Government’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump.
Government’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump.
Reuters reports that in a briefing today, Guy Caruso of the Energy Information Administration — the government’s “top energy forecaster” — said expanding offshore oil drilling would do little to lower gas prices:
“It would be a relatively small effect, because it would take such a long time to bring those supplies on,” Caruso said during a briefing at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on the EIA’s new long-term international energy forecast. “It doesn’t affect prices that much.”
In 2007, the EIA also concluded that offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact” on oil prices. The remarks today come after both Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and President Bush endorsed plans to expand offshore oil drilling in response to record gas prices.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Can I get a “DUH!!!”…?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:02 pmGovernment’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump
– - Yeah, we know. It’s gonna help n the brain pan though, right J-Mac?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:03 pmWell maybe investigating the speculators might help and maybe, just maybe alittle oversight into the Electronic Oil Futures Trading might help.
Just don’t sit there, do nothing about it.
Unless the USA gets off it’s collective fat ass and start a push like WW2 to change the industrial base into making alternative energy and electric transportation and useful public transportation we are going to have a depression like none other the world has ever seen, and it will include the entire world.
Leave it to Repukian Scum to f’up the entire world.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:10 pmleftside,
June 25th, 2008 at 4:11 pmDuh!
Ok, TP, here’s the “cleaned up” version of my post:
According to the NYT, the Energy Information Agency estimates that the
total amount of oil in the offshore zone in question is about 16
billion barrels. If we assume that it would take about ten years from
the day of authorization to get to peak production and that most of
the oil is pumped out over 30 years, this would translate into a bit
over 1 million barrels of oil a day.
That would be equal to about 1 percent of world production in a
June 25th, 2008 at 4:11 pmdecade. If we assume a long-run demand elasticity of 0.3, this would
imply a drop in world prices of approximately 3 percent. In today’s
prices, we would be looking at a drop in the price of a barrel of oil
from around $135 to $131. If this were passed on one to one in gas
prices (this is long-run story), we might expect to see a drop in the
price of a gallon of gas from around $4.00 to around $3.92 a gallon.
We have been under the”Bushwacked energy policy”, spelled John Baker, for too long. Sen. Phil Gramm’s wife on the board of Enron, and his collusion with John McCain is now becoming well known.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:13 pmBut, But,….The PSYCHOLOGY! GOOD LORD, the PSYCHOLOGY!
June 25th, 2008 at 4:15 pmGive the man a medal…
June 25th, 2008 at 4:16 pmI wonder on what page number of Dick Cheney’s secret energy plan can we find $140.00 per barrel oil, $4.00 per gallon gas, and off-shore and ANWAR drilling.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:18 pmSo what, who cares. Off shore drilling is not about lowering prices at the pump. Heck, ANWR is not about the pump. It’s about exporting and fattening the bottom line of multination corporations and large institutional investors. If a few small fries get rich as well, so be it.
Drilling offshore will allow greedy, short-term thinking Americans to continue on with their wasteful ways, American car manufacturers to continue to fight against higher fuel efficiency standards and all of us squander further a natural resource that took either millions of years to develop or a few thousand – depending on your view of creation (and we all know where the current administration stands).
Let’s just pump every last drop til there is no more left. Our grandchildren will be proud.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:18 pmI’ve said this before. Cheney was never about America. He has always been about maximum profit. He is a traitor to American values of looking your son in the eyes and saying, “Do what is right, not what you’d like.”
June 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pmWhy would anyone be surprised at this? What – give an oil company a lease and they’ll start drilling everywhere they can right away? It’ll take years and years before they drill on anything they get a lease on today. They still haven’t even explored all the leases they have now, why would anyone think otherwise (save Bush/Republican idiots trying to save face).
June 25th, 2008 at 4:22 pmGovernment’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump.
But it will sure make the views from the Florida coasts beautiful!!!
June 25th, 2008 at 4:23 pmThis is the dumbest debate ever.
I agree, it’s stupid, why the pressure from R’s to drill I wonder?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:27 pmI agree with lock_box (and throw away the key before the big black scary gay man gets you).
Why even debate off shore drilling if we don’t see relief from the prices at the pump.
Wow. Whodathunkit????
June 25th, 2008 at 4:29 pmWell it is now that you showed up Lock Box.
YOU ARE JUST AS STUPID TODAY AS ANY OTHER DAY.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:29 pmlock_box Says
June 25th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
This is the dumbest debate ever.
