President Bush asked Congress on Wednesday to permit drilling for oil in deep water off America's coasts to combat rising oil and gas prices. There is no excuse for delay," the president said in a Rose Garden statement. The proposal met opposition from governors from California, New Jersey North Carolina, and New Mexico. "We are in this situation because of our dependence on traditional petroleum-based oil," California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said in a statement, according to The Associated Press. "Our $35 billion economy is driven by tourism and the use of the shore," AP quoted New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, a Democrat, as saying.
"It's a very bad idea. First of all, it will take 30 years before it affects gas prices -- lowering them -- and it will take 10 years to start the drilling," New Mexico Governor and former U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, a Democrat, told CNN. "The answer is a long-term policy that deals with -- substantial policies that promote -- conservation, fuel efficiency in vehicles, an emphasis on renewable energy." "It's doesn't work for states to decide. If the state above or below you has a problem it affects your shores as well," North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley, a Democrat said, according to AP. "It's too much squeeze for the juice when you look at real estate on the coast, recreational fishing and tourism that could be adversely affected by some problem." Virginia and South Carolina have largely supported lifting the moratorium, AP reported.
Oil production cost,Here's what the price of a barrel of oil needs to be for different sources of petroleum to be profitably extracted: - Accessible land: $19 - Shallow water: $20-60 - Deep water: $60 - Shale mining: $30-50 - Oil sands: $50-60 Current price per barrel: $134 Sources: U.S. Govt. CERA, Rand, EnCana Bush also renewed his demand that Congress allow drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, clear the way for more refineries and encourage efforts to recover oil from shale in areas such as the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. Bush said that the basin potentially contains more than three times as much recoverable oil as Saudi Arabia's proven reserves and that the high price of oil makes it profitable to extract it. Bush tells Congress again do it my way
We have discussed our shale oil numerous times since Bush first clandestinely announced a program to make it's capture economical! It is interesting that Bush is finally saying it out loud! It seems to me like it should be equitable to produce our energy needs from already existing and unused existing sources rather than instituting programs that will only give the oil industry more work and employment while doing nothing for our cost and energy needs! This is only one of the numerous issues that is coming to a head conveniently just before elections!
What really bothers me is tha I believe nothing will prevent prices to continue skyward and once again the lying idiot McCain proves while he says he is different he is a clone of Bush as McCain wants to lift ban on offshore drilling
Also right in line with Bush McSame has bought into Bush's "Green Energy" nuclear proliferation as Sen. John McCain proposed Wednesday to dramatically increase America's commitment to nuclear power, calling for a crash program to build 45 reactors by 2030 and a long-term goal of building 100 such plants across the country. McSame also mirrors Bush on nuclear energy
You can see for yourself exactly where Obama and McCain stand on the issue
* The frightening thing to me is House Democrats responded to President's Bush's call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply. They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow. At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that "there were multiple reasons for the postponement" including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.
Here are the highlights from briefing: Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling 1115 We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market. Hinchey on why they postponed the Appropriations markup 1119 I think there aren't enough votes for the Peterson amendment. It wasn't taken up (the Interior spending bill) because of the omnibus Appropriations bill. That's the main focus of the Appropriations Committee. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) 1116 They (Republicans) have a one-trick pony approach. please check this out
This is very scary! Part of me wants to say Yeah but all of me knows the Government and Congress can't do anything right. They are all complicit and corrupt! What the hell is the answer? the problem is just beginning like all of the rest of them as we try to progress successfully into the twenty first century. We know it is a world wide problem and our friend in Wales explained nicely the over taxation and fuel problem in Britain as the people are starting to rebel. from Landsker
* I wish I could sound rosy but I can only say stay together and hold on!
20 comments:
Asking for offshore drilling at a time when fuel prices are so high is pure and simple pandering. Anyone with a lick of sense knows any new drilling wouldn't even make a dent in the consumer usage. And even if it could, it would probably be 15 to 20 years before they would pay off. No, we need to start looking into other sources - solar, electric, etc - now. President Obama - how's that hope for change? - needs to challenge the country the way JFK did when he promised to get us to the moon before the end of a decade. If our ancient - by today's standards - technology could put a man on the moon less than 60 years after the Wright's first flight, then surely our great minds and today's technology can get us away from fossil fuels in less than a decade.
