After a presidential campaign where both President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris pushed back on claims that they were trying to shut down much of the fossil fuel industry, Biden waited until the final days of his administration to ban oil and gas drilling over 670 million acres of America’s coastline. President-elect Donald Trump responded that“It’s ridiculous. I’ll un-ban it immediately. I have the right to un-ban it immediately.” It will likely be more difficult than a simple “un-ban” order. Environmental groups will likely push a “sue, baby, sue” campaign to counter Trump’s “drill, baby, drill.”
In his statement, Biden justified the move to counter the “climate crisis.” A White House announcement stated that “President Biden has determined that the environmental and economic risks and harms that would result from drilling in these areas outweigh their limited fossil fuel resource potential.”
The question is whether the order can handcuff Trump in pursuing one of the main parts of his campaign platform to unleash America’s fossil fuel resources.
This is all familiar ground.
Biden acted under Section 12(a) of the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), which states that the president “may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the Outer Continental Shelf.”
As noted in a Congressional Research Service report there is an ongoing debate over whether presidents can reverse the withdrawals of prior presidents. Trump faced that question in 2017 when he sought to overturn a ban by President Barack Obama in order to open up Alaska’s Beaufort and Chukchi seas and some parts of the Atlantic to oil and gas exploration. Two years later, a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska struck down Trump’s order. While acknowledging that the law is ambiguous, it did not find express authority for such reversals.
Litigation ran out the clock and Biden later overturned Trump’s executive order.
So, there are grounds to assert this authority of reversal, but it will take years in court. The alternative and preferred route would be Congress. This is an issue that should ultimately rest with Congress. This ambiguous law is unfortunately common in poorly crafted provisions giving presidents sweeping authority.
Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has already pledged to “push back using every tool at our disposal.”
I asked my friend, AI, a question-
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Bitcoin mining and Artificial Intelligence combined currently consume around 2% of the world’s electricity, with data centers housing both technologies using roughly 460 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity annually, which is comparable to the power consumption of a small country; with the increasing demand for AI, this energy usage is expected to rise significantly.
Key points about energy consumption:
Bitcoin Mining:
The energy required for Bitcoin mining is substantial, with estimates comparing its annual electricity consumption to that of a country like Poland.
AI Impact:
While AI currently uses a significant amount of energy, its energy demands are expected to rapidly increase as AI applications become more widespread.
Data Center Concerns:
Both Bitcoin mining and AI rely heavily on data centers, which contribute significantly to global electricity usage.
++++++++++++++==
Sooo, does the world come to an end if we quit mining for bitcoin???
And how much do we need AI, in the first place, and how much of it s waste???
For example, this is fun, but how much does this improve my life???
The Communist Party Political Officer irrevocably rejects this video for not meeting the correct party-designated percentage of DEI affirmative action quota participants.
Silly mous
That’s what Wicked and Target commercials are for!
If people did not value AI or Bitcoin they would die. Does it improve your life – that is up to you. Just as others get to choose.
What is NOT up to you , is deciding for others.
Actually, electrical rates and power consumption policies are not in the users’ control, except as to how much they use. For example, Biden has reportedly banned tankless gas-operated water heating systems. So there is a legal basis to charge extra for electricity used to mine bit coins. And, I think, it would be good public policy, because it is a wasteful, and useless bit of circle-jerkery.
A bit like those stupid schemes to collect aluminum can tabs, and mail them off to some charity, that doesn’t want them. Or, wasting food and housing on those prisoners who should be executed.
“Actually, electrical rates and power consumption policies are not in the users’ control, except as to how much they use. For example, Biden has reportedly banned tankless gas-operated water heating systems. So there is a legal basis to charge extra for electricity used to mine bit coins. And, I think, it would be good public policy, because it is a wasteful, and useless bit of circle-jerkery.”
You specifically noted that users can control how much they use. That is still control , that is the primary way the free market works.
In my state I can also choose who I buy power from. So I have more choice that just how much I use.
Further if I get really pissed at electric rates I can put up solar panels and or buy a gas turbine generator.
Currently in My specific location the payback on Solar is too long – but that is only because I live in the susquehana valley which is one of the largest sources of power for the east coast. We have Wind, Nuclear, Hydro, Coal, Gas, Trash to Steam – just about every immaginable form of power generation – and the very low costs to go with it.
Constitutionally the federal government has no authority to interfere with free market transactions – see the Contracts clause in the constitution.
If Biden has banned Tankless water heaters that is incredibly stupid, they are unbelievably energy efficient and cheap. I have 3 systems of about 150K BTUH each, they provide endless hot water, they provide radiant heat which is more cost effective than anything except heat pumps. They have 97% efficiency, nd they last far longer than traditional hot water heaters.
I would further note that they are fundimentally just smaller versions of commercial boilers – both old inefficient ones and new high efficiency ones.
Regardless there shoudl be absolutely no public policy of anykind for anything that can be resolved in the free market – I would note that the Nobel Economics prize work of Elonro Oldstorm, and Ronald Coase as well as dozens of other nobel winners proves that to be the case.
Government is force, it is dangerous, but on occasion necescary. We only use force where it is actually necescary.
The social contract – which gives the govenrment its legitimacy is the contract to give a near monopoly on the use of force to govenrment in exchange for Government using that force ONLY to protect each of us from the illegitimate use of force by our neighbors.
