1
   

Obama permits off-shore oil drilling

 
 
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2010 10:13 am
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack Obama on Wednesday announced an expansive new policy that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska.

A welcome and astonishing decision. It makes me rethink my view about Obama.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,815 • Replies: 77
No top replies

 
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2010 10:18 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;146721 wrote:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack Obama on Wednesday announced an expansive new policy that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska.

A welcome and astonishing decision. It makes me rethink my view about Obama.


A good and necessary decision,yes. But at a cost.
Seems basically a stop gap measure, regretably necessary ,at this point.
Hopefully we will not rest on our laurels as has been our past inclination.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2010 11:48 am
@wayne,
wayne;146723 wrote:
A good and necessary decision,yes. But at a cost.
Seems basically a stop gap measure, regretably necessary ,at this point.
Hopefully we will not rest on our laurels as has been our past inclination.


What's the cost? And why is it regrettable?
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 11:00 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;146747 wrote:
What's the cost? And why is it regrettable?


I think we must be very careful as far as our environment is concerned. Our future hopefully will continue to place a high value on this.

It is regrettable that we have waited so long to develop alternative sources of energy, that we still need to make choices that will impact our environment so heavily.

Oil is a messy business, I am seeing it daily here in western Kansas.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 12:37 pm
@wayne,
wayne;147110 wrote:
I think we must be very careful as far as our environment is concerned. Our future hopefully will continue to place a high value on this.

It is regrettable that we have waited so long to develop alternative sources of energy, that we still need to make choices that will impact our environment so heavily.

Oil is a messy business, I am seeing it daily here in western Kansas.


What makes you think, I wonder, that we can discover alternative sources at a reasonable price? There is no evidence for it. Nor is there any evidence that even if we can that we would discover enough so that we would not need more oil anyway.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 02:09 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;146747 wrote:
What's the cost? And why is it regrettable?


Regretable is state of Energy policy of USA. After decades of cheap imports and cheap domestic gas, the bill mounted to trillions.

Regretable is the neglect of domestic resources for decades. Now it's late.

That's regretable !

Pepijn Sweep
Magister Ox:sarcastic:
0 Replies
 
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 03:20 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;147143 wrote:
What makes you think, I wonder, that we can discover alternative sources at a reasonable price? There is no evidence for it. Nor is there any evidence that even if we can that we would discover enough so that we would not need more oil anyway.


I have little doubt that the price will be high ,at first anyway. We have come a long way along the road to renewable resourses. I do think the time has come to increase our efforts. The price must be paid at some point, why should we be selfish enough to force it onto the shoulders of our progeny.

Oil will run out, that is a fact. Coal will continue to be an environmental nuisance, apparent fact.

At what point do we take responsibility for our children's future.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 08:04 pm
@wayne,
wayne;147187 wrote:
I have little doubt that the price will be high ,at first anyway. We have come a long way along the road to renewable resourses. I do think the time has come to increase our efforts. The price must be paid at some point, why should we be selfish enough to force it onto the shoulders of our progeny.

Oil will run out, that is a fact. Coal will continue to be an environmental nuisance, apparent fact.

At what point do we take responsibility for our children's future.



Your post does not answer the question why you think we have the technology you think we need. And I doubt that even if we do, we'll find private industry willing to do what it takes unless it is profitable. So, I suppose you are expecting the federal government to do it. Another step toward serfdom. By the way, we already have the technology to help do what you want, namely nuclear power. But, the environmentalists are going to raise a stink about that too. Just as, by the way, they do about windmills.

By the way, people keep predicting the end of oil as we discover new vast oil fields in Brazil, and off-shore. Another case of crying "wolf".
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 08:20 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;147297 wrote:
Your post does not answer the question why you think we have the technology you think we need. And I doubt that even if we do, we'll find private industry willing to do what it takes unless it is profitable. So, I suppose you are expecting the federal government to do it. Another step toward serfdom. By the way, we already have the technology to help do what you want, namely nuclear power. But, the environmentalists are going to raise a stink about that too. Just as, by the way, they do about windmills.

By the way, people keep predicting the end of oil as we discover new vast oil fields in Brazil, and off-shore. Another case of crying "wolf".


We are developing better solar technology as we speak. I agree that private industry needs to make a profit, the government is not responsible for developing new technologies.
Somehow we must find a way to make this profitable, after all "The consumer speaks. It is the responsibility of the public to make the necessary sacrifices to ease the burden on our progeny.

I sometimes fish in the cooling lake of a nuclear facility, I am amazed at the lack of impact one observes. Of course there is the issue of waste, which at least can be collected and stored safely, while coal waste is simply diffused into the environment.

Given our earths finite nature, oil will run out, and these problems will have to be solved sooner or later. We might discover oil on the moon , yet the resource is finite still.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 08:43 pm
@wayne,
wayne;147314 wrote:
We are developing better solar technology as we speak. I agree that private industry needs to make a profit, the government is not responsible for developing new technologies.
Somehow we must find a way to make this profitable, after all "The consumer speaks. It is the responsibility of the public to make the necessary sacrifices to ease the burden on our progeny.