___________________________________________________
Yes, it IS a no-brainer, isn’t it? So why are Bush and McBush continuing to beat the drums for off-shore drilling?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:31 pmwhat is the problem with offshore drilling?
Lemme help…
June 25th, 2008 at 4:36 pmGovernment’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump.
Where is Tracy to tell us that America’s natural resources belong to the multi-national corporations, and we have no right to protect our environment when it sits on top of all that oil that belongs to the oil companies?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:37 pmP.S. lock_box… I found that at the top of the page, I guess there’s usually some type of story or article that goes with the comments section…
June 25th, 2008 at 4:37 pmwhat is the problem with offshore drilling?
Unnecessary.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:38 pmlock_box Says
June 25th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
what is the problem with offshore drilling?
____________________________________________________________
Short attention span today? Try reading the item at the top of this thread. If the words are too big, we’ll try to translate.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:39 pmThere is only ONE thing left to do: ???
June 25th, 2008 at 4:41 pmOr maybe, two, three,, or more.
But, action seems slow. Are we ready for a change? All of us here have some decisions to make. WE need to get together and decide are we going to change the world, or let it die? Some want takeover of the oil fields of the middle east as Bush has decided, or others want alternative energy. But, this is getting down to a simple choice.
Decide.
lock_box Says:
what is the problem with offshore drilling?
Unlike your head, the ocean isn’t empty and devoid of life.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:42 pmlock_box Says:
what is the problem with offshore drilling?
####
Personally, I have nothing against it. I am not an environmentalist, and I don’t care about the caribou in Alaska. However, it will do nothing to lower gas prices, or to decrease our dependence on foreign oil. Nothing. So, while I don’t have anything against offshore drilling specifically, I do have a problem with politicians pushing the idea that it will help the general public in some way. And I do think that George HW Bush was right to prevent drilling in ANWR. I think Gov. Jeb Bush was perfectly within his rights as governor of Florida when he opposed drilling off the coast there. And I think McCain was right when he voted against drilling in ANWR.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:43 pmlock_box Says:
If it make my gas 1 cent cheaper it worth it, Drill away !
It won’t, it will most likely make your gas more expensive. idiot.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:43 pmIf it make my gas 1 cent cheaper it worth it, Drill away !
Lemme help again…
June 25th, 2008 at 4:44 pmGovernment’s top energy forecaster: Offshore drilling won’t help at the pump.
lock_box Says:
I’ve got a mouthful of perfectly healthy teeth. Drill away !
Makes about as much sense as the original.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:45 pmlockjaw has succeeded in derailing the conversation again. he must be one of those republican trolls mcbush hired to disrupt rational blogs.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:47 pmSo what do you have to say about the roughly 3000 plus oil wells in Louisiana that made it though hurricane Katrina with very little damage?
44 oil spills found in southeast Louisiana
Largest is nearly 4 million gallons, most big ones are on Mississippi River
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9365607/
Oohh, cut and past arguing is fun!
June 25th, 2008 at 4:49 pmlock_box Says:
So what do you have to say about the roughly 3000 plus oil wells in Louisiana that made it though hurricane Katrina with very little damage?
I say you should really watch something other than Pox News once in a while. You brain has become a toxic spill.
44 oil spills found in southeast Louisiana
Largest is nearly 4 million gallons, most big ones are on Mississippi River
Sept. 19, 2005
More than 500 specialists are working to clean up 44 oil spills ranging from several hundred gallons to nearly 4 million gallons, the U.S. Coast Guard said in an assessment that goes far beyond initial reports of just two significant spills.
The report comes nearly three weeks after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, and reflects the fact that the Coast Guard and other agencies are able to only now tackle environmental problems since the search and rescue effort is winding down.
The Coast Guard estimates more than 7 million gallons of oil were spilled from industrial plants, storage depots and other facilities around southeast Louisiana.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:52 pmlock_box Says:
shoeless Says:
So what do you have to say about the roughly 3000 plus oil wells in Louisiana that made it though hurricane Katrina with very little damage? How many major environmental disasters involved offshore oil rigs in the past 15 years?
I say it is b.s.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
How will increasing the domestic oil supply make gas prices higher?
There is no shortage of domestic supply.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:53 pmDarn belac, you beat me to it. You’re ruining my fun!
June 25th, 2008 at 4:53 pmAnother…
Katrina oil spills may be among worst on record
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/sep/16/usnews.hurricanekatrina
There seem to be a lot of these lock_box, does ‘very little damage’ mean the opposite of what it sounds like?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:53 pmlock_box Says:
what is the problem with offshore drilling?
