To the Editor:
The information being released by “Environment Maryland” is misleading. An example of this is in Dimock, Pa., where there was no contamination of drinking water caused by fracking (“Environmental group says fracking not worth the cost,” Sept. 24 Times-News, Page 1A).
The report from the EPA stated that a sampling of drinking water was done. The EPA sampled private drinking water between January and June 2012, and the substances found were naturally occurring substances (ref: news release by EPA dated July 25, 2012).
An article released by the EPA (Aug. 12) states that environmental officials have been given permission by Pennsylvania officials to use fracking in Dimock.
Furthermore, I am not and do not claim to be an economist, but it is very simple — fracking in Maryland will possibly bring thousands of jobs, the state will collect tax revenues from the gas, and articles have been written that gas companies may pay for the upkeep of the roads they travel. This is also a benefit to the state.
So between lowering our unemployment rate, the state receiving more tax revenue, and the use of clean natural gas (lower cost than oil) that does not contaminate drinking water as proved in Dimock, it’s a winning situation for everybody.
We also will not have to depend on the other countries for something we have right under our feet!