day. It's not economically sound to frack those wells.

 

[surada]

I wonder how much of that expense is due to unneeded .gov regulation?

We're not overly regulated in production regulations. The US rates just behind Venezuela in production pollution. Saudi Aramco sets the gold standard with the least production pollution.