– - I think “offshore drilling” by this poster means extreme rendition in foreign countries.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:55 pmRepublicans did not make a big issue about ‘Oil Offshore Drilling’ until a month ago,when people began to talk loudly about gasoline prices with unease and anger.
To deflect crisicism and aim it at Democrats,Republicans made offshore drilling their daily issue which became also their daily cry.
It is well known that such drilling will not have any serious and quick impact on gas pumps prices or oil market,but Republicans keep pushing it and blaming Democrats, while it is a known fact that oil companies have leases over 68 million acres for sometime that they did not use…
So what is this all about…? it is about blaming Democrats for oil prices and the situation we are now in and nothing else,using pundits and talking heads to sell this oil ‘blame game’ now that we are getting closer to elections in Novemebr.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:58 pmDRILL, DRILL,DRILL, DRILL, DRILL, DRILL, DRILL, DRILL, DRILL, DRILL,.
AND THEN WHAT?
June 25th, 2008 at 4:58 pmWhere in your little article does it say anything about offshore wells??
Moving the goalposts, like a good little Gooper:
So what do you have to say about the roughly 3000 plus oil wells in Louisiana that made it though hurricane Katrina with very little damage?
You originally said Louisiana, and now you want to talk about off shore platforms, exclusively.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:59 pmWhere in your little article does it say anything about offshore wells??
Gummitch gots this one…
June 25th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
So the troll makes a claim that is quickly debunked, then gets caught trying to change his previous claim, to hopefully avoid embarrassment.
Next.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:05 pmHere is a government satellite picture which hilites the oil slicks in Louisiana right after Katrina.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1306/pdf/c1306_ch3_f.pdf
The report states:
In addition, the sensitivity of the SAR data to the presence of oil on the surface of open waters provides the opportunity to identify potential oil slicks in both the September 2 and September 5, 2005, images (figs. 2 and 3). Some oil slicks appear to be related to offshore oil platforms that appear as bright specks in many radar images;
As you can see by the photo, many big oil slicks are well off the coast. These were obviously caused by damage to offshore oil platforms.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:09 pmGuy Caruso better start looking for work. Debunking a Bushco lie is career suicide.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:12 pmlock_box Says:
The offshore spills were relatively minor
Offshore oil derricks are very safe for the environment.
Do you enjoy being wrong, because you are very good at it.
Industry says there was no way to prepare for spills
A Houston Chronicle review of data from the National Response Center shows that the two storms caused at least 595 spills, incidents that released untold amounts of oil, natural gas and other chemicals into the air, onto land and into the water.
The quantity and cumulative magnitude of the 595 spills, which were spread across four states and struck offshore and inland, rank these two hurricanes among the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history. Some have even compared the total amount of oil released — estimated at 9 million gallons — to the tragedy of Exxon Valdez.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:13 pmLock_box sez:
The offshore spills were relatively minor
Offshore oil derricks are very safe for the environment.
After we slipped and fell into the mudpit my brother was covered from head to toe, I was relatively clean, only my pants got dirty…
June 25th, 2008 at 5:14 pmTherefore mudpits are very clean places to go…
Awesome! Is relative a fun word to play with, lockbox?
Tracy. 3/4 of the entire planet wants to see Bush on trial. Are you suggesting we should follow public opinion polls?
June 25th, 2008 at 5:15 pmHaving more domestic production has alot to do with national security which is even more important than trying to bring down the high price.
First of all, the oil companies are gonna sell to the highest bidder- just like they do today, so it ain’t ‘Americun Oil’…
Secondly, you wanna improve national security? De-centralize the grid… no more big power plants. Have all new construcion required to generate a certain percentage of it’s own power and transfer oil subsidies to alternative energy… suddenly power generation gets spread across the grid, like communication did with the internets, and it’s much harder to ‘black out’ entire areas with one transformer malfunction or plant melt-down… sound more secure?
Why are you guys so obsessed with lashing us to the sinking ship called oil?
June 25th, 2008 at 5:20 pmFrom the same Houston Chronicle article:
In Louisiana, a new environmental incident was reported nearly every minute days after Rita passed: At 11:21 a.m. on Sept. 26, Chevron reported that crude oil had been released from a platform missing in the Gulf.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:22 pmMcCain’s most recent energy speech….
MCCAIN: THE LEXINGTON PROJECT
Wed June 25, 2008 12:50:11 ET
In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project Ð named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment:Ê In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.
