Opinion Open Letters A switch to natural gas would help public tra...
| Open Letters is a place where the letters to the editor published by the Post-Gazette are offered up for broader comment and discussion. |
Links: More opinion |
| Letters published by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette are offered here for broader comment and discussion. |
Archives
- December, 2010 (125)
- November, 2010 (112)
- October, 2010 (122)
- September, 2010 (103)
- August, 2010 (51)
- July, 2010 (156)
- June, 2010 (379)
- May, 2010 (363)
- April, 2010 (606)
- March, 2010 (737)
- February, 2010 (721)
- January, 2010 (740)
- December, 2009 (762)
- November, 2009 (739)
- October, 2009 (760)
- September, 2009 (731)
- August, 2009 (537)
- July, 2009 (563)
- June, 2009 (517)
- May, 2009 (622)
- April, 2009 (606)
- March, 2009 (658)
- February, 2009 (604)
- January, 2009 (489)
- December, 2008 (293)
- November, 2008 (239)
- October, 2008 (264)
- September, 2008 (204)
- August, 2008 (162)
- July, 2008 (230)
- June, 2008 (92)
- May, 2008 (93)
- April, 2008 (5)
- January, 2008 (3)
- September, 2007 (1)
A severance tax on natural gas, especially with prices as low as they are today, is not the budget panacea many people think it would be.
With natural gas commodity prices currently about half of what they were a year ago, the revenue generated from such a tax would also be cut in half or even less if the increased cost of doing business in Pennsylvania drives producers to states offering a much better return on their investments.
The other taxes imposed on businesses in the commonwealth also cannot be excluded from the conversation about a severance tax. Simply put: This is a costly state in which to do business.
These facts have led to the ongoing development of a reasonable impact fee, now being discussed in Harrisburg. It is being evaluated carefully, recognizing that Pennsylvania is still competing with other states for investment, seeing some rigs move to Ohio and others being idled.
The real story Mr. Norman overlooked is the savings that can be made in public transit with a strong shift toward using inexpensive natural gas for more buses, as the Port Authority is evaluating. Taken across the state, it would save hundreds of millions of dollars in fuel costs and reduce diesel emissions and our dependence on foreign oil.
LOUIS D. D'AMICO
President/Executive Director
Pennsylvania Independent Oil & Gas Association
Marshall
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by burt, February 06, 2012 - 12:16 PM
-
- +3
-
-
written by Ironman, February 06, 2012 - 12:59 PM
It all sounds good to use natural gas as the fuel to power the buses. However, there are issues. First, the natural gas powered buses may not have enough horsepower to traverse the local hilly terrain.
Second, there are maintenance issues with natural gas and propane tanks due to high pressures with seals.
I agree its a win-win to use gas, but there are issues that have to be addressed by the port authority.
-
- +0
-
-
written by GBRetired, February 06, 2012 - 01:17 PM
I'll have to profess my ignorance here, but are there not multiple trucks using nat. gas? I thought Giant Eagle was converting their fleet.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ironman, February 06, 2012 - 01:41 PM
BTW, the buses are supplied by Gillig out of San Francisco.
http://www.gillig.com/New GILLIG WEB/product.htm
-
- +0
-
-
written by KOKelly, February 06, 2012 - 04:08 PM
-
- +9
-
-
written by Spock, February 06, 2012 - 06:13 PM
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/32863.pdf
I suspect that reliability issues are also make & model specific.
-
- +6
-
-
written by Ironman, February 07, 2012 - 07:22 AM
-
- +0
-
-
written by GBRetired, February 07, 2012 - 10:01 AM
I believe that was the Raja plan when he ran. Fitz and his loonies still have no clue as to haw to use this to their benefit.
-
- -1
-
-
written by ksimm, February 07, 2012 - 10:34 AM
On another note, I here by volunteer my services to the PG to be the daily updater of there LTE blog site if they are so inclined.
-
- -1
-
-
written by GBRetired, February 07, 2012 - 10:42 AM
The Raja plan was to slash employee retirement and benefit plans, kill the unions, convert the fleet and SELL gas to PAT.
Somehow, that is just about the ONLY plan that might save PAT. The Fitz plan to reward the Transit Union, extend the crushing benefits and forget about saving with an alternative fuel have worked so well, why change.
As for updating the LTE blog--what are you-- a union buster???????
-
- -2
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|