Civil libertarians have long complained that, as soon as he got into office, President Barack Obama appeared to morph into former President George Bush on everything from surveillance policies to blocking investigations of torture. Now, environmentalists may join that chorus of criticism with Obama wanting to lift a 20-year ban on drilling off the Virginia coastline — as well as to open large areas of the Gulf of Mexico.
Obama insists that the answer is “drill, baby, drill” — to paraphrase the GOP — and that such development is needed “[t]o set America on a path to energy independence, the president believes we must leverage our diverse domestic resources by pursuing a comprehensive energy strategy.”
He also wants the Interior Department to survey other areas along the Eastern shore for drilling and exploration. These are sensitive areas already dealing with threats caused by pollution.
This was one of the issues that environmentalists pressed Obama on when he was running for president, here. At the time, in relation to the same question regarding Florida’s coast, he said “when I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts. That’s how we can protect our coastline and still make the investments that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for good.”
For the full story, click here.
Fascism has its benefits.
For example, Exxon gets whatever the hell they want regardless of which “party” is in charge, the wisdom of their desires for profit above all other consideration or standing legal prohibition.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
It does not matter who you are. Maybe he ate too much paint containing lead as a kid…….
I didn’t like the idea when GWB proposed off-shore drilling and I don’t like it nor approve of it now.
If the oil companies got their way, we would drain the Chesapeake Bay, and pave it over.
!!!damn!!!
I’m ready for Ralph Nader now…
From: ALL PART OF THE PLAN
Obama preempts the other side’s most resonant arguments, which forces them to come up with more and more extreme claims in order to differentiate themselves. In the end, he occupies the reasonable middle ground and his opponents are Palinized.
Another giant beer-fest.
mespo,
You say that like it is not currently underway. If they can drain a swamp and built a city with such fine people as DC then what next? I think I have heard a song with these words, paved paradise and put up a parking lot….
Did somebody say beer? Set em up….
ye hah, I finally agree whole heartedly with the president. A big tip of the Oil Soaked Stetson to the President. What a piece of good news to start the day with.
This will create good, well paying jobs and ancillary jobs to support the rigs. And as someone who has done offshore drilling, it is not environmentally unfriendly. In fact in the 2 years that I spent in Alaska there were no problems and the amount of oil that leaked overboard was less than from a small power boat. Marine mammals were also not disturbed by the presence of a rig, seals, walrus and killer whales would come by on a regular basis to investigate. Seals would come right up to the rig, the walrus and killer whales would come within a hundred yards or so.
This is great news for Virginia. Maybe the President is getting a clue and starting to understand that if you are going to redistribute wealth you better have something to redistribute.
They realize that green technology is not so green, that coupled with the fact they are now forecasting 30 years of global cooling. So much for the more co2 that is released the hotter it will get.
This is also a compromise to get votes on whatever climate bill that they are going to come up with. Unfortunately for the administration there is no compromise from the republicans which is why Boner is already saying it does not go far enough.
Byron just look at what offshore drilling has done in the GOMEX. When the big boats head out, thats the first place they head to, the oil rigs. TUNA, chicken of the sea. Now if Utah can get there land back and they start drillin there, we just might be heading towards energy independence.
P.S. It’s too late to save the planet. F it, were all gonna die.
Lovelock: ‘We can’t save the planet’
Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too late to try and save the planet.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8594000/8594561.stm
Bdaman:
if it is too late then it ought to be “drill baby drill”
Byron,
“offshore drilling, it is not environmentally unfriendly”
That is like saying murder is ok because it is not the gun that kills, it is the murderer.
Placing the “oil” into the atmosphere and everywhere else is what is environmentally unfriendly.
Obama’s speech, given at a military base like Bush II always did, sounds of ultimate ignorance “it will help the planet” to become more green.
The ignorance comes from his religious background that denies humanity can destroy the environment to the point of human extinction.
We have entered the Criminally Insane Epoch:
http://ecocosmology.blogspot.com/2010/03/criminally-insane-epoc-arises.html
Dredd:
It is not environmentally unfriendly. Nothing is 100% environmentally friendly. Dont you think there is pollution during the production of solar panels and wind turbines? What about the fish kills with hydro-electric power?