This pledge is addressed to all concerned — to those abroad whose power flows from an accident of geology, and to you, my fellow Americans, whose strength proceeds from unity of purpose. Together, we will break the power of OPEC over the United States. And never again will we leave our vital interests at the mercy of any foreign power.
Some will say this goal is unattainable within that relatively short span of years — it’s too hard and we need more time. Let me remind them that in the space of half that time — about eight years — this nation conceived and carried out a plan to take three Americans to the Moon and bring them safely home. In less than a third of that time, the gathered energies of my father’s generation built the industrial might that overcame Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. That is the scale of our achievement when we set our minds to a task. That is what this country can do when we see a danger, and declare a purpose, and find the will to act.
As president, I will turn all the apparatus of government in the direction of energy independence for our country — authorizing new production, building nuclear plants, perfecting clean coal, improving our electricity grid, and supporting all the new technologies that one day will put the age of fossil fuels behind us. Much will be asked of industry as well, as automakers and others adapt to this great turn toward new sources of power. And a great deal will depend on each one of us, as we learn to make smarter use of energy, and also to draw on the best ideas of both parties, and work together for the common good.
This Project is not a plan calibrated to please every interest group or to meet every objection. That is how we arrived to our present predicament. That is how energy policy in Washington became a long list of subjects avoided, options ruled out, and possibilities foreclosed. Nor can I promise you that the long-term success of this Project will bring instant relief.Ê In the mission of energy security, some tasks are the work of decades and some the work of years. And they will take all the will and resolve of which we are capable. But I can promise you this. Unless we begin this mission now, nothing will change at all, except for the worse. And when we succeed in the hard reform ahead, your children will live in a more prosperous country, in a more peaceful world.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:25 pmWhat Above the Clouds said!
June 25th, 2008 at 5:33 pmK – all of McSames solutions presume a never ending supply of energy which is destroying our planet. More coal? How about vacationing in West Virginia? Kinda smoky, ya know…More oil? There is not that much left and what is left will take a decade to find its way into your gas tank. Why not find something else? We put a man on the moon in ten years, why can’t we think our way out of this inevitable ‘dry well’?
June 25th, 2008 at 5:35 pmlock_box Says:
shoeless Says:
There wasn’t enough spillage to make a difference. Your digging for little insignificant things that still proves my point that offshore drilling rigs are environmentally safe!
You can just keep ignoring the linked information and increase the perception that you’re talking through your hat, to be polite.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
lock_box Says:
shoeless Says:
There wasn’t enough spillage to make a difference.
I am wondering if the seagulls and sea lions feel the same way; just a little spillage? Just a little spillage?
June 25th, 2008 at 5:37 pmMcBush:
As president, I will turn all the apparatus of government in the direction of energy independence for our country — authorizing new production, building nuclear plants, perfecting clean coal, improving our electricity grid, and supporting all the new technologies that one day will put the age of fossil fuels behind us.
Does McBush think that coal is not a fossil fuel? Speaking of fossils . . .
June 25th, 2008 at 5:38 pmJust a little spillage?
Reminds me of those chips with Olestra that they took off the market… they caused “slight @na1 leakage”
June 25th, 2008 at 5:39 pmany @na1 leakage is significant and worrisome in my book…
Algae Blooms do more damage to sea wild life than any oil spill.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:41 pm… and are increasing in size and frequency due to enviromental pollution and rising sea temps…
lock_box Says:
shoeless Says:
and you’re taking about a deep-water production platform which is not even being recommended for the drilling proposal off Florida & Mississippi. Its more like a ship than a drilling rig.
1969 Santa Barbara Channel. Three MILLION gallons of crude spilled onto the beaches.
Off shore drilling.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:43 pmYa gotta love the trolls. When someone on “their” side bucks the party line? They go all goofy. What part of “it won’t make any difference in gas prices” do they fail to understand? What part of “it takes a huge up-front investment to drill and the oil companies aren’t doing that” escapes their reasoning?
The oil companies say it won’t work. The government says it won’t work. Virtually every economist with any expertise in oil and/or other energy says it won’t work. But? They just keep on keeping on with their “stay the course” mentality.
Hey! Here’s an idea. Maybe we could hire the Chinese/Cubans to drill for us? I’m sure they will do it cheaper than any Western oil company or consortium and then we actually might see a tiny reduction in gas prices.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:44 pmlock_box Says:
StratRat Says:
Algae Blooms do more damage to sea wild life than any oil spill.
