I think the problem is they ask the question the wrong way. it should be, would you be willing to eliminate fossil fuels if your energy costs for everything rose 50% or more to pay for renewables? my take is that will change a lot of views, young and old, democrat and republican
The “hydraulic fracturing” as an energy form is a puzzle. How does that work? How does hydraulic fracturing produce energy? The inclusion underscores the failure of science education as well as a laziness or equal ignorance by the pollsters.
In that sense, neither is offshore drilling an energy source. Fracking increases the available supply of an energy source. Understood that way it seems like a sensible option to include.
Fracking is a process that improves the flow of oil and/or natural gas. It’s been around for more than 50 years. It can only be used after the well has already been drilled and completed. Not all wells are candidates for fracking.
I think the problem is they ask the question the wrong way. it should be, would you be willing to eliminate fossil fuels if your energy costs for everything rose 50% or more to pay for renewables? my take is that will change a lot of views, young and old, democrat and republican
Oh yeah! When consumers have the option to opt in or not, real willingness to pay is in single-digit dollars, let alone 50% or more.
The “hydraulic fracturing” as an energy form is a puzzle. How does that work? How does hydraulic fracturing produce energy? The inclusion underscores the failure of science education as well as a laziness or equal ignorance by the pollsters.
In that sense, neither is offshore drilling an energy source. Fracking increases the available supply of an energy source. Understood that way it seems like a sensible option to include.
Fracking is a process that improves the flow of oil and/or natural gas. It’s been around for more than 50 years. It can only be used after the well has already been drilled and completed. Not all wells are candidates for fracking.