Robert
Nothing is going to stop this price rise. Everything in any direction is just an excuse for prices to keep rising. We are powerless. Congress controlling the oil scares me too they can't even control there mouths!
I get scarred when I hear JFK's name invoked in the same breath as Obama's as you know because if they have to I see the same fate and just imagine what that would do. Very scary!
yea man, the age of geopolitical warfare is among us
Technology allows us to use energy that we already have, to do work.
It doesn't create energy from nothing.
That is the real problem with energy. We are using every source we know of, and we need energy consumption to go to infinity.
If we did discover a new energy source that would allow us to continue our energy consumption growth forever, there would come a point where the waste heat would destroy all life on the planet.
At what point do we stop energy consumption growth? When the oceans evaporate? When the earth's crust starts to melt? When the Earth blazes as bright as our sun?
Every energy source we use today, we already knew about. We've known about fossil fuels, hydro, wind and solar for thousands of years. We knew about nuclear energy for decades before we captured it.
This time, we've run out of energy sources to discover. There's no next leap to take, so that we can grow our population, energy and mass to infinity.
And say we discover a source that can double our energy consumption? Our population doubles a couple of more times, then it runs out. What then? What would our planet look like if it had to feed 28 billion people?
I'm not convinced that it is rational or moral, to chase infinite growth on a finite planet.
I understand the fear the comes with the realization that we may be living at the end of civilization as we know it. I understand the desperation we all feel in wishing we could extend the crash out a few more decades.
But is it worth building our population up for a bigger fall later? If we could postpone the problem until there are 10 billion people, then let them crash and burn, would it be the right thing to do?
Torrance
It is pretty screwed up knowing we're we are headed for a future. i don't know how long or how much of the conversations you have been following here but they are very in depth and dead on largely thanks to input from Larry, wease, Brother, and others. I won't get too dire on you I think you know. I was just talking to one of my sons in Iraq who has a couple non battle injuries and I think the mad man is safer in combat anyway you know it is your kidss ant their age group that I really feel for and will happily go to my death defending.
wease
i don't know if it is knowing that water is the side effect of burning Hydrogen or not but I kep thinking their must be a way to use the pollutants in air itself as a source with pure air being the only result! I really see no way out of the way this is rapidly headed. I only keep going back to we must stay together and be there to get ourselves through if we are to have a chance.
Knowing that I get very peeved with the chief scum going to disasters like the floods today just for a friggen photo op. He has never come through with a damn thing ever. If it wasn't for citizens coming together we would be screwed. We are on our own as the Goverment is only concerned about themselves and proves daily!
This is a pathetic attempt by the moronic monkey to bail out his embalmed zombie buddy, and it doesn't look like it's gaining much traction to me.
What worries me is that Chimpy's cronies in big oil can turn the screws and make it a discussion topic. I half expect them to.
Jim, I sympathize completely with what you're saying.
I'm torn between wishing there were solutions, and being glad that if we're going to crash, then it's now, while there's still wild creatures left on the Earth.
If we had unlimited energy, we'd turn the planet into a complete wasteland.
We live like locusts, consuming everything in our path.
Sorry, Piss me off I just had a long response for you but when I posted it Blogger was having problems. I hate that! Anyway you know oil will be the only ones benefiting! I liked what one Senator said about using all the wells they have capped and there would be no shortage.
Congress countered Bush's proposals by wanting control of the refineries thus the oil and that is scary too. Like every other problem in the world and largely caused by Bush this too is just beginning and will get a lot worse as we try to progress into the future. I think I have tried to go to your place before but balked because I had to join or something but I will check it out momentarily. Take care!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/06/19/darfur.rape/index.html
This is horrifying! how can this be happening. I feel like the world has gone completely crazy. where is the breaking point?
jolly roger my friend that last comment was to you. I have been having trouble with Blogger and that just went through!