Tell that one to the lifeforms on Prince Williams Sound. That’s truly one of the stupidest things you’ve said to date in a fairly long list of stupid comments.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:45 pmlock_box Says:
StratRat Says:
Algae Blooms do more damage to sea wild life than any oil spill.
I have been on this planet 50 years. I lived on the coast for most of that time. During that time, I can recall dozens of oil spills from Alaska to Baja California. All those spills fouled the waterways, the birds, and the sea life. Very ugly pictures of birds covered in the dark brown goo.
Not once, however have I heard of algae causing damage to the waterways, the birds, and the sea life – not once. Maybe I am missing some very important news, but surely I think I would have known there was ‘algae clean up days’ down at the beach. Never heard of them. I have heard of oil spill clean up days and requests from the Humane Society to come and help them wipe the oil from the feathers of unfortunate birds.
Hmmm. Algae claen up days. Maybe you are on to something…
June 25th, 2008 at 5:47 pmlock_box Says
June 25th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Its not an environmental issue, the only reason you oppose it is because the republicans are for it.
____________________________________________________
Hmmm…I suspect that’s the only reason you support it.
Lemme ask you something. If a Democratic president went all gung-ho on off-shore drilling, would you still support it? Or would you fall in line with the rest of the GOP who would surely oppose it purely because a Democrat was for it?
There are those of us here who would oppose off-shore drilling no matter who’s cheering for it. Not only for environmental reasons (although that IS a biggie), but just because we are tired of Big Oil raking in obscene amounts of money at our expense. Let them drill on the millions of acres of leases they are currently sitting on. Let them fulfill their promise to invest in development of alternative energy. And then, when there are are truly no other options left, perhaps we can talk about off-shore drilling.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:50 pmlock_cox is living proof that homeschooling doesn’t work
Maybe it isn’t the ‘home’ part; maybe its the person providing the lessons and grading the tests?
June 25th, 2008 at 5:50 pmStratRat Says:
Hmmm. Algae claen up days. Maybe you are on to something…
June 25th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I think he’s talking about “red tides” which, while they kill some sea life, are mostly dangerous to humans because of the build up of toxins. Particularly in shellfish. Most sea life is, however, immune or resistant to it’s effects.
“Red tides” are a natural occurrence but there is significant evidence showing that human induced environmental problems can trigger a “bloom” or increase it’s severity.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:53 pmget Rev Gore started on a movement to ban all farming
Don’t need to ban farming… just all corporate mega-fams with their toxic pools and chemical run-off… we’ll bring back the family farm, viable small businesses!
June 25th, 2008 at 5:54 pmToilet Paper needs to get Rev Gore started on a movement to ban all farming
Sir, do not insult this blog. If the topics here, or the other posters here don’t make you feel superior, the adult thing to do is leave and go to RedState or Hot Air – not insult the blog. You have dug many holes with your inane arguments. You are to blame that we think you have nothing to share, you are to blame for the responses you get when you write something silly. Being childish is not an attractive quality – except for a child.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:54 pmActually, there is extensive environmental damage from algae blooms, particularly at the mouth of the Mississippi river and in the Florida Keys. They are caused by pollution from agricultural and urban runoff, as well as rising sea temperatures, as belac noted.
However, the environmental damage from algae blooms seems a strange reason to increase environmental damage from oil spills.
I also find it amusing that an anti-environmental right-wing extremist, like lock_box would use other sources of pollution and global warming as an argument for offshore oil drilling.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:59 pmDufi like box_o_rocks want to see the money that could be spent on teaching organic farming and reinforcing our national system of levees instead spent on bombs and bullets and chemical fertilizers.
June 25th, 2008 at 5:59 pmI think it’s just precious the way they are wasting so much energy arguing against someone from “their” side. Yes. I laughed at “Dumb and Dumber” too.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:00 pmlock_box Says:
gummitch Says:
Mississippi scientists are watching for the possible spread of an area of oxygen-depleted water off the Louisiana coast that could move eastward.
A recently released study suggests the dead zone could be more than 10,000 square miles this summer
Toilet Paper needs to get Rev Gore started on a movement to ban all farming
I’m trying to figure out the point of this. You don’t think that they referring to an algae bloom, do you? I mean, did you read far enough to realize they’re writing about damage from pesticides and herbicides?
