Comments on: Lift the Offshore Drilling Ban

National Review: It Would Signal That The U.S. Is Serious About Increasing Domestic Production

[sparks224]

The premis of this story is false.

There are plenty of oil fields in the continental U.S. that are not being utilized right now. Of course you will never about that from the ExxonMobile sponsored news.

[ubrew12]

IOWEIGN said: "CEO pay is at record highs..." Nice to see our priorities are in the right place...

To take just wave power as an example, certain states have had enough of oil-costs, and are beginning (finally) to order wave-power installations. So, which companies are about to reap massive growth from a sudden worldwide interest in wave power? Why, the Aussies, Scotts, and Scandinavians, of course. Only there did the government offer tax-breaks and other aid to these struggling companies while they were birthing their technologies.

There is one U.S. company with an offering to tap into this huge new market, just ONE. Where did they get their research funds during the hard years? The military. Welcome to America!!!

[ioweign]

Why can''''t that happen for wind, wave, ocean thermal, geothermal, solar, and other mechanisms? Because powerful interests are against it, that''''s why.

Posted by ubrew12 at 09:31 PM : Jun 19, 2008

CEO pay is at record highs...

[ubrew12]

The powers that be promote oil and nuclear because they can control the fuel for these energy options. Think oil speculation is bad? Try speculation in uranium. We don''t promote renewable energy options because they are renewable, and so no one can monopolize the supply of the fuel.

Once we got it right. In the 1930s-50s, American''s built dams that still generate 20% of our electricity today, despite the fact that the dams paid for themselves 40 years ago. Thus, the energy they pump into the American economy is FREE. That would never happen under todays corporate-controlled energy market. Why can''t that happen for wind, wave, ocean thermal, geothermal, solar, and other mechanisms? Because powerful interests are against it, that''s why.

[atheismwins]

Good article. Worldwide supply is 85 million barrels daily. Worldwide demand is 87 million. We are in a bidding war for oil.

Did anyone else hear the Dems'' back breaking? They are like the man who hit his wife because his sports team lost.

[tejasdemo]

The only thing it will signal is more getting screwed at the pump. Period.

[texlandrover]

Everyone WAKE UP!!! We need a multi-prong approach. We need to build more Solar & Wind systems. Build Nuclear, YES Nuclear power. I know its hard for some to grasp but sometimes the wind does Not blow and it gets dark outside. And Finally, we need to fully exploit the fossil fuel resources located in North America. Enough sending US dollars to the mid East, lets spend that money in the USA!!! That is the solution, and it only took me 5 minutes to come up with it.

[texlandrover]

Everyone WAKE UP!!! We need a multi-prong approach. We need to build more Solar & Wind systems. Build Nuclear, YES Nuclear power. I know its hard for some to grasp but sometimes the wind does Not blow and it gets dark outside. And Finally, we need to fully exploit the fossil fuel resources located in North America. Enough sending US dollars to the mid East, lets spend that money in the USA!!! That is the solution, and it only took me 5 minutes to come up with it.

Drilling more wells is classic head-in-the-sand solution! It ignores two of the biggest gorillas in the woods.
1. We WILL run out of oil someday. Drilling more wells just hastens the arrival of that day. We need to be getting ready for it, instead of going precisely in the wrong direction.
2. There is no getting around the effect fossil fuel burning has on this ocean of air we live in. Cars are the biggest sources of pollution.
The best and quickest way to lower gas prices is to put a leash on those predatory capitalist speculators that the republicans unleashed a few years ago. These clowns are the ONLY beneficiaries of more oil well drilling!

[it_oldtimer]

Pfffftt...our remaining "native" oil reserves are already pitifully inadequate, and still years away from production.

Perhaps it would be better to just leave them untapped for now, and consider that oil a part of the "strategic reserve" - to be used only when all the other sources dry up.

[questionnews]

Sorry, but I have no idea what this means

PS You were for the war, weren''''t you? If not what facts specifically led you to conclude that war was not warranted? thx!

Posted by SamTheTVCat at 04:08 PM : Jun 19, 2008

Well if our economy collapes we have no money to pay for the infrastructure change over. It''s far better to make these required changes while our economy is still somewhat strong then wait until we are really hurting to make the switch because that will take longer.
As far as the war issue goes, I would have much rather have spent that money on large scale solar & wind power generation than on Iraq. Leading the world on the path away from oil would have been the biggest finger to all the OPEC nation. Making oil an outdated energy source would have scared the c.r.a.p out of them and would have put real doubt in thier mind about the future of thier own countries.

