Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Bush to Urge Congress to Lift Offshore Drilling Ban
McCain supports it after all these years of being against it, now.
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
McCain? Flip flop? Never!God Save the Queen wrote:
McCain supports it after all these years of being against it, now.
http://keetsa.com/blog/wp-content/uploa … -flops.jpg
Whats the turbine for?Pug wrote:
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
Are you crazy? If that turbine fell off it could wash up on Florida's shores and ravage their tourism industry.Pug wrote:
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
Back on topic, the Bush family has a long history of ties to the oil industry. It should be no surprise to anyone that he supports perpetuating that rather than finding alternative fuels.
Why are the powers that be continuing to flog the dead horse that is fossil fuels?...it doesn't matter if we find more oil, it will still be a finite resource. They should all bite the bullet and plough all the cash and expertise into alternative fuels.chittydog wrote:
Are you crazy? If that turbine fell off it could wash up on Florida's shores and ravage their tourism industry.Pug wrote:
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
Back on topic, the Bush family has a long history of ties to the oil industry. It should be no surprise to anyone that he supports perpetuating that rather than finding alternative fuels.
Exactly. Even if the ban gets lifted, how soon do they really think it'll be until we start getting gasoline? Years. We could be well on our way to a new fuel source in that time.Braddock wrote:
Why are the powers that be continuing to flog the dead horse that is fossil fuels?...it doesn't matter if we find more oil, it will still be a finite resource. They should all bite the bullet and plough all the cash and expertise into alternative fuels.chittydog wrote:
Are you crazy? If that turbine fell off it could wash up on Florida's shores and ravage their tourism industry.Pug wrote:
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
Back on topic, the Bush family has a long history of ties to the oil industry. It should be no surprise to anyone that he supports perpetuating that rather than finding alternative fuels.
I'd say the situation has changed. Housing Market Burst>Rate Cuts>Inflation>Oil Speculators. Lack of foresight maybe. I don't want a leader whose head is stuck in concrete. I do however think that it should be left up to the states.. But of course the sheep will follow. Crist was promising to protect Florida beaches as part of a plan to get elected. Now he might be shooting for a VP spot so to hell with it. I miss Jeb.God Save the Queen wrote:
McCain supports it after all these years of being against it, now.
http://keetsa.com/blog/wp-content/uploa … -flops.jpg
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Jeb was good.... However there isn't any reason not to drill in the gulf. Did you see the map in the Wall Street Journal? Everything to the west of Florida is in use or leased. If there is an incident, then I doubt the spilled oil has the sense to stay out of Florida's waters. Asinine. I understand why us Floridians wouldn't want drilling in the Gulf, but it is all ready there.Kmarion wrote:
I'd say the situation has changed. Housing Market Burst>Rate Cuts>Inflation>Oil Speculators. Lack of foresight maybe. I don't want a leader whose head is stuck in concrete. I do however think that it should be left up to the states.. But of course the sheep will follow. Crist was promising to protect Florida beaches as part of a plan to get elected. Now he might be shooting for a VP spot so to hell with it. I miss Jeb.God Save the Queen wrote:
McCain supports it after all these years of being against it, now.
http://keetsa.com/blog/wp-content/uploa … -flops.jpg
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
I never said I was opposed. Right now the restriction is 100 miles (I think). 50 miles might not be bad. Our safety procedures are greater than most.DBBrinson1 wrote:
Jeb was good.... However there isn't any reason not to drill in the gulf. Did you see the map in the Wall Street Journal? Everything to the west of Florida is in use or leased. If there is an incident, then I doubt the spilled oil has the sense to stay out of Florida's waters. Asinine. I understand why us Floridians wouldn't want drilling in the Gulf, but it is all ready there.Kmarion wrote:
I'd say the situation has changed. Housing Market Burst>Rate Cuts>Inflation>Oil Speculators. Lack of foresight maybe. I don't want a leader whose head is stuck in concrete. I do however think that it should be left up to the states.. But of course the sheep will follow. Crist was promising to protect Florida beaches as part of a plan to get elected. Now he might be shooting for a VP spot so to hell with it. I miss Jeb.God Save the Queen wrote:
McCain supports it after all these years of being against it, now.
http://keetsa.com/blog/wp-content/uploa … -flops.jpg
The main cause for concern I think would be the local economies. Tourism is what drives Florida's economy. I'm not sure how enticing our beaches would be amidst the backdrop of oil platforms.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Its a pimpin' rig.The#1Spot wrote:
Whats the turbine for?Pug wrote:
This should be interesting. Lets see what florida does
I'm also imagining a oil rig with a huge wind turbine on top right now.