Wease
I agree with you! That locust analogy was right on! It seems that our country is at the end of the life cycle of any generation. Bush has merely put it on the fast track. Sadly we seem to be taking the world with us but the world too seems to be at the end of its life cycle and some seem to be purposely bringing it about.
You also made me remember what my brother use to say when he was young speaking about creatures still being around. He use to say better to die young and be a nice corpse. Bull! I am not ready or giving up!
new mommy
Thanks for the link! I saw that this morning but went past it to put this and other crap together.
I am not going to make things worse Hon you know. The world has gone crazy if you will as they jockey for their position often in situations deemed helpless anyway and some like the majority of the so called civilized world to gain position for their new order desires like Bush and many are uniting with Russia to take him on.
It does boil down to a mess but you just relax and take care of you hubby and baby! I can go on forever just join the gamut of problems together as a whole but I won't unless you so desire to converse and of course we will be here!
new mommy
The Sudanese Government is full of crap. You know it goes on routinely and also by aid worker often. I have heard cases where the UN workers were accused. There is no excuse for it period. Often they think the poorest and the youngest do not matter and are too young to implicate. Sick! there is no justification for taking a woman against her will or for bothering a kid period!
that is the first news article in a while that has choked me up. i've become a bit numb to the news. here we send a 17 year old to prison for staying in 3 seconds too long and there it is just expected to be raped periodically and then continue gathering firewood. i guess i can still be thankful (for now) that i live in America, flaws and all.
new mommy
you are entirely right! I have seen quite a few stories on it and it never ceases to amaze me casual about it some of those young girls and women are. To them it is just a part of life. I guess it beats some of the alternatives such as butts and buttocks lopped off. I will agree with you too that at least for now we are better off here. At least in this country I am heartened by the fact that the Government is failing us but the citizens are not. They will come to the rescue and they are not the Government. That is just a fact!
Another step to Military Rule Jim:
'Orwellian law must be stopped'
Despite some cosmetic changes, Sweden's proposed surveillance law is still a monster, writes Pär Ström from the independent New Welfare Foundation.
"The critics won", is the messgage from certain media outlets after it emerged that the FRA (Försvarets Radioanstalt - Swedish National Defence Radio Establishment) surveillance bill would be sent back to the parliamentary defence committee to enable the inclusion of certain "privacy guarantees".
But in fact nobody has won. We have instead witnessed politicians hoodwinking their citizens.
A monster with make-up is still a monster and "Swechelon", or Sweden's Echelon, must be stopped.
It is not yet certain how exactly the amendments to "Lex Orwell" will look. But the primary changes seem to be that: the Swedish Data Inspection Board will be tasked with monitoring FRA's surveillance; a parliamentary committee will also be appointed to watch the watchers; and FRA will be give a somewhat more limited remit regarding what it may and may not monitor. Mention has also been made of two new agencies: one to authorize surveillance and another to check on FRA's activities.
But on the whole these are no more than marginal adjustments. The basic idea remains unchanged.
FRA will still be able to conduct mass surveillance of law-abiding citizens' communications without need for a court order. It will be able to read people's emails and text messages, listen to their conversations, see which websites they are visiting, create "sociograms" that map out the friends people have. And so on.
It's just as absurd as it was before. It still runs counter to Article 12 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It's still going to create a society characterized by self-censorship and concern. It's still going to make people fearful of contacting journalists to report abuses of power. Et cetera.
The government's idea now is to push the revised proposal through at breakneck speed. Somewhat like what they tried to do with the original draft bill. The Riksdag could vote the bill into law as early as this evening or tomorrow before people have come to the realization that the changes are a decoy. It bears repeating: "Swechelon" must be stopped!
Larry
Surveillance has become a justified necessity of life thanks to under good conditions the failing of our society to enforce morality instead of allowing people to debauch whatever they want and make decent society try to live safely among the ilk. It is sick but sadly like everything else it will be used against decent people!
"Surveillance has become a justified necessity of life...."
Jim, Jim, Jim, how Orwellian of you!
brother
I know I felt guilty when I was saying it and I have to laugh I was thinking of you. I was thinking of all the criminals in society that are caught numerous times every day on surveillance and it comes in handy.
Post a Comment