“A bit like those stupid schemes to collect aluminum can tabs, and mail them off to some charity, that doesn’t want them.”
Are you saying that government is involved ? If not why do I care ? In a free society stupid ideas die naturally, punishing those that buy them.
That is how we learn.
“Or, wasting food and housing on those prisoners who should be executed.”
My wife is a public defender. I have seen a FEW people who are so dangerous and evil and whose crimes are so heinous that I can not completely oppose the death penalty.
But they are rare and interestingly usually negotiate to avoid the death penalty.
Death penalty cases are still rare. They are also generally arbitrary. There is no pattern to those who receive the death penalty and those that get life or even as little as 20 years.
It is really hard to say that in practice the death penalty has merit.
I woudl strongly suggest reading John Grisholms “an innocent man” it is the only non-fiction he has ever written and it is a pretty accurate and damning indictment of the capital punishment system in the US. One thing I would note is that even Highly conservative Judges, prosecutors and governers – with only a few exceptiosn generally find an excuse to delay as long as possible before executing someone. Prisons bring in outsiders to perform executions – it is too hard on prison staff.
The incarceration fo people sentenced to death is a mess – the prison system loses a great deal of the leverage they have over their conduct. Death rows tend to be foul and repugant places – because death rowe inmates take whatever little control they can get, sometimes that means smearing feces all over.
Within the courts – proseutors and defense attorney’s must be “death penalty qualified” – and that is only a tiny portion of attorneies – which further delays everything.
Typically the cost to execute someone in the US is many times what it would have cost to incarcerate them for life.
I would further note – beyond the death penalty – that I am a strong proponent of alot of criminal justice reform.
But there is a difference between we should defund the police and we should look for better solutions to punishment, protection, and rehabilitation.
We need to get away from one size fits all solutions. All criminals and all crimes are not the same. Violent criminals should not receive bail.
Conversely the majority of accused people can await trial at home on an ankle monitor, possibly even continuing with their jobs.
That is also suitable in SOME cases as a means of punishment – rather than imprisonment.
Even violent criminals – most are going to get out some day. Recidivism rates in some cases are very high.
How much are you willing to spend on a pre-release program for violent offenders that reduces they likelyhood they committ another violent crime by 30% ?
That is a poor success rate. But if you are going to have to release 1000 violent criminals with an 80% probability they commit another violent crime – what is it worth to reduce that to 60% ? Even it you only reduce the 5 yr recidivism rate – that is still a dramtic decrease in the number of murdered, mained and raped. What is that worth ?
One of the massive problems of the BLM Defund the police nonsense is that they pretended disasterously that alot of justice reform was a substitute rather than a supliment to traditional justice.
You seem to be into cost/benefit analysis – the fact is the death penalty does not pass cost benefit analysis.
Nor can we make executing people easier – it is supposed to be very hard for the state to take peoples lives.
Who would want that to be different ? And yeat with all the impediments to execution – we have executed over a hundred provably innocent people over the past century.
Executing people needs to be hard.
Regardless I am all for subjecting our criminal justice system to cost benefit analysis. A part of that is recognizing that our traditional one size fits all solutions may be the least expensive up front but they still often are suboptimal on a cost benefit basis.
You have control? In the free market? Not really. Tell that to homeowners who use solar to lower their bills only to have the power company charge extra for inconveniencing other customers who don’t use solar. That it’s not fair for power companies to get paid less for less power from customers. So what do they do? They increase fees to customers who use solar power to lower their bills. Power companies don’t want customers to save money. They want customers with no alternative than to pay what power companies need to keep their stock prices up.
Much ado about nothing? On January 20th Trump will take an oath to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States,” in accordance with the Constitution of the United States. I don’t see how he can do that if executive authority is hamstrung by previous administrations. Which is to say, Trump will land this in court and do as he pleases in the interim. Incredible to me that any president of the United States would ban new leases within two hundred miles of the Unties States – that is what we’re talking about here, the 200 mile territorial limits of the United States – are y’all sure he’s working for us? Because I am not at all certain that he, or any within his administration, or this federal government or this Democrat party, are working for the people of the United States.
Trump should issue a document negating biden’s “determination” – citing his statements during the 2020 campaigns (and any other times) that he wouldn’t impair the US energy businesses and his impaired mental state/dementia that renders him incapable of making any such “determination.” In short, biden was mentally incapable; he may have been spiteful, but I’ll bet discovery could show he didn’t have the mental capacity to be involved in the decision to issue the piece of paper. (If the Special Prosecutor who questioned him in DE about documents said he should not be prosecuted because of his impaired mental state … what changed between then and now, except his health is even worse?)
Trump can issue an executive order “temporarily suspending” Biden’s ban, pending resolution of the current law’s ambiguity by Congress, citing the Loper Bright decision last year that overturned Chevron. The courts will be unlikely to take a challenge to that executive order structured that way, and the House leadership has already indicated it will support overturning the ban in its omnibus package now being assembled. That should solve the problem.
Looks like the new Congress has the constitutional basis and majority to pass relevant pro-Trump legislation immediately if not sooner.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Trump imposed an offshore drilling ban in 2020 that is set to expire in 2032. You don’t hear him say he’s going to “in-ban” his own ban from 2020 do you? Biden essentially expanded Trumps own ban by imposing his own. Will Trump repeal his 2020 drilling ban too??