Irony is the enemy of the intraweb.
why can't we look for alternative fuels AND ALSO pursue offshore drilling, drilling in ANWR, nuke power, etc? why does it have to be one or the other?
the nature of alternative fuels is that it takes very long time to develop the technology. we could accelerate that development by pumping money into it, but that doesn't necessarily make the solution arrived at actually cost effective - these are two separate axes. we have the tech to make electric cars. right now they are not very cost effective as compared to gas/diesel all things considered (repair, impact to environment upon scrapping, refueling from strained coal-generated electric grid, etc).
so as a stop-gap measure, we could drill locally and potentially get off or severely limit our dependency to foreign oil. in PARALLEL, we pursue more green alternatives with COST as a major factor. making green tech cost effective is a no brainer. people will flock to it if it is cheaper AND effective.
interestingly, Cheney issued a mis-statement about china drilling less than 60 miles offshore from Florida. actually not true. china is not drilling.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington … -oil_N.htm.
but...if you read deeper into the article, it's not the fact that china is drilling or not. forget china, communism, cheney for a moment. the idea that cuba is allowing exploration and if oil is found, could actually drill 60 miles off coast of florida is the interesting point here. our current regulations have this distance set at 100 miles and forbid everything closer. so my mind is thinking that if cuba can do at 60 miles, why can't we do it at least at 60? cuba is a different country for cripes sake!
the nature of alternative fuels is that it takes very long time to develop the technology. we could accelerate that development by pumping money into it, but that doesn't necessarily make the solution arrived at actually cost effective - these are two separate axes. we have the tech to make electric cars. right now they are not very cost effective as compared to gas/diesel all things considered (repair, impact to environment upon scrapping, refueling from strained coal-generated electric grid, etc).
so as a stop-gap measure, we could drill locally and potentially get off or severely limit our dependency to foreign oil. in PARALLEL, we pursue more green alternatives with COST as a major factor. making green tech cost effective is a no brainer. people will flock to it if it is cheaper AND effective.
interestingly, Cheney issued a mis-statement about china drilling less than 60 miles offshore from Florida. actually not true. china is not drilling.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington … -oil_N.htm.
but...if you read deeper into the article, it's not the fact that china is drilling or not. forget china, communism, cheney for a moment. the idea that cuba is allowing exploration and if oil is found, could actually drill 60 miles off coast of florida is the interesting point here. our current regulations have this distance set at 100 miles and forbid everything closer. so my mind is thinking that if cuba can do at 60 miles, why can't we do it at least at 60? cuba is a different country for cripes sake!
Last edited by CaptainSpaulding71 (2008-06-18 14:40:18)
I love lame duck politics.
Bush dictates this as a presidential topic for the election.
Bush dictates this as a presidential topic for the election.
And the ducklings follow right along.Pug wrote:
I love lame duck politics.
Bush dictates this as a presidential topic for the election.
What is on the table is for offshore drilling, 50-200 miles off the coast line. You are not going to see any silhouette or Oil Rigs off the coast at 50 miles. You can only see approx 30~35 miles off the horizon.Kmarion wrote:
I never said I was opposed. Right now the restriction is 100 miles (I think). 50 miles might not be bad. Our safety procedures are greater than most.DBBrinson1 wrote:
Jeb was good.... However there isn't any reason not to drill in the gulf. Did you see the map in the Wall Street Journal? Everything to the west of Florida is in use or leased. If there is an incident, then I doubt the spilled oil has the sense to stay out of Florida's waters. Asinine. I understand why us Floridians wouldn't want drilling in the Gulf, but it is all ready there.Kmarion wrote:
I'd say the situation has changed. Housing Market Burst>Rate Cuts>Inflation>Oil Speculators. Lack of foresight maybe. I don't want a leader whose head is stuck in concrete. I do however think that it should be left up to the states.. But of course the sheep will follow. Crist was promising to protect Florida beaches as part of a plan to get elected. Now he might be shooting for a VP spot so to hell with it. I miss Jeb.
The main cause for concern I think would be the local economies. Tourism is what drives Florida's economy. I'm not sure how enticing our beaches would be amidst the backdrop of oil platforms.
I agree that McCain has flipped on many topics, this one is not one that I hold him to that judgement. Only that he's changed his mind way to late, but late is better, than never at all.
This is only one small step in the right direction... we still need the capacity to refine more crude oil.
I would agree, Teflon. One last caveat, however, is that we should maintain high environmental standards in this drilling. If any Valdez type disasters occur, the company involved should get the shit sued out of them.
I'm pretty sure it's a lot less than 30 miles. It has to do with the curvature of the earth. I was referring to the cruise industry, charter boats boat, gulf fishing trips, etc..(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
What is on the table is for offshore drilling, 50-200 miles off the coast line. You are not going to see any silhouette or Oil Rigs off the coast at 50 miles. You can only see approx 30~35 miles off the horizon.Kmarion wrote:
I never said I was opposed. Right now the restriction is 100 miles (I think). 50 miles might not be bad. Our safety procedures are greater than most.DBBrinson1 wrote:
Jeb was good.... However there isn't any reason not to drill in the gulf. Did you see the map in the Wall Street Journal? Everything to the west of Florida is in use or leased. If there is an incident, then I doubt the spilled oil has the sense to stay out of Florida's waters. Asinine. I understand why us Floridians wouldn't want drilling in the Gulf, but it is all ready there.