People need to live, we are part of the environment and our survivability depends on our ability to manipulate our environment to our benefit.
Methinks the President just out-smarted the GOP yet again. There will be drilling, but it’ll be done under stringent guidelines set up by the Obama Dept of the Interior, not the oil companies. There will be none in CA and only on off the coast of Alaska, not the preserve. This will be one art of a comprehensive energy plan that will include more green energy devlopment. Either the GOP will have to oppose drilling in order to oppose the rest of the package or they’ll be forced to be bi-partisan. Either way Obama wins.
Obama’s lies never end. During his campaign, he strongly criticized McCain and GW Bush regarding offshore drilling. One of the reasons I voted for him was his pledge against such drilling for oil.
On drilling, even Palin has the right to call Obama a bald-faced liar–and without dispute.
LEO
Note the date of the article below. It’s from an NBC fact-checking piece was just after the final Obama-McCain debate.
Fact-checking offshore oil drilling
Posted: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 9:22 PM by Mark Murray
From NBC’s Mark Murray
McCain just said that Obama is opposed to off-shore drilling. That’s only partially true. Obama had opposed it, but later said he’d support it as part of a bigger compromise.
From the the Palm Beach Post this past August: “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama said today he would be willing to open Florida’s coast for more oil drilling if it meant winning approval for broad energy changes. ‘My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices,’ Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post. ‘If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage – I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done,’ Obama said.”
“Methinks the President just out-smarted the GOP yet again. There will be drilling, but it’ll be done under stringent guidelines set up by the Obama Dept of the Interior, not the oil companies. There will be none in CA and only on off the coast of Alaska, not the preserve. This will be one art of a comprehensive energy plan that will include more green energy devlopment. Either the GOP will have to oppose drilling in order to oppose the rest of the package or they’ll be forced to be bi-partisan. Either way Obama wins.”
If this be true, HE IS Usul, Muad’Dib!!!!!
To rcampbell:
Is there any hint that there will be an effective mechanism to insure the “stringent guidelines” are followed to prevent disasters as opposed to being simply a legal basis to impose post-disaster, wrist-slap penalties?
In June 2008, then-Sen. Obama told reporters in Jacksonville, Florida, “when I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts. That’s how we can protect our coastline and still make the investments that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for good.”
In July 2008, he said, of lifting moratoriums on offshore drilling, that “if there were real evidence that these steps would actually provide real, immediate relief at the pump and advance the long-term goal of energy independence, of course I’d be open to them. But so far there isn’t.”
But by August, then-Sen. Obama signaled that he was willing to support legislation that included off-shore drilling as part of a bipartisan compromise.
By September 2008, then-Sen. Obama was saying an energy strategy means “increasing domestic production and off-shore drilling.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/president-obama-drill-baby-drill-.html
In Obama’s own, hypocritical words…A video–then and now….
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/drill-barack-drill-obama_n_520523.html
Is there any hint that there will be an effective mechanism to insure the “stringent guidelines” are followed to prevent disasters as opposed to being simply a legal basis to impose post-disaster, wrist-slap penalties?
Name all the disasters you can think off and then list the reason for the accident. Ready? Go.
The timing of this makes me think it is being used as a distraction to the healthcare bill.
The EPA is going to rule on MPG next week and look for the ol reduction of speed from 65 to 55 again. It’s a game of give and take.
GOP response
Despite today’s announcement that the Obama Administration may allow some new OCS leases in 2012, it is clear that the Administration and Democrat Congress have and continue to promote public policies that restrict American energy exploration and raise gas prices.
* Obama Moratorium: The Obama Administration plan would discard the 2010-2015 Outer Continental Shelf lease plan that had been set in motion by the previous Administration and delay the implementation of their new plan until 2012. This new two-year “Obama Moratorium” (2010-2012) would almost certainly delay any new exploration in areas previously under moratoria until after the president’s entire term. The president’s plan would then keep several areas off limits, including the Pacific coast from Mexico to Canada, the Atlantic coast north of Delaware, parts of Alaska, and the most promising areas of the Gulf of Mexico.Against the will of the American people and Congress, the Administration is essentially unilaterally reinstating the drilling ban for an additional two years, signaling to markets that supply will not expand, thus raising prices. Earlier this month, Natural Resources Ranking Member Doc Hastings (R-WA) and 87 other House Republicans sent a letter to Interior Secretary Salazar urging the Administration to implement the 2010-2015 leasing plan. The letter also outlined the cost of inaction-these years of delay will leave Americans unemployed, lose billions of dollars in revenues and create a greater dependence on unstable foreign sources of oil and gas that puts U.S. national security at risk.