Well, thanks for proving the point that Biden merely wants to put his name on such a measure that is already in place, –thanks to President Trump during his first term. Biden’s expansion is said to have little or no impact:
“An energy industry researcher says, despite both praise and criticism of President Joe Biden’s executive order banning offshore drilling in huge swaths off much of the nation’s coastline, the measure will likely have no near-term impact on oil and gas exploration…” https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-order-expands-trump-offshore-110031556.html
so it is being done for political reasons only. (Notice the little tag-ons/tag-alongs added by biden to existing Trump protections:
https://www.boem.gov/oil-gas-energy/leasing/areas-under-restriction
close but no cigar, George.
The point is that he imposed it because he knew Trump couldn’t do anything about it unless Congress chose to. That won’t happen since Trump’s 2020 ban was done at the behest of the same Republicans whining about Biden’s ban.
Will Trump “un-ban” his ban first? He can easily do that, so why not start there?
So why is Trump whining and moaning about a ban that he imposed first? Biden just made it a bit bigger. It was Trump who first boasted about opening up large swaths of the coats to drilling when Republican lawmakers and governors implored him not to once they realized their coastlines were more valuable than the need to drill for oil. So he “walked back” his promise. Trump seems to have an odd habit of reversing many of his promises, doesn’t he?
* 🤔
Here is my OT contribution for today. Just The News, which postures as a right-leaning, Republican sympathizing site, is carrying this story:
ActBlue mystery solved? Incorrectly entered email could be to blame as lawyers move to drop lawsuit
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/actblue-mystery-solved-incorrectly-entered-email-could-be-blame
which advances a claim that the controversy regarding misattributed ActBlue contributions is resolved by the “fact” that someone other than the Republican accusing AB of misattribution, Mark Block, made the contribution in question, and made a typo in entering Block’s email address, which resembles that of the contributor. I smelled a rat as soon as I saw that. I have a lot of experience in IT and web tech, and my first thought was that every legitimate site that accepts any kind of financial remission, be that a contribution or a payment, first confirms the email address of the party making that remission. This is done to limit liability in the event of a fraud claim. And, sure enough ActBlue has such a confirmation routine in place (link domain fudged because of the one-link limit here):
https://secure.actblue.c*o*m/users/confirmation/new
So, who are JTN and Mark Block trying to fool, and why? Why do I regularly need to entertain the suspicion that those of us who subscribe to the principles of this nation as expressed in the Declaration and the Constitution are being played for suckers by fraudsters at both ends of the alleged political spectrum? Am I being paranoid? Or am I not being paranoid enough? Anyone have an alternative explanation for this?
You say you have alot of experience in IT – but clearly you do not. There are plenty of sites that take credit card information without email verification.
I would note that even outside of the WWW the gas pump at your local gas station will take your payment card without verifying your name or email or drivers license.
I smell a Rat too.
Here is my OT contribution for today. Just The News, which postures as a right-leaning, Republican sympathizing site, is carrying this story:
ActBlue mystery solved? Incorrectly entered email could be to blame as lawyers move to drop lawsuit
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/actblue-mystery-solved-incorrectly-entered-email-could-be-blame
which advances a claim that the controversy regarding misattributed ActBlue contributions is resolved by the “fact” that someone other than the Republican accusing AB of misattribution, Mark Block, made the contribution in question, and made a typo in entering Block’s email address, which resembles that of the contributor. I smelled a rat as soon as I saw that. I have a lot of experience in IT and web tech, and my first thought was that every legitimate site that accepts any kind of financial remission, be that a contribution or a payment, first confirms the email address of the party making that remission. This is done to limit liability in the event of a fraud claim. And, sure enough ActBlue has such a confirmation routine in place (link domain fudged because of the one-link limit here):
https://secure.actblue.c*o*m/users/confirmation/new
So, who are JTN and Mark Block trying to fool, and why? Why do I regularly need to entertain the suspicion that those of us who subscribe to the principles of this nation as expressed in the Declaration and the Constitution are being played for suckers by fraudsters at both ends of the alleged political spectrum? Anyone have an alternative explanation for this?
(The good Hullbobby just gentlemanly corrected me on my statement that Biden granted clemency to 1,500 death row inmates. He is absolutely correct. I carelessly conflated the death row with the regular criminals, and my apologies to all!)
Keep that puck flying, hullbobby-Barn Burner!)
Lin, thanks for that! Now please keep on commenting as your comments are always among the best on here.
PS. That old puck isn’t flying as much these days with my two artificial hips.
Signed
The Golden Jet!
Trump can issue an executive order reinstating off-shore drilling areas, INCLUDING THOSE THAT HE BANNED DURING HIS FIRST TERM. While the green-tinged a-holes are seeking injunctions, the Republican Congress should amend 1953 OSCLA to provide a reasonable procedure to reinstate lands taken off the drilling list. Hopefully that passes before any court proceeding is finalized, and thereby renders all of them mot.
I agree. End the ambiguity, especially since Chevron can no longer protect some agency decisions (BLM, DOI, EPA and SLA) and clarity is needed more than ever. (p.s., I thought OSCLA was more about workers’ safety protections? (Do you work in that industry?)
“Do you work in that industry”
No, I’m retired IT, with an interest in the topic. I did once write software for retail distributors of heating and motor fuel, but I don’t count that 🙂
good for you, for fleshing out your forte with tangential topics.
I also thought of the overturning of Chevron when Biden pulled his latest stunt. It is about time for Congress to be more clear and for courts to give less deference to the out of control agencies.
