After reading several letters to the editor the last few weeks concerning the BLM methane gas rule, filled with a mixture of facts and emotional opinions, I’ve also decided to write.
A letter entitled “Oppose repeal of BLM methane gas rule” in the March 10 edition of the Journal finally caused me to opine.
I agree with the author on many, if not most, of the points made, especially that the methane gas rule should be revisited and revised, not repealed.
However, there were at least three statements that were, at a minimum, merely opinions and, at most, completely wrong.
First, Congress doesn’t know how our healthcare will change. Certainly the author can’t know that they are going to “take away our healthcare.” In fact, there are some that argue it might actually improve; but no one knows.
Second, leaks from natural gas pipelines don’t “pollute rivers and streams.” Yes, these leaks pollute air, lungs and perhaps crops, but not rivers and streams. Please don’t confuse natural gas pipeline leaks with oil pipeline leaks.
Third, the BLM methane gas rule has not been “a boon for Montezuma county coffers.” In fact, according to public records, there are only around 15 natural gas (methane) wells in Montezuma county, none of which are actually good producers, on top of which the price for natural gas is extremely low.
The tax increase Montezuma county gets from an increase in natural gas sales resulting from stopping leaks from these wells is minuscule, if even measurable. Please don’t confuse methane with carbon dioxide.
And, please don’t confuse emotional opinions with facts.
Rick Corbitt
Dolores
