BCT Editorial – 9/23/10

As you read these editorials, keep in mind the Times is a believer in the religion of manmade global warming and - though it won’t admit it in so many words - opposes exploration for and production of natural gas in the Marcellus shale formation.  As a reminder, in “Digging deep (9/14/08),” the Times appeared to support producing Marcellus gas.  In my critique of “Digging deep,” I noted the Times position appeared to be inconsistent with previous editorials with respect to “carbon-based fuels.”  I wrote, “Perhaps the Times will recognize the inconsistency and publish an editorial opposing drilling for the natural gas unless all the carbon can be extracted and sequestered underground.”  It took two months, but I was right, and wrong.  The Times reversed its support of drilling for natural gas, but came up with a different reason than I predicted.

The above notwithstanding, it appears the Times is willing to “hold its nose” regarding Marcellus gas production as long as it results in more taxes to increase government spending.   You’ll recall in “No more Centralias” the Times referred to potential taxes as “a new revenue stream, something that is getting harder to find (and to implement politically).”  Why not use potential gas extraction taxes to cut other taxes?  You may recall the Times opposed/opposes using new revenue from gambling taxes to cut property taxes.  Instead, the Times wants to use any new tax to increase already excessive spending.

For reference, Texas taxes natural gas production at 7.5% of market value plus a regulatory fee of $0.000667 per thousand cubic feet, with variances for natural gas that’s expensive to produce.  I’m not an expert, but a lower tax rate than Texas and some other states may be appropriate due to the higher costs of producing from formations like the Marcellus shale.  Keep in mind, though, natural gas consumers (you and I) will ultimately pay any severance taxes via our gas bills.  Funny how the editorial doesn’t remind us of that fact, isn’t it?

As I’ve written before, companies harvesting our natural resources must do so in a responsible manner and must have the financial and technological wherewithal to handle worst-case scenarios and post-production cleanup.  It is government’s responsibility to enforce these rules and to make sure everyone involved [businesses and government (local, state, federal)] is prepared (via drills, for example) to execute disaster plans.

This is at least the third editorial since 2006 mentioning “the ‘Book of Bokonon,’ a made-up religion in Kurt Vonnegut’s ‘Cat's Cradle.’”  Yet the Times fails to concede manmade global warming is a “made-up religion.”