Unconstitutional Agencies
Jonathan: Ban, baby, ban. Cudos to Pres. Biden for banning oil and gas drilling along our pristine coasts. Too bad he waited until the end of his term to do it. And you are right that it’s highly unlikely DJT can reverse the ban. The fact is we don’t need to drill along our coastlines. The US us already energy independent. Last year, US energy exports exceeded total energy imports by about 7.80 quads, the largest annual margin on record.
The problem is that the greedy oil and gas companies have a short memory. In 2010 the Deepwater Horizon platform in the Gulf exploded releasing 207 million gallons of oil. The spill killed millions of native wildlife and devasted the commercial fishing industry in the Gulf for years.
That’s why the people who live along our coasts overwhelmingly opposed offshore drilling because it can be dangerous to the environment and the livelihoods of its residents. I have a property that overlooks the Pacific in LA. Strong majorities in California oppose allowing oil drill off the coast (72%). We know the dangers of offshore drilling. In 2021 there was a major oil spill off the Orange County coastline. The crude spoiled beaches, killing fish and bird populations and threatened local wetlands.
The answer is not DJT’s “drill, baby, drill” but to move away from fossil fuels to renewables. Solar, wind and other renewables are the only answer to the climate crisis. According to leading climate scientists we have only about 10 years to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent the worst impacts of a climate catastrophe. DJT’s insane policies will cut the time in half to save the planet!
Dennis
Homework question:
How many gallons of oil does a single wind generator require to function?
How often does this oil require to be replaced?
How much electricity does a single wind generator produce?
Get back to us when you have the answers and we can move on to solar and lithium batteries.
Traveler,
As I generally dont read Dennis comments, but I did read yours. I would add to your list of questions, what do they do with those fiberglass wind turbine blades? How long does the average wind generator last?
Also it has been noted the amount of energy AI data centers are going to need. States that produce energy the cheapest to include transmission distances will see companies coming to them. PA is poised to be the next Silicon Valley as it is the state that exports the most energy. TX is a close second. Who is dead last? The failed state of CA which has to import the most energy. The CA grid is notorious for unreliability from high winds and wild fires. Data centers need reliable energy. Wind and solar just dont cut it. Most companies in the data center business are looking at Natural Gas for energy production in the short term, and nuclear or small modular reactors in the long term. Those would exclude states with high environmental costs and regulations.
From what I’ve read, the only oil needed for wind turbines is for lubrication and for the transmission equipment–AND the preferred lubricant is synthetic oil–not fossil fuel. Sounds like more MAGA media propaganda.
Hmmm, how do you make synthetic oil GiGi? By the way, it’s in the hundreds of gallons per turbine GiGi. How about the fiberglass blades, structural steel, hundred of yards of concrete for the foundation, copper conductors for the grid? How many birds are annually killed?
What’s the electricity production rate and what are the tax funded subsidies GiGi?
Traveler,
Well said. Also what people need to take into consideration is all the energy inputs that have to go into the production of and life use of a single turbine and then the costs involved in disposal, recycling if there is any (like only 10% of solar panels are recycled, the rest are landfill bound and they have heavy metals in them that make them toxic).
For reference to the synthetic oil question, “Synthetic lubricants can be manufactured using chemically modified petroleum components rather than whole crude oil, but can also be synthesized from other raw materials. The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
The part that matters is “subsidies”
I honestly do not know the real merits of Wind turbines. What I know is that if they can prove themselves in a truly free market that is fine with me.
What we do not want is government rather than the market deciding.
Gigi,
No one trust your reading.
From what you read the Steele Dosier is true and the Hunter Biden laptop is russian disinformation.
Regardless my only interest in Wind, Solar, electric cars, etc is that Government stays out of it.
I do not care how clean or dirty windmills are – or more accurately I get to decide for my self and structure my choices accordingly.
What I care is that Government s neither subsidizing nor hamstringing anything in the free market. Then consumers get to decide.
I suggest you watch the Paramount series “Landman”. There is an episode in season one in which the leas charcter explains “wind energy” . You can learn alot from it.
So, if you choose to trol in your desperate attempt to “educate ” us, then please educate yourself first.
“MAGA media Propaganda” …also known as facts
Leftism is not only based in unwarranted arogance, bit it is an illness
Thanks, Dennis. Trump stole the line “drill, baby drill” from former half-governor Sarah Palin, who stole the line from black activists during the 1965 Watts riots when they chanted:
“burn, baby burn”. As you point out, we are already drilling at an historically-high capacity and producing and exporting more crude than ever before. There is absolutely no good reason to risk environmental damage by drilling along our coastlines and running the risk of another spill. This is just another line from Trump’s vaudeville act that he thinks makes him look cool and more proof of how stupid and superficial he is. It is also proof of how uninformed his supporters are, too.
Meanwhile, today, he said he wouldn’t rule out using the military to take Panama and Greenland, and/or impose some form of sanctions to try to force them to allow the US to take over. He keeps blathering on about taking over Canada, too, and claims he can re-name the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America”. Sheesh! Is there no end to his arrogance and stupidity? I can’t believe that even the MAGA faithful can’t see through all of this nonsense.
^^^from the person who steals phrases, words, tactics, and styles from other commenters every day^^^^
I’m not a nurse or a lawyer but I did stay at Holiday Inn last night. I would agree with you.
