Last class I mentioned an article I found in the Wall Street Journal about natural gas’s potential to influence global politics. Although methods of extraction have a negative effect on the environment, they could potentially add to U.S. influence and security. Do you think these factors should play a role in federal conservation policy? If so how much?
http://blogs.wsj.com/emergingeurope/2014/03/10/central-europe-turns-to-u-s-for-natural-gas/
How about we export the hydrofracking technology to them so they can develop their own shale gas resources? Then we don’t have to bear the environmental costs for them
see this map (note lots of gas under eastern Europe):
http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/global-shale-gas-basins-graphic-of-the-day/
I think there’s a delicate balance to be struck within this issue, though whether such a balance is actually feasible is another issue altogether. Gaining influence and security through the extraction of natural gas to be sold to other countries could definitely be a driver in American politics, yet as Professor Brandes mentions, doing so carries the implication that we will have to bear the environmental costs. Yet, would exporting technology to evade the environmental costs within the United States still allow us to gain some political ground? And would opening up that gate for them to foster their own environmental demise be conscionable?