Now we have to admit that compressed natural gas is a new concept for us. Thus we went to the Xpress Natural Gas website to learn more about the operation. From what we read, the fears of pipelines by those opposed can be laid to rest. Since the gas is seemingly only available to large volume energy users, it would be, as far as we could tell, most unlikely that small business and homeowners could benefit from the program. Therefore, we rather suspect that should these two large volume energy users think the program would be to their advantage, no underground feeder pipelines would be involved.
Now we must admit that we have no idea if the use of compressed natural gas would be beneficial to these organizations. But it would seem somewhat short-sighted to demand that such gas be dismissed out of hand, citing such concerns as demand for natural gas would result in more companies wanting to drill for gas here and problems with not being able to stop methane emissions and migration into water supplies even though the gas would not be produced in this area.
Plus, what consideration should be given to potential savings to be realized from using gas instead of oil? If Bassett can save a half a million dollars in energy costs why would it not be a prudent thing to do. The money saved on energy costs could be spent providing health care for patients. If we had to choose, we would rather the money be spent on health care than on energy. To think otherwise makes little sense to us.
Likewise, we would tend to think that if such energy use would allow similar savings for the county that would be a plus for everyone living in the county. To argue that there is no need to exercise fiscal responsibility in any governmental entity makes little, if any sense, in today’s economy. And to even suggest that there is no need to investigate possible savings would seem to be utterly ridiculous.