Can you say ‘KA-BLAM’?
Why would I ask this? Isn’t that the sound commonly associated with blowing one’s own foot off?
Um, if I’m not mistaken, it was the party of whack jobs who LOST the last election by screaming ‘Drill here, drill now!’
Um, let me first dispel any illusion that drilling for oil off of America’s seacoast is going to result in more/cheaper oil for US consumers. That oil will be sold on global markets for the current global price. [Nobody is going to cheat those oil speculators out of their ‘cut’!]
Again, if I remember correctly, Bobo didn’t ‘campaign’ on (decidedly unpopular) expanded oil exploration, he ran on the promise of ‘energy independence’. Specifically laying out a policy of pursuing ‘alternative energy’ as a ‘two-edged sword’ which would create jobs as well as wean us off of our ‘dangerous’ dependence on foreign oil…
What do you suppose happened to that idea?
You don’t think the ‘Banksters’ slapped him upside the head and wagged their finger in his face while they told him, ‘You can’t do that! Do you know how much we have invested in Chinese wind technology? If you’re gonna ‘go green’, you’re gonna go green OUR way!
But still, after losing the last election, where the fuck did ‘Drill here, Drill now! Re-surface from?
If you ask me, Peak Oil ‘deniers’ appear to be running out of ammunition.
Obama Details Plan to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: March 31, 2010
WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday described his proposal to open vast expanses of American coastlines to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, as a painful but necessary decision.
He said that his plan to allow drilling along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska — ending a longstanding moratorium on exploration from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean — would balance the need to produce more domestic energy while protecting natural resources. [!] But it is also intended to generate revenue from the sale of offshore leases and help win political support for comprehensive energy and climate legislation. [What part of ‘sold on the global market’ do they think the public doesn’t get? Never mind that one of the ‘dangers’ of peak oil is the end of ‘cheap and easy’. It’s that last part that really rattles my feeble noggin’, how the hell does drilling more fossil fuel ‘help’ the environment?]
While Mr. Obama has staked out middle ground on other environmental matters — supporting nuclear power, for example — the sheer breadth of the offshore drilling decision will take some of [?] his supporters aback. And it is no sure thing that it will win support for a climate bill from undecided senators close to the oil industry, like Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, or Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana. [It’s safe to say that Bobo has ‘accepted’ the idea he won’t be re-elected so he’s dropping all pretense that he ever supported the progressive agenda. Looks like Bobo is going to give Billy-Boy a run for his money when it comes to the title of ‘best Republican president’. If this isn’t W’s third term then you could sure fool me!]
“This is not a decision that I’ve made lightly,” [Excuse me? Did you think about it for a whole ten minutes or did we get it the same way you did ‘This has been a public service announcement, so STFU!] the president said in prepared remarks in a speech on energy security. “But the bottom line is this: given our energy needs, in order to sustain economic growth, produce jobs, and keep our businesses competitive, we’re going to need to harness traditional sources of fuel even as we ramp up production of new sources of renewable, homegrown energy.” [Um, let’s suppose they aren’t yanking our crank and we will soon find ourselves in a world suddenly devoid of oil that people/nations are willing to sell. Talk about your screeching halt, the ‘whiplash’ alone would kill millions! That’s the only way this meme of ‘we need to enlarge our personal oil reserves’ makes any sense.]
But Jacqueline Savitz of the environmental group Oceana countered on Wednesday: “We’re appalled that the president is unleashing a wholesale assault on the oceans. Expanding offshore drilling is the wrong move if the Obama administration is serious about improving energy security, creating lasting jobs and averting climate change.”
Under the plan, the coastline from New Jersey northward would remain closed to all oil and gas activity. So would the Pacific Coast, from Mexico to the Canadian border.
The environmentally sensitive Bristol Bay in southwestern Alaska would be protected and no drilling would be allowed under the plan, officials said. But large tracts in the Chukchi Sea and Beaufort Sea in the Arctic Ocean north of Alaska — nearly 130 million acres — would be eligible for exploration and drilling after extensive studies.
