she said god :lol: I thought there was seperation of church and SB...Nope something else.
Let's go drill for oil!
Let's go drill for oil!
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
catherine96821:okay, you want to take this on? Then stick around. Address my points Mr.Eco-Saint. Some of you have a misplaced disdain for a vehicle.
let's talk about your life.
I think I should get extra credit for the first 12 miles I logged on my bike today.
Deception on drilling
More Gulf oil may not lower prices, but it sure puts Florida at risk
Election-year pandering plummeted to new depths this week with passage of a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that would lift long-standing bans on offshore drilling.
The measure's proponents would like voters to believe that the measure -- designed primarily to open up forbidden waters off the eastern Gulf of Mexico -- will lower prices at the gas pump, ease U.S. reliance on foreign oil and, in the most bewildering claim of all, help safeguard our energy supply from the vagaries of hurricanes.
But it's an illusion, at best. The sooner the measure is defeated in the Senate, the sooner our nation's leaders can focus their attention on exploring more viable, effective solutions to our nation's energy crisis.
The Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act -- or DOER, as the bill's supporters call it -- is largely the result of a compromise between Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., who's fought the drilling bans for years, and Rep. Adam Putnam, a Republican from Bartow.
Florida's congressional delegation has, for the most part, stood united against repeated efforts to allow drilling closer to the state's shoreline. But, as gas prices rose, some in the delegation began to waver.
Putnam unwisely sought to broker a compromise with Pombo, a longtime beneficiary of the oil industry who's raked in $200,000 in donations from companies this year alone.
The compromise falls far short of serving Florida's, or America's, best interests.
Legislators would set limits -- or not
In general terms, the deal would allow drilling 50 miles from the shoreline of any coastal state unless its legislature votes to limit drilling to 100 miles. The limit would have to be renewed every five years.
State lawmakers could choose to let the rigs in closer -- within 3 miles of shore.
The bill grants an exemption for part of the eastern Gulf. Drilling would be off-limits in a military training zone extending roughly 240 miles west of Tampa Bay. But, given the history of Pombo and others, Floridians cannot safely assume the industry won't try to chip away at that limit in the years ahead.
Americans also shouldn't count on this maneuver saving them any money.
Drilling in the eastern side of the Gulf could affect natural gas prices -- with "could" being the operative word. But the benefits to consumers at the gas pump are far more dubious.
Industry officials say it will take at least seven years to begin drilling, and a decade to bring any oil to market. In other words, there would be no immediate effect on gas prices.
And there isn't likely to be a long-term effect, either. The price of oil is determined on the world market, and the amount available in the eastern Gulf -- the area primarily targeted by drilling supporters -- doesn't contain enough oil to influence prices.
So, who stands to benefit? The oil and natural gas industries -- and their current and future lackeys in elected office.
In one of the many troubling aspects of the measure, a large share of royalties from drilling would go to state governments -- creating huge financial incentives for legislators to bring drilling closer to shore.
States that allow drilling within 100 miles would get half the royalties. States that allow drilling within 12 miles eventually could get three-quarters.
If this measure becomes law, Tallahassee would soon be dripping with oil lobbyists. "The oil industry will come in and own the state capitals," Jason Kello, spokesman for Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fort Pierce, recently told the Herald-Tribune's Will Rothschild.
The scenario certainly isn't hard to imagine. The oil and natural gas industries currently spend close to $50 million a year on lobbying in Washington and contribute $10 million to candidates every election cycle.
Environment and economy at risk
Opponents of the measure fear that any drilling will damage the eastern Gulf's fragile environment, including its marine life, and endanger the heart of the state's $50-billion-a-year tourism industry.
Those fears aren't unreasonable. Although Pombo and others claim spills aren't a worry, data from the Coast Guard show tens of thousands of gallons of oil -- sometimes hundreds of thousands -- are spilled in the western Gulf every year.
In testimony before Congress this spring, Coast Guard officials said an estimated 9 million gallons of oil were discharged in the Mississippi River corridor and the Gulf during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita last year.
Ironically, proponents of lifting the drilling bans point to those hurricanes as proof that additional sources must be developed to protect against price surges.
