Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

We need all of the above, more drilling, solar, wind, smaller cars, conservation, whatever it takes. It is foolhardy to take any of them off the table, most importantly oil. And isn't it amazing, just suggesting we drill offshore helped oil prices drop over the last couple of days. I guess amazing to some people, not to me.

I hear the momentum is finally building in Washington, and I sincerely hope McCain takes the hint and picks up the entire banner soon. It is a huge fastball right down the middle, ready to be hit out of the park. If only he could see it.

We need all of the above, more drilling, solar, wind, smaller cars, conservation, whatever it takes. It is foolhardy to take any of them off the table, most importantly oil. And isn't it amazing, just suggesting we drill offshore helped oil prices drop over the last couple of days. I guess amazing to some people, not to me.

While developing all these energy sources we must remember:
1. CO2 is not a pollutant;
2. CO2 is not causing global warming;
3. CO2 is good for plant growth.

Does a state have ability to control its own coastal waters? Or do they belong to everybody? I rather think that authority to do more oil production on the coastal shelves comes from the Federal level and a state could not legally block that.

Oh, yes please, have McCain make domestic oil drilling a major part of his campaign! Please!

We will crush him on this issue, if alone on the fact that it can easily be shown that it doesn't solve the problem, only puts the problem off! Major investment in renewables is a smarter plan then major investment in oil drilling...

I would add that the West coast (with the possible exception of Alaska) will not allow any more drilling to operate off the shores of our states... and good luck with Florida. Even if this passes on the Federal level, it is unlikely to be allowed on the State level.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oh, yes please, have McCain make domestic oil drilling a major part of his campaign! Please!

We will crush him on this issue, if alone on the fact that it can easily be shown that it doesn't solve the problem, only puts the problem off! Major investment in renewables is a smarter plan then major investment in oil drilling...

I would add that the West coast (with the possible exception of Alaska) will not allow any more drilling to operate off the shores of our states... and good luck with Florida. Even if this passes on the Federal level, it is unlikely to be allowed on the State level.

Cycloptichorn

Malarkey. McCain will be crushed only if he continues to emulate much of the left.

Drilling NOW will solve much of the energy problem before and for less cost than any of the other energy developments currently in progress.

Does a state have ability to control its own coastal waters? Or do they belong to everybody? I rather think that authority to do more oil production on the coastal shelves comes from the Federal level and a state could not legally block that.

ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oh, yes please, have McCain make domestic oil drilling a major part of his campaign! Please!

We will crush him on this issue, if alone on the fact that it can easily be shown that it doesn't solve the problem, only puts the problem off! Major investment in renewables is a smarter plan then major investment in oil drilling...

I would add that the West coast (with the possible exception of Alaska) will not allow any more drilling to operate off the shores of our states... and good luck with Florida. Even if this passes on the Federal level, it is unlikely to be allowed on the State level.

Cycloptichorn

Malarkey. McCain will be crushed only if he continues to emulate much of the left.

Drilling NOW will solve much of the energy problem before and for less cost than any of the other energy developments currently in progress.

No, it will most definitely NOT do that. It will only put the problem off farther, at which point you and others will still suggest that we keep drilling more more more.

Drilling more oil does nothing to solve the underlying and fundamental problem of relying upon a fixed resource for energy, instead of a renewable one.

Cycloptichorn

Foxfyre wrote:

Does a state have ability to control its own coastal waters? Or do they belong to everybody? I rather think that authority to do more oil production on the coastal shelves comes from the Federal level and a state could not legally block that.

The international borders of the USA end 12 miles from shore. Consequently, the international borders of the states with ocean borders end 12 miles from shore. Drilling beyond the 12 mile limit is drilling in international waters not limited to the USA, not limited to any state in the USA, and not limited to any country in the world. Other nations have already sponsored drilling in international waters within and without continental shelves.

ican711nm wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Does a state have ability to control its own coastal waters? Or do they belong to everybody? I rather think that authority to do more oil production on the coastal shelves comes from the Federal level and a state could not legally block that.

The international borders of the USA end 12 miles from shore. Consequently, the international borders of the states with ocean borders end 12 miles from shore. Drilling beyond the 12 mile limit is drilling in international waters not limited to the USA, not limited to any state in the USA, and not limited to any country in the world. Other nations have already sponsored drilling in international waters within and without continental shelves.

Well I appreciate learning something new every day. I presume, however, that the Coast Guard is within its authority to patrol that 12 miles of ocean that falls within a state's borders? Are there uniform laws governing speed limits, protocol etc. in the coastal oceans or are ships, etc. subject to differing state laws as they negotiate the coastal waters? I know national law applies to all foreign registered ships traveling in our coastal waters. But apparently a state can ban oil production within its own 12-mile ocean border?

But you're right. Mexico is drilling like crazy in the Gulf so whatever minimal risk those rigs present to the ocean, there is no practical or logical reason for us not to do so. It would be unfortunate for a state to be so short sighted as to force us to go out 12 miles or more to do that though. The rigs within the coastal waters of Texas are like shining jewels in the night and all sit within teeming sea dwellers who really like those rigs.

I sure hope a majority of Americans wake up and ditch the knee jerk emotional resistance to rational human progress soon. It would make our problems so much easier to solve.

Quite a bit of oil was spilled during Katrina and Rita, and almost all was from land installations. Amount spilled from ocean drilling platforms - negligible.

And yes. I have personally assisted with bird, seal, and otter rescue from an oil spill on the California coast. It was a small one and it was ugly and heart breaking, and it made me realize how important it is to make oil production, transport, and storage as safe as possible.

Risk does not trump the necessity for improving safety and moving forward, however. If it did, we would be back in caves polishing our clubs.

In May 2006, the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) published their offshore damage assessment: "113 platforms totally destroyed, and 457 pipelines damaged, 101 of those major lines with 10″ or larger diameter."

http://blog.skytruth.org/2007/12/hurricane-katrina-gulf-of-mexico-oil.html

Unsurprisingly, this devastation caused significant spillage, according to the official report prepared for the MMS by a Norwegian firm:

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused 124 Offshore Spills For A Total Of 743,700 Gallons. 554,400 gallons were crude oil and condensate from platforms, rigs and pipelines, and 189,000 gallons were refined products from platforms and rigs. [MMS, 1/22/07]

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused Six Offshore Spills Of 42,000 Gallons Or Greater. The largest of these was 152,250 gallons, well over the 100,000 gallon threshhold considered a "major spill."

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/581/44814183_MMS_Katrina_Rita_PL_Final%20Report%20Rev1.pdf[MMS, 5/1/06]

Energy giant Halliburton, which owns a proprietary drilling technology frequently used in Colorado, on Wednesday questioned a proposed rule that would require oil and gas companies to identify and list all the chemicals used at a well site.

"The rule would need us to identify the chemicals (used in drilling), the volumes and concentrations," said Ron Heyden, a Halliburton executive, while testifying at a hearing before the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in Denver. "It is much like asking Coca-Cola to disclose the formula of Coke."