The main cause for concern I think would be the local economies. Tourism is what drives Florida's economy. I'm not sure how enticing our beaches would be amidst the backdrop of oil platforms.
I agree that McCain has flipped on many topics, this one is not one that I hold him to that judgement. Only that he's changed his mind way to late, but late is better, than never at all.
This is only one small step in the right direction... we still need the capacity to refine more crude oil.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
At the same time though... the federal ban subverts states' rights. If the majority of Florida's citizens supported drilling along its coast, then I don't see why the feds should be able to keep them from doing it.
Last edited by Turquoise (2008-06-18 16:18:18)
Absolutely correct! I love the power of a highly engineered internal-combustion engine in just about any mode of travel. That should not go with out saying, that being responsible with it's use and planning for future replacements.Turquoise wrote:
I would agree, Teflon. One last caveat, however, is that we should maintain high environmental standards in this drilling. If any Valdez type disasters occur, the company involved should get the shit sued out of them.
I have believed this, as long as I can remember, that it was like 10 or 12 miles... I thought I lost an argument at work earlier today, that it was 30~35 miles http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 515AAPsb4AKmarion wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's a lot less than 30 miles. It has to do with the curvature of the earth. I was referring to the cruise industry, charter boats boat, gulf fishing trips, etc..(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
What is on the table is for offshore drilling, 50-200 miles off the coast line. You are not going to see any silhouette or Oil Rigs off the coast at 50 miles. You can only see approx 30~35 miles off the horizon.Kmarion wrote:
I never said I was opposed. Right now the restriction is 100 miles (I think). 50 miles might not be bad. Our safety procedures are greater than most.
The main cause for concern I think would be the local economies. Tourism is what drives Florida's economy. I'm not sure how enticing our beaches would be amidst the backdrop of oil platforms.
I agree that McCain has flipped on many topics, this one is not one that I hold him to that judgement. Only that he's changed his mind way to late, but late is better, than never at all.
This is only one small step in the right direction... we still need the capacity to refine more crude oil.
One key part of this topic that I have heard, is that China is starting to log seismic and topographical seabeds off of the coast of Cuba. They are going to be drilling sooner than us. The reason I have a problem with this is that if the oil fields are discovered and developed by the Chinese before we can even allow our domestic oil producers, to do the same we've lost billions or resources for our economy and supply demands.
The negative externalities of drilling and production don't have an effect on Florida alone.Turquoise wrote:
At the same time though... the federal ban subverts states' rights. If the majority of Florida's citizens supported drilling along its coast, then I don't see why the feds should be able to keep them from doing it.
Good point... but... if properly regulated, then more drilling isn't a bad thing. It's all about oversight.Masques wrote:
The negative externalities of drilling and production don't have an effect on Florida alone.Turquoise wrote:
At the same time though... the federal ban subverts states' rights. If the majority of Florida's citizens supported drilling along its coast, then I don't see why the feds should be able to keep them from doing it.
With directional drilling they could pull it out right from under us.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
Absolutely correct! I love the power of a highly engineered internal-combustion engine in just about any mode of travel. That should not go with out saying, that being responsible with it's use and planning for future replacements.Turquoise wrote:
I would agree, Teflon. One last caveat, however, is that we should maintain high environmental standards in this drilling. If any Valdez type disasters occur, the company involved should get the shit sued out of them.I have believed this, as long as I can remember, that it was like 10 or 12 miles... I thought I lost an argument at work earlier today, that it was 30~35 miles http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 515AAPsb4AKmarion wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's a lot less than 30 miles. It has to do with the curvature of the earth. I was referring to the cruise industry, charter boats boat, gulf fishing trips, etc..(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
What is on the table is for offshore drilling, 50-200 miles off the coast line. You are not going to see any silhouette or Oil Rigs off the coast at 50 miles. You can only see approx 30~35 miles off the horizon.
I agree that McCain has flipped on many topics, this one is not one that I hold him to that judgement. Only that he's changed his mind way to late, but late is better, than never at all.
This is only one small step in the right direction... we still need the capacity to refine more crude oil.
One key part of this topic that I have heard, is that China is starting to log seismic and topographical seabeds off of the coast of Cuba. They are going to be drilling sooner than us. The reason I have a problem with this is that if the oil fields are discovered and developed by the Chinese before we can even allow our domestic oil producers, to do the same we've lost billions or resources for our economy and supply demands.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Kmarion wrote:
With directional drilling they could pull it out right from under us.
Economic implications would not be enough for overstepping states rights. If they cite national security as the core reason then it falls within the jurisdiction of the United States Constitution. Of course it doesn't really matter now. Floridians elected Crist and Crist has now agreed.Turquoise wrote:
Good point... but... if properly regulated, then more drilling isn't a bad thing. It's all about oversight.Masques wrote:
The negative externalities of drilling and production don't have an effect on Florida alone.Turquoise wrote:
At the same time though... the federal ban subverts states' rights. If the majority of Florida's citizens supported drilling along its coast, then I don't see why the feds should be able to keep them from doing it.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Bush to Urge Congress to Lift Offshore Drilling Ban