Trump is negotiating – get over it.
The right choice regarding the Panama canal is for US companies to get involved in funding alternatives.
We have reached the capacity of the panama canal and that is causing problems. Worse the worlds largest and most efficient vessess can not use it.
Mexico is actively working on a port to port rail system – automated ports at either end reasonable rates and a short enough transit time could end the panama canal bottleneck. Further Mexico is closer to the US shortening total transit time even further.
There is a nascent plan for a canal in costa rico, there is a more developed one for a canal in Nicuragua.
There is another Ocean to Ocean Port to port rail project in Columbia.
Truman sought to purchase Greenland – it has ALWAYS been in the US interests.
I doubt the Gulf of Mexico will get renamed -but left wing nuts like to rename things so why not ?
The US has already effectively taken over canada – it has not been a viable independent county in a long time.
Today it is just a US vasal – as is Mexico.
But we are not invading Canada. Mexico is more complicated.
YOU CAN’T “NEGOTIATE” FOR THE SALE OR CONTROL OF SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON THE MARKET AND WHICH THE RIGHTFUL OWNER ISN’T INTERESTED IN SELLING–you are just being an axxhole who is annoying someone by trying to get something valuable that they have and that you want. I experience this every day over some property I own–endless calls from would-be “investors”–you can’t get rid of them, either–threats, polite requests, nothing works other than hanging up on them–but, it is annoying because it takes up your time and they are using your phone equipment and service for their own purposes. The US has never held any ownership interest in the Panama Canal, which originally was part of Colombia. While we did take over construction of the canal after a French firm that started the project went bankrupt, the Panamanian people wanted it back–so we gave it back. It wasn’t ours to begin with. Now, it is owned by Panama, and while it would be good for the US or any country for that matter, to own the canal–we don’t–and Panama isn’t interested in selling. If the mentality is that we should just be able to obtain whatever we think is in our best interests by nagging, cajoling, threatening sanctions or taking by force, then how is that any different than what Putin did when he invaded Ukraine? It’s not–it’s imperialism, something America opposes. Denmark is not interested in selling Greenland, either. This is just more of Trump’s bloviating and bluster–symptoms of his malignant narcissism. All he will manage to do is piss people off.
And, it wasn’t “left wing nuts” who said anything about re-naming anything–that was your hero. Names of things have been changed for good reasons–for example, Mount McKinley was renamed Denali–because the native Inuit people wanted their heritage name reinstated–so that’s what happened. It had always been Denali–the name given by the native people living there. Alaskans of all stripes, both native Inuit people and non-Inuit people, want to keep the name “Denali”. Trump can go to hell for all they care. He wants to change the name because McKinley was in favor of tariffs–another bad idea of your hero. Who the hell does he think he is to re-name a landmark of the Intuit people?
Similarly, names of Confederate military people have been taken off of military bases and other facilities because the Civil War was fought over enslaving black people–those people are not heroes, and never were because slavery is wrong and always was.
“[T]he Panamanian people wanted it back–so we gave it back.”
We should have given it to them in the condition we found it.
The contion in which we found it was partially constructed by the French firm that started the project but went bankrupt. Why would the US destroy part of the Panama Canal because the native people there wanted us to turn it back to them?
* the aesthetic of the rigs is awful…
And within a short time after the deepwater Horizon disaster – which was mostly a problem with regulators, the gulf coast is doing fine.
We have had myriads of “environmental disasters” and STILL we have a pristine coast.
I tend to agree that we are not going to have an explosion of offshore drilling in the near future. As you correctly note – we do not need to open up the coasts today.
But ultimately we will.
In the short run what we will see is a significant increase in fracking in the Baken and permian.
We do currently produce more energy than we need.
HOWEVER the more we produce the cheaper energy is and the lower the price of things that depend on energy.
Further the more energy we produce the more stable the world is.
If you want peace in the middle east or in Ukraine the best route to that is not just US energy independence but much of the west – particularly Europe meeting its energy needs from sources that do not risk their national security.
The US has replaced most of the natural gas that Europe has lost from Russia. That is the result of Trump policies in his first term.
Without that Europe would have begged Putin for peace.
My thoughts are that energy produced or extracted from federal lands sold domestically is provided to States at a discounted cost. Afterall, it is OUR oil these companies are extracting, refining and selling to us. They can sell surplus to foreign markets at a higher cost. Saudi Arabia and oil rich countries already do this, when I was a kid gas cost .25 cents a gallon. This would be a huge boost for the economy and families.
Just turn over most federal lands to the states as the constitution dictates.
Traveller I suspect that we are somewhat politically aligned.
To the extent we differ that would be that I do not want government implimenting MY choices by force for everyone.
I want governmet out of the business of deciding this things.
You not federal lands – the constitution does not allow the federal govenrment to posess land in states except for a few narrow circumstances,
The District of Columbia, forts and govenrment buildings. There is no provision for national parks of government owning vast swaths of the country.
For much of our early existance federal lands were sold to the people or turned over to the state when a teritory became a state.
That is why even though the federal government owns massive amounts of land – nearly all of it is in the west.
Out founders had it right. The Federal Goverment shoudl turn over all federal land to the states it is in.
And it can all look like that beautiful Manhattan place in NY… what is of value must be guarded. Beauty itself…
250 years ago Economist Thomas Malthus predicted the end of the world, he subsequently realized his error but not before giving his name to the idiotic pessimism and nonsense that you are spreading – Malthusian.