So, no, no one needs to ban farming, because there are already a great many farmers using techniques that don’t pour pesticides into the ecosystem. Nice of you to care, though, because your moronic comment about oil spills seemed to indicate otherwise.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:04 pmI guess you have never been to the gulf of Mexico. Only visitors get in the water because you have an oily slime on you when you get out of it. It is the nastiest coastal water we have. Not rocket science see.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:07 pmJust the polls that support your Master’s agendas?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:11 pmLet me refresh your memory. This is from your post:
Want to explain the logic of posting that if you don’t think it is relevant?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:15 pmFred Says:
Want to explain the logic of posting that if you don’t think it is relevant?
Twacy5: “Polls I agree with are gud; other polls bad and stoopid.”
June 25th, 2008 at 6:17 pmTracy5 Says:
#58
“Tracy. 3/4 of the entire planet wants to see Bush on trial. Are you suggesting we should follow public opinion polls?”
Not necessarily.
LOL! What’s the matter Tracy? Is it hard work being a shill for the world’s most hated man?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:23 pmTracy says:
“Why are you guys so obsessed with lashing us to the sinking ship called oil?”
Because even if we replace oil with another alternative energy you will still need it to produce millions of other products.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Then why in Hell does it make sense to burn our dwindling supply?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:27 pmTracy5 Says:
There are sea lions off the coast of Lousiana and Texas?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I don’t think so, but, there used to be Caribbean Monk Seals. However, we already drove them to extinction.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:29 pmWhat? What the hell are you talking about?
What? What the hell are you talking about?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:29 pmTP just posted last week that it was Hurricae Katrina alone that caused spills comparable to the Valdez. Which is it?
’cause if it was the two of them together then the rigs are safe?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:31 pmSomeone ought to alert the factory that the Tracy5 model has the same bugs in its logic board that the earlier models displayed.
Maybe this is a beta version.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:32 pmGo easy on him belac. He still hasn’t figured out he’s arguing with his own side on this one. I think someone is going to wake up and feel “dirty”. Or stupid.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:34 pmTracy5 Says:
June 25th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
We’ve moved on from algae blooms. Time to get with the program or bow out.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:39 pmTracy5 Says:
“Secondly, you wanna improve national security?….”
I agree with your suggestion. Great idea! Nuclear power is your best bet as that “alternative energy”.
What do they call trainloads of Toxic, radioactive Waste ( with a half life of tens of thousands of years) traveling all around the country on their way to Yucca Mountain???
TERRORIST TARGETS!
June 25th, 2008 at 6:39 pmSee what I mean? T5 is still trying to claim that the results of one form of human-generated pollution is worse than the cause that HE favors, so his cause is okay.
Does that make sense to anyone?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:42 pmTracy5 Says:
#83
“Not once, however have I heard of algae causing damage to the waterways, the birds, and the sea life – not once.”
Are you kidding?
None of which goes anywhere near your ridiculous claim that algae blooms were more dangerous than oil spills, and at least one of the links makes the case that increased blooms are the product of human behavior — which hardly makes your case for oil drilling.
You’ve managed to complete avoid any acknowledgment of the Exxon Valdez or Santa Barbara Channel spills, not to mention the huge number of oil spills around the planet. Instead, you’re trying, pathetically, to equate algae and oil.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:42 pmWho knew that T5 was a Hugo Chavez supporter?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:43 pmEven though it’s off topic:
June 25th, 2008 at 6:43 pmI am not diametrically opposed to an expanded nuclear energy industry. However, the only way it’s an acceptable alternative is if (that’s a huge if) we can find a way to ensure that greedy idiots are cut out of the loop. That would be impossible in today’s U.S.A.
Then I suppose you have no objections if the Iranians also develop their “alternative energy”, huh?
Hmm… backing Hugo Chavez and supporting the Iranians’ nuclear program… your wingnut pals are gonna be pissssed at you…
June 25th, 2008 at 6:45 pmlock_box Says:
shoeless Says:
and you’re taking about a deep-water production platform which is not even being recommended for the drilling proposal off Florida & Mississippi. Its more like a ship than a drilling rig.
Lockedbox,
Tell us which oil company or service company you work for. Are you involved in upstream or downstream business? And be honest, OK?
June 25th, 2008 at 6:55 pmWhy this obsession with oil? There are three solar technologies that are less expensive at this time. Not an immediate answer to the transportation question, but in five or ten years, all of our energy requirements for the infrastructure could be sourced to the Sun. Once that target is met, our total energy input could be transferred to solar sources within another generation.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:01 pmI was just stating that TP was inaccurate with their own claim.