Stalling and blockading of new energy production endangers tens of thousands of existing jobs and prevents the creation of new jobs that would help lower the unemployment rate. Opening new areas to drilling would be a no-cost stimulus for the U.S. economy.
* New Gas Tax: Making matters worse, the Democrat Congress is unfathomably considering a new gas tax. Press reports suggest that the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham climate bill under construction in the Senate may impose a “carbon tax” on motor fuels such as gasoline. This gas tax would target all consumers (especially rural Americans who travel further for work) and result in an increase in air travel, cargo costs, and significantly impact fuel-dependent industries such as trucking.
http://ow.ly/1t8tg
In 2009 Democrats scrapped oil and gas leases in Utah.
Bdaman:
The only one I can think of is the Exxon Valdez. I don’t know of any oil leak disasters from rigs. There may be some minor leakage but not millions of barrels. I think most of the disasters have involved oil tankers that wreck.
That stuff costs money so I doubt those greedy capitalists are out to ruin the environment by spilling it into the ocean.
I think he is doing this because the Russians are going to be drilling off the coast of Florida in Cuban and international waters. He would look pretty stupid if he allowed the Russians to drill within a few miles of our shores and we couldn’t. With the new advances in directional drilling they could probably reach deposits within our territorial waters.
He isn’t doing this to put one over on the GOP he is forced to do it or the GOP would beat him like a red headed step child over another nation drilling so close to our shores and we can’t. This is just laughable, the picture of Obama as a sly fox. It makes me giggle. He is an idiot and a statist, but then I repeat myself.
Yep Obama is a frigging “genius” alright. He is still a fool and will be a lame duck by the first Wednesday in November. But dream on about how he is going to out-fox the GOP or people with any sense.
“The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012 or beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is making a bold strategic leap to begin drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. While the United States attempts to shift gears to alternative fuels to battle the purported evils of carbon emissions, Russia will erect oil derricks off the Cuban coast.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/18/obama-surrenders-gulf-oil-to-m
Byron you are correct. Not one single disaster has occurred in re to spillage of oil do to drilling. It’s all been in the transportation thereof. Not one.
Bdaman:
“The president’s plan would then keep several areas off limits, including the Pacific coast from Mexico to Canada, the Atlantic coast north of Delaware, parts of Alaska, and the most promising areas of the Gulf of Mexico.”
Yeah, he is saving those areas for the Russians or maybe the Chinese. I wonder how much he is making under the table in campaign contributions from them?
You know the Russians just last week have come to an agreement just last week to drill for oil in the GOMEX. Obama may have been under some pressure there. The Russians will now direct drill in the GOMEX and take what is ours. The Russians are stocking up. It’s one of the main reasons they invaded Georgia for the natural gas.
Byron,
Can’t be bothered to do a quick google search? Here’s a site from a French nonprofit.
http://www.black-tides.com/
Interestingly it seems that while the number of oil spillage from tankers has gone down since the 70s, the spillage from oil platforms has risen.
From the site “The US National Academy of Sciences estimates the volume of operational discharge and accidental spills from this sector of activity at 80,000 tonnes in 1979, 50,000 in 1981 and 100,000 in 2000.
The accidents mostly involve the spillage of a few cubic metres to a few tens of cubic metres, resulting from pipes bursting or from human errors. These incidences are mainly concentrated in areas where the material is old and the safety procedures deficient (Caspian Sea, Black Sea, Red Sea and China Sea). Occasional major accidents caused by an oil well eruption or an act of war can be added to the list of causes of large-scale oil slicks. One of these incidents holds second place in the ranking of oil spill world records.”
“The oil companies already have access to some 34 billion barrels of offshore oil they haven’t even developed yet.”