We have forever to “save the planet” – the planet is doing fine. The biggest Crisis is neurotic left wing nuts making the same errors as Malthus two and a half centuries ago.
Unfortunately Julian Simon died in 1998 and no one as notable has taken up his quest to debunk leftist malthusian garbage, but he left his magnum opus to all of us online for free.
http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/
Regardless the is a single resource that actually matters – and that is the human mind. Everything else can be dealt with.
Contra the left – humans – everywhere live better today that they ever have.
Even nature is better off. There are more Bears in the east coast than when the pilgrims landed – and more beaver.
There are more bald eagles in the continental US than ever before.
The reality is that all the end of the world nonsense of left wing nuts is just more malthusian poppycock.
I have no idea if the world will be warmer in 2100 that today, What I can tell you is that absent our starting global theromnuclear war, or the eruption of a super volcano like Yosemeti, or a massive asteroid impact – all of which are unlikely before 2100 but near certain eventually, humans and the world as a whole will be BETTER off than it is today.
You note a few things that have happened.
Yesterday we had a blizzard on the east coast – the roads were impassible. Today they are clear.
The Gulf beaches recovered after Deep Water Horizon – and quite quickly.
Can you name a single place in the country where there has been an environmental disaster that man or nature has not cleaned it up – often quite quickly.
Absolutely we should do better. And guess what – we do. For most of human existence our energy came from wood and peat and dung($hit).
We switched to coal in the past 500 years because it was cleaner. We switched to oil because that was cleaner, we switched to natural gas because that is cleaner still.
Every single one of these transitions and myriads of other similar ones all occurred without government involvement at all.
I have no idea if the future is nuclear or thorium or natural gas or wind or solar or … nor does it matter much,. What is certain is that in the future we will need far more energy than today, and we will produce it far cleaner than today. And that will true even absent any government involvement.
What I do know is that malthusians such as yourself are WRONG.
I will offer you the same bet that Julian Simon won against Malthusian “the population bomb” Paul Ehrlich
Pick a basket of any 10 raw materials, and I will bet you that they – or whatever replaces them in the rare instances that we transition will be more abundant AND cheaper in real dollars in 10 years than today.
That is how free markets work.
Most of us forget or were never taught that actual free markets have not existed until approximately the past 400 years.
We talk about the tech revolution or the industrial revolution but it is all the revolution caused by free markets.
Improvements in technology are the consequences of greater human freedom – again read Julian Simon for the data
Let go of your neurosis,
The world improves overall ever decade. It improves faster the greater freedom we have, but albeit more slowly it even improves under left wing nuts.
Just at far slower rates.
We are going to need all the energy we can get. Artificial Intelligence consumes massive amounts of energy and generates massive amounts of heat. The moguls in the tech industry are already lobbying for nuclear more power plants.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the tool that will enable your government and favored industries to monitor and control every aspect of your life.
This raises a few questions.
Where do the “greenie weenies” stand on nuclear power and added global warming?
Where does congress stand on the government and favored industries being able to monitor and control every aspect of your life?
What will the United States be like in ten years?
For more info on the subject, refer back Colossus the Forbin Project, Logan’s Run, Barbarella, and 2001 Space Odyssey.
In his statement, Biden justified the move to…..
I can not play this game. Everyone knows Biden is not running the Executive Branch.
Everyone knows Biden is cognitively impaired.
Everyone knows Biden is not making any statements but speaking incoherently.
Biden can barely read teleprompters
Biden is not capable of public speaking in an extemporaneous manner.
Philosopher Josef Piper wrote in his book, Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power
“This lesson, in a nutshell, says: the abuse of political power is fundamentally connected with the sophistic abuse of the word, indeed finds in it the fertile soil in which to hide and grow and get ready, so much so that the latent potential of the totalitarian poison can be ascertained, as it were, by observing the symptom of the public abuse of language. The degradation, too, of man through man, alarmingly evident in the acts of physical violence committed by all tyrannies (concentration camps, torture), has its beginning, certainly much less alarmingly, at that almost imperceptible moment when the word loses its dignity.”
― Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language—Abuse of Power
Why are we pretending Biden is making decisions? Why the charade? If words have meaning, why are we ignoring the obvious, that a person with cognitive impairment can not, should not, be taken seriously?
His words mean nothing. His statements are null and void.
Why do we accept a Chief Executive that is so compromised that the world makes jokes at our expense?
How is it that leaders in Congress, on both sides of the aisle but especially GOP, have done nothing to pull a 25th amendment?
No, this is not normal.
This is not acceptable.
It just shows how broken our nation is, how soul-less our leaders are, and how corrupt the MSM is.
Live not by lies.
Why Do We Accept Government by an Invalid?
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-do-we-accept-government-by-an-invalid/
Estovir,
Well said and spot on. One would think after the WSJ expose, they would of had a degree of honesty and admitted the truth. But, they have no shame.
Estovir
Executing the 25th Amendment would have delivered us a far worse result. Kamala Harris as President and then potentially a Clinton or Big Mike Obama Vice President. Bigger fish to fry for now but a retroactive impeachment or a challenge to Biden’s actions post mortem have sound legal basis.
Estovir,
True, Biden is running nothing. The NY Post has a good article about the need to root out the criminals who are exercising presidential power without legal authority.
https://nypost.com/2025/01/06/opinion/why-we-must-expose-the-criminal-fraud-of-those-behind-bidens-presidency
Hang em high! High tide floats many a boat but when the tide changes there’s a many that are stuck to the bottom!