And we were just proving that Lock_box was inaccurate with his own claim that there was no spillage and that offshore rigs are completly safe…
June 25th, 2008 at 7:03 pmto what end were you pointing this out is what I was wondering… but I should have known you were just a stickler for details and complete accuracy…
Tracy5 Says:
I believe to topic of this thread is whether or not offshore drilling is a good idea.
Hooray! Ya got one right. Get yourself a cookie from the jar.
Now, here’s the hard part. The consensus, among experts (including those within the Bush administration), is that offshore drilling is not, at this time, a good idea even if drilling resources were immediately available. In fact, it’s entirely possible that oil would increase to cover the drilling costs. Then, of course, we would have to find “extra” refining capacity since the oil industry has not kept up their infrastructure despite holding permits for new refineries.
Off shore drilling is just a “shiny rabbit” to distract us from bad energy policy.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:04 pmOne word: duh.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:07 pm“I am not diametrically opposed to an expanded nuclear energy industry.”
Are you opposed to it as a source of energy? If so, please expain your “diametric” opposition in even a little detail.
He just said no, the reluctance is explained in his post…
June 25th, 2008 at 7:11 pm“Herd follower” is “constructive”?
Or is this another case of “Do as I say, not as I do” wingnuttery?
June 25th, 2008 at 7:12 pmApparently, the T5 model also has some problems with its text recognition circuitry.
It reads “I am not diametrically opposed” then asks for an explanation of the poster’s “diametric” opposition.
Someone call tech support.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:14 pmTHIS is “constructive”?
DAIS, NAID. Seems to be the only program this model runs without a hitch.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:16 pmtRACY 5,
I’m not against Nuclear Power…I am against Nuclear Power that yields Radioactive waste that can be used to make Nuclear Weapons….that we don’t know how to store safely for thousands of years…and creates hundreds of aging, highly radoactive power plants that No One knows how to safely decomission. ( a fence around it for thousands of years is no solution.
I am interested in next generation fusion reactors, like the polywell, which used a Boron 11 isotope. Boron is safe and plentifull….and no Neutorns are released in the reaction…so the reactor does not become radioactive like a tar baby.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/24/19392/2417/623/499759
Wouldn’t we feel foolish, if we created a huge legacy of dangerous long lasting radioactive waste ( maybe it’s too late)…and then discovered how to tap Nuclear fusion with none of the Danger.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:20 pmJust when he starts to make a glimmer of sense? He proves he doesn’t know the meaning of the word “not”. Back to Kindergarten.
I thought I had sufficiently explained my opposition to expanding the nuclear energy industry. But, to make it clear for the slow folks, here we go again.
If we are to build and operate new nuke plants, we must have a structure in place that ensures lawyers, MBA’s, and politicians NEVER make an operational decision. Using the second best grade of steel to shave costs, for example. There is zero margin of error. I’m not afraid of nuclear energy, but, I’m terrified of greedy idiots using it to get rich. Until such time as scientists, physicists, and engineers are given COMPLETE control? It’s an unacceptable risk. I can imagine few worse nightmares than a, Bush appointed, Regent University grad making technical decisions on nuclear safety.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:23 pmFrom your link tracy5:
There are dozens of oil companies not building refineries in order to maximize profits… which ones specifically are you ignoring?
June 25th, 2008 at 7:51 pmWell, it’s good to see that T5 has stopped offering anything “constructive” to the thread.
Perhaps he’ll stop insisting that others provide what he is unwilling to offer.
Not counting on it, but…
June 25th, 2008 at 7:56 pmTouché!
Oh see, now this is fun, Tracy 5… isn’t this better than calling each other crappy parents?
Falsely saying that Iran is developing alternative nuclear energy is also constructive?
That’s what Iran is claiming, and as they are a soveriegn nation they are within their rights to pursue nuclear technology for civilian purposes… think they’re doing it for other reasons?
Wish we could pressure them to stop?
See, this is why it’s important for US to respect treaties and international orginazations… so that when we want other countries to comply with our requests they can’t just say, “We’ll do whatever we want- world opinion be damned! After all, you guys do whatever the hell YOU want!”
June 25th, 2008 at 8:04 pmDoes Guy still have a job?
June 25th, 2008 at 8:32 pmSure, although I still couldn’t figure out what you thought that teaching your kid that stealing $5,000,000 was some how worse than stealing $5.
Now that’s a warped view of moral equivalency. Criminal statutes recognize there is a difference. Why can’t you?
