FILTER BY SCHOLARAll Scholars
- The following scholars have published material in this field
FILTER BY RELEVANCEMost Recent
FILTER BY CONTENT TYPEAll Content Types
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the canal’s opening, and you would be forgiven if you were unaware that billions of dollars in U.S. business is riding on its expansion.
Is Senate hopeful Rep. Ed Markey (D-Ma) abandoning key support for greenhouse gas reductions as political payback to Dow? Is he anti-shale gas regardless of its economic and environmental benefits?
Displaying little of the contextualized reporting that the paper, at its best, is renowned for, the Times has run numerous articles in its “Drilling Down” series and elsewhere, simplistically framing shale gas extraction as an environmental disaster-in-progress.
If there is one conclusion that should be drawn from the boom in U.S. natural gas production, it is that supplies are so abundant that it makes economic sense to export some of our gas to countries overseas.
New York Times natural-gas reporter Ian Urbina last week launched another salvo in his crusade against the shale-gas industry, and demonstrated once more why there is little trust of him at USDA.
There are new twists to in the ever-entertaining faux debate over the dangers of shale gas. The New York Times, which turned obscure Cornell University marine ecologist Robert Howarth into an anti-fracking rock star in its questionable spring series on shale gas, and got hammered for it by its own public editor—I‘ll take some of the credit—is finally getting on the science bandwagon.
Please join AEI and the Institute for Energy Research for a lively discussion of America’s history of gas regulation and thoughts about our natural gas future.
Join us for a lively debate about who is hurting the conservative cause and who is helping it.