If I really thought that Biden were motivated by concern for the environment, I would be “OK-let Congress and the administration look at the pros and cons more carefully.”
–But since Biden had four years to do these things (see, infra)-but waited until after he declared he would not run again– and then AGAIN waited until his last few months/weeks to do some things, –lead[s] me to conclude that his real motivation is (1) to sabotage the incoming Trump administration, and (2) to buoy a legacy that leaves much disdain and negativity in the minds of voters:
(1) selling off massive and costly components/construction parts of the border wall;
(2) granting clemency to more than 1,500 death row inmates;
(3) totally pardoning his wayward son Hunter;
(4) (despite massive debt, granting $400 BILLION for “Green Energy” projects to further national debt;
(5) committing massive $$$$ funds for student debt cancellations;
(6) increasing porosity in our southern Border;
(7) attempting to create a favorable economy, including a compliant media ecosystem, to falsely manipulate jobs and inflation numbers in the final quarter of ’24, in order to say that he left Trump with a “strong economy;”
(8) working with media to create negative characterizations of Musk (“a security risk”), Kash Patel, JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, RFK, Tom Cotton, etc.
(8) frivolously wasting a final $1 TRILLION of what’s left of our money on things like an Iraqi Sesame Street show (to run until 2027 as an effort to promote “inclusion and mutual respect”); a “Beards on Ice” ( Bearded Ladies Cabaret ice-skating drag show); a $3M grant to Brazil to “empower young women to become climate leaders by integrating equity and inclusivity into environmental activism;” $12M for a pickleball complex in Las Vegas (DOI); $1.5M into medical research grants for studying (a) how different animals respond to motion sickness by strapping kittens to tables, then spinning the tables, after “hav[ing] holes drilled into their skulls to keep them in place, and (b) research into whether lonely rats seek cocaine more than rats who are in positive environments. (c/o https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/drag-shows-arabic-sesame-street-lonely-rats-gop-senator-details-how-biden-spent-1t-on-government-waste/ar-AA1wo5kc)
Thank You to Our Good Taxpayers in America!
Lin,
To that list I would add all the money wasted on a war no one really wanted and could of ended shortly after it began. Biden is the president that got us as close to WWIII and nuclear war than any other modern president.
I will add that Biden’s handlers giving the once prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom to 19 people is an incredible abuse and insult, not least of which was including Hillary Clinton and George Soros as recipients. Was Satan not available or did even he not RSVP b/c they already have their places saved in the 9th circle of Hell?
Satan was elected President so he can give himself a medal in 2 weeks.
Estovir and Upstate Farmer: Yes, and I am certain there are several more; I just shot from the hip this a.m., thinking about how Biden has been fired up to leave the White House without flushing the toilet for the last time…
Estovir, I had immediately noticed Geo Soros on the list, but did not watch the presentations; do you know what words Biden used (er,..what words were given to BIden to use…) for Soros? Was it for Soros’s media holdings helping to manipulate/create/avoid certain news stories?
Lin, I loved your comment, but I need to point out just one small error. Biden did not grant clemency to 1500 people on death row, he granted clemency to 37 out of 40 death row inmates. He did pardon 1500 other people as well as his obnoxiously corrupt son.
All other points in your comment are, as usual, excellent!
hullbobby: see my apology, above^. Thank you!
I don’t see how Congress passing a law allowing a president to restrict federal lands automatically forcloses any presidents right to act independently in managing those Federal lands as best benifits the nation. OCSLA is Congress granting a right the president already had.
Turley– “Environmental groups will likely push a “sue, baby, sue” campaign to counter Trump’s “drill, baby, drill.”
Considering what challenges Trump has overcome when out of power I wonder how far they will get when he is actually at the controls.
Maybe it is time for a close look at the funding and management of those pesky ‘environmental groups’ and those sneaky NGOs in general. A close, close look. To begin with, what federal funds are they getting and why? End the rackets.
This time, America’s new industry has Trumps back.
He and his surrogates can drain the environmental organizations bank accounts with the use of lawfare, leaving them voiceless and impotent. Such a nifty tool has been designed by our country to make everyone miserable but the lawyers.
It’s amusing how Trump is already backtracking on his promises before even taking office. His incoming administration is already “tamping down” the scope of the tariffs he wants to implement, which is a vague admission that these tariffs will increase grocery prices and inflation—two things he promised to lower from day one. He has also broken his promise by stating he can’t guarantee a reduction in grocery prices because it’s “much harder to do.” Duh.
Now that Republicans control all three branches of government, it will be more challenging to lay blame on Democrats. Turley may find himself criticizing Republicans and Trump more often than he would like—if he even chooses to do so.
Biden’s ban on offshore drilling will not be easy for Trump to overturn, as he has tried that before and the courts ruled he cannot do so. Congress could attempt it, but they would struggle to secure the 60 votes needed, given their slim majority. In the meantime, Trump will be focused on his deportation policy and hinting at taking over Canada and Greenland.