June 25th, 2008 at 8:41 pmAre you opposed to it as a source of energy? If so, please expain your “diametric” opposition in even a little detail.
If you can stop being gratuitous: radioactive tailings are already leachng into groundwater at current uranium mines. A push to build more plants will cause more mining, more releases of radioactive gas, that is found with uranium deposits, and more radiactive tailings, adding greatly to the seepage, and contamination of the Colorado River, which is near these mines. Or we can bargain for it, with third world countries like Niger, which isn’t any better, from a national security standpoint.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:48 pmTracy5 Says:
#116
“None of which goes anywhere near your ridiculous claim that algae blooms were more dangerous than oil spills…”
You need to go back in the thread and tell me where I made such a claim.
Sorry. Wrong troll. Y’all look alike.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:51 pmWhat I’m saying Tracy5, is that if we want to be able to put international pressure on Iran to stop pursuing nuclear technology we first have to start respecting international treaties ourselves… or does your hatred of ‘moral relativism’ extend to children but stop at nations?
June 25th, 2008 at 8:52 pmDo you think that we should teach our children that there are varing degrees of right and wrong?
Of course. We don’t live in a black and white world, where moral absolutes apply, and never did. You’re fooling yourself, if you think otherwise.
So, it’s the same morally if a child steals a piece of candy, and Ken Lay steals hundred of millions from employees, and from retirees of Enron?
Warped, man, really warped worldview.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:05 pmDon’t feed the trolls. Feeding them only leads to them vomiting all over you, again and again. Which is why they are called Repukes.
BTW, what if terrorist organizations are taking advantage of the “Enron loophole,” created and sustained by Republicans over the past eight years, with these terrorist organizations (al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etal.) playing the electronic oil futures trading market overseas, gaming these unregulated markets through dummy companies or oil futures speculator front men (maybe in Dubai?), gaining hugh amounts of money in the process, that these terrorist organizations can then use to finance their terrorist operations?
In other words, what if free-market capitalism and deregulation mania has actually aided and abetted terrorists?
Completely close the “Enron loophole” RIGHT NOW.
I’m unwilling to continue to let Repukes put American lives at risk, even if there’s only a slight chance right-wing terrorists have been gaming the world energy markets like Enron gamed the West Coast energy markets back in 2001…using the same “Enron loophole” in the process.
Besides, if expert economists are correct, completely closing this loophole and re-regulating the electronic energy markets will cause gasoline pump prices in the U.S. to drop by a dollar or even two, almost immediately.
And I’m not interested in listening to the people who are using outrageously high gasoline prices to push their favorite pet policy…that does nothing to address high gasoline costs today. (Hammm, it’s almost like they’re enjoying gas pump prices rising above $4.00 a gallon. And food prices going up. And monthly utility bills escalating. Because this provides certain people with the right “leverage” to promote certain things that might help down the road, but won’t do anything about high energy/high food costs today).
So, let’s conduct an experiment. Completely close the “Enron loophole” and then see what happens. I bet gasoline prices will drop. And what’s the worst that could happen…gasoline prices will stay the same?
And I still stand by my assertion that terrorist organizations have probably been taking advantage of this energy trading loophole. Close it…stop funding terrorists.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:47 pmDid you parents teach you that?
No, it’s a lesson I learned long ago, perhaps while I was unemployed, sleeping in a ditch, back in the crappy economy in the ’80’s.
Stealing is stealing..if they both know it’s wrong. You seem to be a follower of the BS philosophy, if everyone else does it, it must be OK for me to do it.
No, that the punishment should fit the crime. You seem to prefer the absolutist monochrome, of punishing all, equally.
So, ten years for rape, and for stealing a hubcap?
Warped.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:58 pmSelf taught I see. Must have sucked to be you. Tracy sniffs, through an exquisitely-embroidered monogramed hankie.
I’ve seen things that would shrivel your pampered little soul.
Sound good to me. Sure would put a stop to theft.
Or, simply fill the jails with petty crooks. I thought you conservatives were always crying about your high taxes? Locking up petty crooks for a decade would be very expensive.
Who’s going to advocate raising taxes to pay for it?
You? Or will you just whine about it?
June 26th, 2008 at 12:36 amSo whens McCain going to reveal his plan to promote cars that run on psychology?
June 26th, 2008 at 12:46 am.
Guy Caruso,
Say hello to the family on your early leave.
The “DECIDER” gang think otherwise.
.
June 26th, 2008 at 2:09 am