To the Editor:
I read with interest your editorial on fracking in New York. The state has taken a cautious approach to this form of energy extraction, unlike other states which are now having to put in place laws and regulations to protect the water table and affected communities. You are correct that the identity of toxic fracking fluids is not subject to disclosure under The Safe Water Drinking Act. This secrecy was put in place largely at the behest of former Vice President Dick Cheney.
You encourage the development of wind power as a clean alternative to carbon and toxin-based forms of energy. Please remember roof top and community solar, completely clean and decentralized energy infrastructures. There are state and federal incentives in place for these, but more could be done to speed their development. Current incentives in New York cut the up-front investment by about two-thirds. The remaining costs are generally recouped in 8-10 years through savings.
You misuse the word “antidote” in the editorial; I believe that you meant to use “anecdote” instead. Also, “Anwar, Alaska,” should read “ANWAR or The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.”
You end the editorial, with a tone of essentially wondering what Governor Cuomo will decide regarding fracking in New York. Given the strong content of your overall message, a forceful recommendation to limit or ban fracking in New York, would be more effective.