I sometimes fish in the cooling lake of a nuclear facility, I am amazed at the lack of impact one observes. Of course there is the issue of waste, which at least can be collected and stored safely, while coal waste is simply diffused into the environment.

Given our earths finite nature, oil will run out, and these problems will have to be solved sooner or later. We might discover oil on the moon , yet the resource is finite still.


This sounds like, "the audacity of hope" which heats no houses. And, you are neglecting "the fierce urgency of now", remember that!
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 09:28 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;147326 wrote:
This sounds like, "the audacity of hope" which heats no houses. And, you are neglecting "the fierce urgency of now", remember that!


I have no intention of implying that the solution is now. I very much enjoy air conditioning, and driving to my vacation spot.
I think the "fierce urgency of now" may be that we remember to begin taking baby steps to ease the burden on future generations.
We have lived a life of riley, so to speak, since wwII. May be that the time is come ,we should remember the sacrifice of our forefathers, and seriously look at what we might be willing to do for the future of our country.
I have lived in a land of plenty all my life with little thought or care toward the harsh realities of life on earth. I hope that I ,for one, can seriously view my habits and take a few baby steps.
0 Replies
 
YumClock
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 09:37 pm
@kennethamy,
I believe ken disagrees, and stated that the matter is, in fact, urgent.

Although that's just an interpretation.
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2010 09:55 pm
@YumClock,
YumClock;147377 wrote:
I believe ken disagrees, and stated that the matter is, in fact, urgent.

Although that's just an interpretation.


Yes I agree, the matter is urgent. But the real problem is being ignored.
Our socio-philosophy is seriously flawed. Government cannot fix that.

When are we going to begin teaching our children a new philosophy of living? We continue to teach the methods of get grab take.

How are we going to begin a solution?

The oil decission is a stop - gap measure.
Necessary, but not the real problem.

If you walk on the beach in Galveston,Tx you will get globules of tar on the soles of your feet.
This is the cost of offshore oil.

It is regrettable that we must make decisions that cost us so dearly.
0 Replies
 
fast
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 11:24 am
@kennethamy,
[QUOTE=kennethamy;146721]WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack Obama on Wednesday announced an expansive new policy that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska.

A welcome and astonishing decision. It makes me rethink my view about Obama.[/QUOTE]

Rush Limbaugh said something to the effect that he is intentionally seeking favor by announcing support for a policy that he strongly believes has no chance of being put into effect.
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 11:35 am
@fast,
fast;147549 wrote:


Rush Limbaugh said something to the effect that he is intentionally seeking favor by announcing support for a policy that he strongly believes has no chance of being put into effect.


I've been wondering when that would be said.
Of course there is always that possibility. I suppose we have been so ill treated by our elected officials that we find it easy to believe the worst.
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 12:38 pm
@YumClock,
YumClock;147377 wrote:
I believe ken disagrees, and stated that the matter is, in fact, urgent.

Although that's just an interpretation.


No. I don't think it is urgent. Neither does Obama as far as I can see. I commend him for that.

---------- Post added 04-02-2010 at 02:40 PM ----------

fast;147549 wrote:


Rush Limbaugh said something to the effect that he is intentionally seeking favor by announcing support for a policy that he strongly believes has no chance of being put into effect.


Who is "he", Obama? I think that it is likely that Congress will permit some further drilling. Not enough though.
0 Replies
 
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 09:50 pm
@kennethamy,
I truly hope they will take Alaska off the list. I think it should remain the jewel of America ,if at all possible.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 09:55 pm
@wayne,
wayne;147687 wrote:
I truly hope they will take Alaska off the list. I think it should remain the jewel of America ,if at all possible.


What makes you think it will not remain a jewel even if there is drilling?
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 10:35 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;147689 wrote:
What makes you think it will not remain a jewel even if there is drilling?


We are obviously getting better at preventing errors that cause damage.
But, accidents do happen, pipes leak, ships run aground. I just hope that we will view the risks critically before we open up Alaska to more drilling.

I have selected a long term viewpoint here, but sacrifices must be made today in order to buy some time. I accept that.

I think environmentalists need to be willing to sacrifice too. It makes a lot more sense to accept some necessary environmental impact from something sustainable like wind energy, than to run around crying out against any impact at all.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 10:46 pm
@wayne,
wayne;147696 wrote:
We are obviously getting better at preventing errors that cause damage.
But, accidents do happen, pipes leak, ships run aground. I just hope that we will view the risks critically before we open up Alaska to more drilling.

I have selected a long term viewpoint here, but sacrifices must be made today in order to buy some time. I accept that.

I think environmentalists need to be willing to sacrifice too. It makes a lot more sense to accept some necessary environmental impact from something sustainable like wind energy, than to run around crying out against any impact at all.


That accidents might happen is a given. That is why accidents are called "accidents". But that seems to be not a good reason for supposing that Alaska will be despoiled by oil drilling. You know that there is already some oil drilling in Alaska now, don't you? If we were to take Alaska off the list (as you say) because of the possibility of accidents, then where should we drill? Anywhere?
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama permits off-shore oil drilling
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 08/11/2022 at 12:26:09