(The US uses about 7 billion barrels of oil annually.)
http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/31/obama-offshore-drilling-ocs-ei/#more-22225
Gyges:
I acknowledged that in my post. Please re-read. I dont consider a small bit of oil a disaster.
By the way have you heard of the Le Brea Tar pits?
John if your numbers are correct, how long will the 34 billion barrels last if they do develop it.
Byron,
So the “…second place in the ranking of oil spill world records” doesn’t count as a disaster, or is it just a small bit?
gYGES:
currently there are about 620 offshore rigs world wide taking your value of 100,000 tonnes that amounts to about 21 m^3 per rig. Not a small amount but certainly not an ecological disaster. There are petroleum eating bacteria.
Gyges:
“These incidences are mainly concentrated in areas where the material is old and the safety procedures deficient (Caspian Sea, Black Sea, Red Sea and China Sea).”
I might also point out that these are for the most part socialist or communist countries.
Byron,
Right, I get that. But you said, “I don’t know of any oil leak disasters from rigs. There may be some minor leakage but not millions of barrels. ”
I’m just pointing out that:
“Occasional major accidents caused by an oil well eruption or an act of war can be added to the list of causes of large-scale oil slicks. One of these incidents holds second place in the ranking of oil spill world records.”
and
“On 3 June 1979, in the Gulf of Mexico, the offshore platform Ixtoc 1, run by the national company Petroleos Mexicanos, was destroyed by a blow out. A fire broke out. The blow out was not reduced until 23 March 1980, by which time half a million to possibly even a million tonnes of oil had been released. ”
would seem to render that inaccurate.
Gyges:
Ok that was 30 years ago and the technology is quite a bit better now. You have not provided any info on American rig disasters in American waters.
You have not provided any info on American rig disasters in American waters.
Thats because there are none. It’s all in the transportation of oil and those were due to negligence.
It is a well-known fact that global warming is melting the Arctic ice cap.
As this happens, the natural resources in the Arctic will become available for exploitation. As such, the five countries with major claims to the region—the United States, Canada, Russia, Denmark, and Norway—are looking to extend their claims to the natural resources beneath the ice-covered ocean. The size of the Arctic Shelf is about 4.5 million square kilometers, and the U.S. Geological Survey posits that 25 percent of the world’s undiscovered gas and oil reserves may be there. Clearly, there are large amounts of untapped resources that these five countries could use to satisfy their increasing demand for development and economy.
This paper will try to explore the current disputes over Arctic seabed resources surrounding the five states in North Pole,
evaluate the regimes for resolving the conflict in UNCLOS. Furthermore, the paper will introduce the appropriate points
of view and discuss the alternative dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) for this significant problem caused by global
warming in the coming future.
UPDATE:
Barring an about face by nature or adjustments, it appears that for the first time since 2001, Arctic Sea ice will hit the “normal” line as defined by the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) for this time of year.
NSIDC puts out an article about once a month called the Sea Ice News. It generally highlights any bad news they can find about the disappearance of Arctic ice. Last month’s news led with this sentence.
In February, Arctic sea ice extent continued to track below the average, and near the levels observed for February 2007.
But March brought good news for the Polar Bears, and bad news for the Catlin Expedition and any others looking for bad news. Instead of ice extent declining through March like it usually does, it continued to increase through the month and is now at the high (so far) for the year.
If it keeps this trend unabated, in a day or two it will likely cross the “normal” line.
the big question is if they drill off virginia how are going to get the oil to china. california you’re next.
Threw the Arctic Sea, it’s melting
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h00FEqYmsZFmix6qyOrSXF0x2YEAD9ELQ4E83
why take the chance
Coral in Florida Keys suffers lethal hit from cold
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/01/27/1447907/coral-in-keys-suffers-lethal-hit.html#ixzz0jr6jLPcu
Cold snap kills fish at alarming rate
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/01/14/1423754/cold-snap-kills-fish-at-alarming.html
I have heard politicians preach about the need to end dependency on foreign oil throughout my entire adult life. Human nature being what it is, however, that will not happen without pain, and none of us is willing to endure even slight discomfort if we believe it can be avoided. Pres. Obama’s drilling proposals merely prolong the inevitable and reflect the same shortsightedness that has resulted in our falling behind other countries in the development of alternative fuel technology.