To critics who already were branding the decision both unnecessary and a threat to the environment, Mr. Obama said in his remarks: “There will be those who strongly disagree with this decision, including those who say we should not open any new areas to drilling, But what I want to emphasize is that this announcement is part of a broader strategy that will move us from an economy that runs on fossil fuels and foreign oil to one that relies more on homegrown fuels and clean energy. And the only way this transition will succeed is if it strengthens our economy in the short term and long term. To fail to recognize this reality would be a mistake.” [Um, there is ‘no way’ they are going to succeed in keeping any oil found within our coastal waterways for ourselves…and it’s ‘fucking stupid’ to even entertain the idea!]
On the other hand, oil industry officials and Republicans in Congress claimed the president did not go far enough in making domestic resources available for exploitation.
House Republican Leader John Boehner on Wednesday criticized the administration for keeping the vast majority of America’s offshore energy resources off limits at a time when, the Ohio representative said, Americans want an “all of the above” strategy for promoting American energy production and creating American jobs. [Jesus! Either Beanie-boy is an absolute moron or he thinks the rest of us are! Like Obama’s ‘shovel ready’ projects, all this strategy will accomplish is to provide ‘job security’ for the relative handful of people already employed in energy exploration. Just as ‘Shovel ready’ provided job security for people already employed in roadway maintenance.]
Mr. Obama tried to answer that criticism as well.
“They’d deny the fact that with less than 2 percent of oil reserves, but more than 20 percent of world consumption, drilling alone cannot come close to meeting our long-term energy needs,” he said, “and that for the sake of the planet and our energy independence, we need to begin the transition to cleaner fuels now.” [So why the fuck is num-num instituting ‘drill here, drill now?]
“Ultimately,” he concluded, “we need to move beyond the tired debates between right and left, between business leaders and environmentalists, between those who would claim drilling is a cure all and those who would claim it has no place. Because this issue is just too important to allow our progress to languish while we fight the same old battles over and over again.“ [What a crock of crap! There is NO WAY there are going to drill their way to ‘energy independence’ AND keep it for themselves! And if they did the ‘blow-back’ would be incalculable! Think we have ‘terrorist problems’ now, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet!]
The Senate is expected to take up a climate bill in the next few weeks — the last chance to enact such legislation before midterm election concerns take over. [I’m not even going to go there, these idiotic attempts at bipartisanship are beyond pathetic!]
Mr. Obama and his allies in the Senate have already made significant concessions on coal and nuclear power to try to win votes from Republicans and moderate Democrats. The new plan now grants one of the biggest items on the oil industry’s wish list — access to vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling. [The citizens of the US WANT the WAR to end…what do we get? Off-shore drilling (along with an off-shored economy!) WTF!!!]
But even as Mr. Obama curries favors with pro-drilling interests, he risks a backlash from some coastal governors, senators and environmental advocates, who say that the relatively small amounts of oil to be gained in the offshore areas are not worth the environmental risks.
The Obama administration’s plan adopts some drilling proposals floated by President George W. Bush near the end of his tenure, including opening much of the Atlantic and Arctic Coasts. Those proposals were challenged in court on environmental grounds and set aside by President Obama shortly after he took office.
Unlike the Bush plan, however, Mr. Obama’s proposal would put Bristol Bay, home to major Alaskan commercial fisheries and populations of endangered whales, off limits to oil rigs.
Actual drilling in much of the newly opened areas, if it takes place, would not begin for years. [And when it does begin people will be so desperate for oil they won’t give a damn about the environmental risks.]
Mr. Obama said several times during his presidential campaign that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his State of the Union address in January that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.” [He did? Funny how the media ‘glosses over’ certain topics so they won’t upset powerful advertisers.]
Perhaps in anticipation of controversy, the new policy has been closely held within the administration. White House and Interior Department officials began briefing members of Congress and local officials in affected states late Tuesday.
It is not known how much potential fuel lies in the areas opened to exploration, although according to Interior Department estimates there could be as much as a three-year supply of recoverable oil and more than two years’ worth of natural gas, at current rates of consumption. [This number is not ‘static’ so actual yields could be dramatically lower.] But those estimates are based on seismic data that is, in some cases, more than 30 years old.
The first lease sale off the coast of Virginia could occur as early as next year in a triangular tract 50 miles off the coast that had already been approved for development but was held up by a court challenge and additional Interior Department review, officials said.