But they've yet to satisfactorily explain the logic of setting up drilling operations in another part of the Gulf vulnerable to hurricanes, especially in an era when the storms are growing in intensity and frequency.
On to the Senate
Fortunately, the prospects look bleak for the measure's passage, as is, in the Senate. But Pombo and his industry allies hope that DOER will lead to new compromises that will ease the way for drilling.
Florida's senators, Democrat Bill Nelson and Republican Mel Martinez, have threatened to filibuster. They should do so -- and emphasize for the benefit of the American public just how much deception and shortsightedness is oozing from this measure.
In debating the expansion of Gulf oil drilling, Congress is squandering time and money that should be devoted to fostering the development of alternative energy sources, increasing the fuel efficiency of cars and tracks, and stressing the urgency of conservation.
The sooner lawmakers do away with DOER, the sooner they can do what they really need to do to bolster our nation's energy security.
Will your budget bear that cost? I surely know mine couldn't. Sure, some of you may be weathly
sounds like another "NOT IN MY BACKYARD" attitude to me ... we have known that we had a problem with oil/gas supplies back in the 70's WHEN WE HAD TO RATION GAS due to overseas imports being cut back. Billions of dollars have been spent on trying to develope some other forms of entergy and everything they tried either didn't work or was too expensive ................ I hope gas goes to $10 a gallen and then we will find something that will work ...... until then not much is going to happen. Everyone will gripe about the high fuel cost but you will not get any help from any major corporations to solve the problem quick. The big oil companies don't won't the problem solved. The car makers don't want the problem solved (they would sell less cars if we had a mass transit system that worked), even the government really doesn't want to solve the problem because they would loose TAX DOLLARS. So please call your goverment repersentives and tell them to VOTE FOR THE DRILLING ....... nothing is going to get accomplished in alterniate entergy sources until we run out of oil/gas reserves in about 100 years or so ........bruehlt:No - I am not going to talk about my life. I have nothing to prove to anyone on a scuba diving forum. I frankly don't care about your life, either.
The attitude of being deserving of things is just something that causes much humor in me.
I've noticed that American's tend to have the view that they are owed things - from money, to cheap gas. Wow - I can't believe how many people have taken things that they have for granted. I worked my arse off to get where I am in life - I appreciate every little thing I have. However, I don't believe that I deserve any of it. I consider myself lucky - look at people in other countries and what they have.
Now - regarding the energy we presently have - oil and gas.
As some others have pointed out here, our society cannot simply turn off the spigot. We need to ween ourselves from oil. We are close to (if not surpassed) our peak oil curve. Any small disruption of supply will cause oil prices to spike. Remember last years hurricanes? Well, what happens if we go to war with Iran, and they cut off oil to the market? Oil goes >$100 a bbl. Think your SUV costs a lot to fill up now? Wait until gas costs $5 a gallon (let's do the math - $5 / Gallon * 44 Gallons = $220). This example was for a Ford Excursion. Ymmv.
Can you afford to pay for that fuel cost? Will your budget bear that cost? I surely know mine couldn't. Sure, some of you may be weathly - however, a fair majority of the people out there are not - and those are the majority. If the majority of the people in this country can't afford to fill up their gas tanks, what happens next? Think ripple effect. The economy tanks because people start to ration their money and don't buy other things. Its a cycle.
So - the question is, how do we fix it? Invest in clean energy technologies, and TELL OUR GOVERNMENT to get off their butts support these efforts. By telling them to NOT drill in the gulf, you are telling them that the "quick fix" of drilling in these fields will not change the thirst of the worlds oil demands. Instead of drilling, tell them you support clean energy technologies.
Think for a moment - the amount of oil and or gas that these rigs may produce will not make a dent in the worlds energy market! Why risk polluting the environment, for an energy resource that is not going to change the price to the consumer? Why?? Tell me, please. Because we can?
catherine96821:sigh. I don't think you are supposed to come in here and rag on Americans.
catherine96821:I would take you on but not risking mod wrath tonight. Settle down..we were actually having a nice two sided conversation.