Rahm Emanuel must be buying large chunks of stock in the company that makes Vaseline. Once again the Adminstration is telling progressives that we had better get over the President’s adoption of Republican policies because we have nowhere else to go.
The promotion of drilling offshore is bad policy for a number of reasons:
1. It encourages complacency and discourages capital investment in technologies that make long-term sense.
2. The known and suspected reserves will not put a dent in our projected needs.
3. Despite talk of safety records, it only takes one spill to wreak devastation. The effects of the Exxon Valdez still linger and have not even been fully measured after twenty years.
4. Anyone who believes that there is no leakage from offshore wells is silly. Take a walk along the beaches of Mississippi and Texas, but be sure to carry your tar remover with you.
5. The reef systems off the southern coast of Florida and the Florida Keys are highly vulnerable to pollution. I don’t know this from reading what academics have to say. I have been a scuba diver for 30 years and have personally observed the gradual deterioration of the reefs due to our insistence on treating the ocean as a toilet and garbage dump.
We need to get over ourselves and our false fears that increasing fuel costs will harm our collective “lifestyle,” whatever the hell that means. More offshore drilling will solve nothing, and its promotion is disingenuous pandering.
Mike A:
Don’t worry it isn’t going to happen, the oil companies will be tied up in court for years before they can drill. So this is just a bunch of BS to get conservatives on board.
But the one thing that everyone seems to forget is that if there is no industry there is no prosperity.
And no one said there isn’t some leakage from rigs. But oil is a natural product. Don’t you think that over the history of the earth it has leaked out of reservoirs naturally? Think Le Brea tar pits. There was no long term effect seeing as how life on earth is still flourishing.
Byron, I understand what you’re saying, but the choice isn’t between prosperity and not drilling. My point is that “drill, baby, drill” is an invitation to continue living in a fool’s paradise. We are sending venture capital overseas to fund a variety of innovative approaches to energy creation. And we’re more dependent of oil from the Middle East now than we were during Carter’s presidency. Those two things don’t appear to reflect sound energy policy.
Secondly, the tar in La Brea stays in the pits. The ocean is a whole different animal.
Mike A:
I was pointing out Le Brea as an example of how petroleum does and has come to the surface and I am pretty sure that in the last few million years it has gotten into the ocean from a similar source.
Why is venture capital going overseas? I would say they have a better opportunity to make money in a more hospitable environment. If we would make our economy more hospitable to risk, maybe they would stay here.
Byron,
You know me and accuracy and nuance.
“Oil rigs have caused large spills in the past, but technology has advanced to the point where that is much less likely to happen now” is a much more reasonable position (with actual factual support), than “Oils rigs don’t cause big spills.”
Gyges:
I think what I said was accurate. And if we limit it to American waters the amount of oil from rigs is very small. I dont think drilling for oil offshore in this day and age would cause an environmental disaster.
“President Obama, I ask you to respect and uphold the Constitution. Be transparent and show your honesty and integrity. Release your original, signed birth certificate, if you have one, thus proving your birth on American soil, and thus assure the American people that you are lawfully eligible to hold the office of the presidency and serve as commander in chief of the Armed Forces.”
BVM I beat you by a few days. I posted that over at the Orly thread.
Update:
A U.S. Army flight surgeon who posted a video indicating his complete rejection of all orders from the military unless Barack Obama documents his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office is now refusing an “unofficial” suggestion from the Army for a medical evaluation.
“It is interesting this suggestion of a medical exam should arise now given he was only a couple of weeks from deployment and obviously judged to be fit for deployment with his bags packed.
the controversy raises the prospect that the government may be unwilling to pursue a prosecution because of the possible ramifications – which could include a defense lawyer’s demand for a court-ordered discovery process that would target Obama’s historical documentation
Even participants in a forum on the left-leaning Huffington Post website seemed to agree in part.
“Freakin’ Brilliant!” said one. “They can’t court-martial him [without] the defense getting the judge to order the the (sic) birth-certificate be produced! Either Obama will have to produce or they can’t prosecute. Genius.”
http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=135781