[samthetvcat]

---"They can drill on Mars, in your backyard, in the Alaska preserves and well, you might see gas go down for a little while, just until they invent another ***** in the supply chain and then you''''ll be right back where you started driving your stinking 9mile/gal F250 or SUV. chuckle."---
Posted by talkingham

Although maybe the people of Portland meant to demonstrate that they''re open to compromise of like just approving exploration to find out just how much known deposits there really are without approving actual drilling - I could see them being open to that kind of progressive compromise . . . maybe I made too much of an assumption about the question of the poll :)

[samthetvcat]

---"but we need to maintain our economy in the mean time or else we won''t be able to afford it."---
Posted by Questionnews
Posted by SamTheTVCat

PS I''m sorry, I don''t mean to be so harsh but gosh this type of rationale sounds exactly like what people were saying prior to the Iraq war . . . it was always like ''but we need to be safe in the mean time or else we won''t be able to control terrorism''.

I mean like it SOUNDS totally rational, but the reality of the situation totally doesn''t warrant that conclusion . . . GOP prey on peoples desire to soothe their anxiety by replacing it with a feeling of being in control, even if control isn''t ultimately achievable. Just imagine how you''ll feel when your state coastline is covered in oil and birds are dying and it''s taking billions to clean up and gas came down a total of a penny a gallon . . .

[talkingham]

Yeah this is just like the Jimmy Stewart movie of the late ''50''s when he convinces the gulf cost shrimpers that if they allow him to drill there will be plenty of cheap oil and gas for everyone forever- and in fact, that the largest shrimp just love hanging around the largest oil platforms.

They can drill on Mars, in your backyard, in the Alaska preserves and well, you might see gas go down for a little while, just until they invent another ***** in the supply chain and then you''ll be right back where you started driving your stinking 9mile/gal F250 or SUV. chuckle.

[samthetvcat]

---"but we need to maintain our economy in the mean time or else we won''t be able to afford it."---
Posted by Questionnews

Sorry, but I have no idea what this means . . . we only have enough oil to contribute to like 0.5% towards our economy after 10 years. It will lower costs by about 0.8%. We''re still going to be completely dependent on Saudi Arabia. Like do you accept those figures or are you thinking the situation is something else (?)

PS You were for the war, weren''t you? If not what facts specifically led you to conclude that war was not warranted? thx!

[talkingham]

So why do we need more drilling?
They are just going to charge us more anyway because they know they can. Just last Fall the price of oil dropped to $44/barrel, so somehow between now and last October demand has tripled, yeah right. Believe all the lies you you hear on the news and read here. They (OPEC and our own producers) will sell you as much as you want at $135/barrel because there is no shortage, only the greed of billionaires an ****** speculators.

Has nothing to do with supply, except supplying these billionaires with more billions of dollars.

[questionnews]

---"I don''''t think you know too much about Portland. 3 out of every 4 cars have an "Impeach Bush" sticker on it. GOP has little to no influence in Oregon."---
Posted by Questionnews

Well why else would people be for off-shore drilling in their own backyard if not for misinformation? There''''s too little for it to be worth the burden otherwise. I make the analogy to the Iraq war because that too was oversold. Would the majority of Americans have supported invasion if they knew Iraq didn''''t have wmds? GOP deceive, and the media doesn''''t do a good job of calling them on it . . .

Posted by SamTheTVCat at 03:40 PM : Jun 19, 2008

I give Oregonians more credit than that. There is a difference between knowing that oil is something we need to get away from and realizing if all potential energy sources are shut down that the economy of the region will collapse. We do need to ween ourselves off oil, but to do it overnight is impossible and the majority of people know it.
The January issue of Scentific American has a great article on solar power generation. With a $450 billion investment over the next 20 years it could supply about 70% of the nations electricity. It will take years to switch over to alternative energy sources, but we need to maintain our economy in the mean time or else we won''t be able to afford it.

[samthetvcat]

---"I don''t think you know too much about Portland. 3 out of every 4 cars have an "Impeach Bush" sticker on it. GOP has little to no influence in Oregon."---
Posted by Questionnews

Well why else would people be for off-shore drilling in their own backyard if not for misinformation? There''s too little for it to be worth the burden otherwise. I make the analogy to the Iraq war because that too was oversold. Would the majority of Americans have supported invasion if they knew Iraq didn''t have wmds? GOP deceive, and the media doesn''t do a good job of calling them on it . . .

[samthetvcat]

---"I don''t think you know too much about Portland. 3 out of every 4 cars have an "Impeach Bush" sticker on it. GOP has little to no influence in Oregon."---
Posted by Questionnews

Well why else would people be for off-shore drilling in their own backyard if not for misinformation? There''s too little for it to be worth the burden otherwise. I make the analogy to the Iraq war because that too was oversold. Would the majority of Americans have supported invasion if they knew Iraq didn''t have wmds? GOP deceive, and the media doesn''t do a good job of calling them on it . . .

[ubrew12]

National Review: "It Would Signal That The U.S. Is Serious About Increasing Domestic Production"

And, in other headlines today, "Global Warming to spur Extreme Weather". Oh, yeah, it would definitely ''send a signal'' to the world community alright! (U.S. to communities at risk of global warming fallout: FU!)