But as a result of the Obama decision, the Interior Department will spend several years conducting geologic and environmental studies along the rest of the southern and central Atlantic Seaboard. If a tract is deemed suitable for development, it is listed for sale in a competitive bidding system. The next lease sales — if any are authorized by the Interior Department — would not be held before 2012. [Um, Aren’t these the same leases that go ‘unpaid’ year after year because ‘nobody’ is in charge of collecting the fee?]
The eastern Gulf of Mexico tract that would be offered for lease is adjacent to an area that already contains thousands of wells and hundreds of drilling platforms. The eastern Gulf area is believed to contain as much as 3.5 billion barrels of oil and 17 trillion cubic feet of gas, the richest single tract that would be open to drilling under the Obama plan.
Drilling there has been strongly opposed by officials from both political parties in Alabama and Florida who fear damage to coastlines, fisheries, popular beaches and wildlife. Interior Department officials said no wells would be allowed within 125 miles of the Florida and Alabama coasts, making them invisible from shore.
The Interior Department and the Pentagon are discussing possible restrictions on oil and gas operations in some areas off Virginia and Florida, home to some of the nation’s biggest Navy and Air Force facilities. States are also likely to claim rights to the revenues from oil and gas deposits within 3 to 12 miles of shore and to some portion of lease proceeds, officials said. [Too bad for the States that the oil industry is a notoriously poor payer AND very tightly politically ‘connected’.]
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar developed the offshore drilling plan after conducting four public meetings over the past year in Alaska, California, Louisiana and New Jersey. The Interior Department received more than 500,000 public comments on the issue. [Um and they only met with officials from four states! Talk about ‘political suicide’, now the general public knows what they’re up to!]
Mr. Salazar has said that he hoped to rebalance the nation’s oil and gas policy to find a middle ground between the “drill here drill now” advocacy of many oil industry advocates and the preservationist impulse to block oil exploration beneath virtually all public lands and waters. [Understand good citizen, the ‘public’ has been routinely ‘swindled’ out of the income these so-called ‘leases’ generate, and if you think that’s about to change I’ve got a bridge you might be interested in…]
He has called the offshore drilling plan a new chapter in the nation’s search for a comprehensive energy policy that can open new areas to oil and gas development “in the right way and in the right places,” according to an aide. [Despite being termed as ‘right/proper’ what we are really seeing is the ‘second phase’ of worldwide oil extraction…the easy to get at and refine stuff is spent, now it’s time to go after the stuff that’s harder to reach and more expensive to bring up.]
In many of the newly opened areas, drilling would begin only after the completion of geologic studies, environmental impact statements, court challenges and public lease sales. Much of the oil and gas may not be recoverable at current prices and may be prohibitively expensive even if oil prices spike as they did in the summer of 2008.
Um, I don’t know about you good citizen, but I certainly didn’t see that coming! Worse, there are several ‘off the wall’ assertions being made here that are outright lies!
Naturally, they are politicians and this is to be expected. Perhaps we need to take a moment and mourn the loss of anything even resembling ‘subtlety’
What disturbs me most is the increasing sense of ‘desperation’ being displayed by the ‘spin-masters’…they’re losing control of the lies and they’re not quite sure what to do about it.
Sorry good citizen but any of you that doubted ‘peak oil’; this is the ‘convincer’. It is what would logically follow passing the half-way mark in ‘known reserves’.
More, er, diabolical is there have been people staring down this hole for a long time, doing precisely what we’re doing here, trying to figure out what comes next and what comes after that.
Let it suffice to say that you can only see just so far ahead with any degree of certainty. The trouble with variables is they are indeed ‘variable’.
The next decade will witness a ‘rush’ of alternative energy, stretching out fossil fuel supplies into the near future…what is unknown is how ‘reliable’ renewables will be in practice as opposed to theory.
If the parts prove to need replacement on too frequent a basis, you put yourself right back where you started with a ‘resource shortage’.
Going after the ‘harder to extract' oil is, er, frightening enough because the next ‘stop’ on this dead-end railroad is governed by price, where the ‘cost’ of extracting the fuel exceeds the benefit reaped from harvesting it. (Meaning you use more energy than you extract.)
Bizarrely this is one instance where ‘cost’ has absolutely nothing to do with dollars and cents.
You can’t expend ten ‘joules’ of energy to harvest a single joule, even nature respects the laws of mathematics/diminishing returns.
Thanks for letting me inside your head,