Make no mistake, Trump’s tariffs will not be implemented in the way he envisions. They will be much more “targeted” and designed to avoid serious impacts on his supporters, such as food prices and higher utility bills. Trump needs these tariffs as a source of revenue for his deportation policy and tax cuts. Tariffs are effectively a tax on U.S. businesses, especially those with extensive supply chains linked to China, Mexico, and Canada. This is how Republicans plan to fund the majority of Trump’s spending initiatives—through tariffs and cuts to entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Although he promised not to touch those programs, he hasn’t guaranteed that cuts won’t happen when proposed by someone else.
You are correct that with control of all three branches of govenrment Republicans will be expected to deliver, and will be judged accordingly.
What you fail to grasp is that they will be measured against Obama blah 8 year or Biden’s disasterous 4.
Those should be easy to overcome.
On Jan 21, 2025 Trump is in the same place as Biden was in Jan 21, 2021.
He can Cost to success. If he does NOTHING the economy will boom and outside of the nuerotic left everyone will be happy.
But Biden was not smart enough to do nothing.
If we had 4 years of 3% growth with 1% inflation – we would have re-elected Biden and Democrats in a landslide – even if Biden was so demented he no longer remembered his own name.
Trump like Biden is not going to do nothing. Trump has promised to do much as he did in his first term – except bigger.
That worked pretty well.
I will bet you that the price of groceries – of nearly everything will be lower in real dollars in 2028.
Trump can do nothing and that will happen automatically.
If he cuts spending – or even just slows the rate of growth – that decline in real dollar prices will be greater.
Why can I make that bet ? Because absent government stupidity that is the norm.
It is not your interpretation of what Trump said or promised that matters – it is that of Trump voters and potential trump voters.
Tarriff does not appear ANYWHERE in Agenda 47
search it yourself.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform
Trump has absolutely never talked about Tarriffs as a goal, they are a means to an end, that end is fair trade.
Whose idea of Fair trade ? half the country – Trump voters.
Trump’s first 100 Days of his second term will certainly be interesting.
[From Monday, January 20, 2025 – Added 100 days – Result: Wednesday, April 30, 2025]
But lets take a look at Biden’s first 100 Days for reference & perspective:
First 100 days of the Joe Biden presidency (Good Read)
“…Over his first 100 days, Biden signed 42 executive orders, more than any of his predecessors since Harry S. Truman.[1] Many of these executive orders were reversals to Donald Trump’s policies. On March 11, he signed the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion bill to help relieve economic strain due to the COVID-19 pandemic.[2] With the elections of Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock in Georgia, the Democrats held a slim majority in both the House and the Senate.[3] This was crucial in ensuring the passage of the American Rescue Plan, as every Republican senator voted against it.[4] …”
By: Wikipedia.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_100_days_of_the_Joe_Biden_presidency
Biden in Action: the First 100 Days
Biden compared to prior presidents.
By: John T. Woolley & Gerhard Peters ~ Friday, April 30, 2021
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/analyses/biden-action-the-first-100-days
F.Y.I.:
The first 100 days: When did we start caring about them and why do they matter? (Commentary)
By: Elaine Kamarck ~ April 16, 2021
[Link].brookings.edu/articles/the-first-100-days-when-did-we-start-caring-about-them-and-why-do-they-matter/
As a reminder, Biden had the been V.P. prior to his presidency, and had the guidance of the Obama/Clinton Administrations behind him to boost their agenda.
Is your choice of the word “guidance” with regard to the Obama/Clinton influence on Biden policy decisions intended to be humorous?
Because it’s become fairly apparent that the correct terminology would more like “puppeteering.”
I was only being as considerate as one could be. Given his faculties, “puppeteering” would be the correct analogy.
As I read through the articles, his accomplishments in the first 100 days made it quite clear that Someone else was writing the script.
Note: take a look at: §Reversal, §Biden Reversals Compared, and §DAY ONE priorities, as well as the Charts referred to in:
Biden in Action: the First 100 Days
Biden compared to prior presidents.
By: John T. Woolley & Gerhard Peters ~ Friday, April 30, 2021
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/analyses/biden-action-the-first-100-days
Joe & Jill were to busy raking in & hiding money to have had a mind for all that.
Makes me wonder what Liz Cheney (Dick Cheney’s surrogate) position is on this.
She’s a Dem at heart, the J6th hearings proved it.
Bet she’ll just keep her mouth shut and pocket what her daddy is sending her way (Oil$).
What a bunch of idiots. That includes Turley. The ban that President Biden implemented is essentially a continuation of the offshore drilling restrictions that former President Trump established during his first term, a decision he made largely in response to requests from Republican lawmakers. This irony makes the ongoing complaints and grievances from some GOP members all the more amusing and nonsensical.
It’s important to highlight that this ban specifically targets offshore drilling in states like Florida and California, where the tourism industry holds significant economic value. Biden’s ban does not impede drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico, where a considerable amount of oil extraction already occurs. Instead, the restrictions are focused on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, areas where Republican governors and congressmen have voiced strong opposition, primarily due to concerns about potential oil spills and their devastating impact on tourism and other key economic activities like commercial fishing.
While legal “expert” Turley points out that Congress has the power to override Biden’s ban, it’s important to recognize that this legislation affects regions such as Florida’s Atlantic coast and the Grand Banks, both of which have economic and environmental significance that outweighs the immediate benefits of drilling in those areas. This is particularly relevant in a context where Republicans commonly champion for fewer regulations. However, less regulation usually equates to increased risk. For example, Florida residents and stakeholders would understandably be worried about the prospect of a catastrophic event similar to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill happening near their pristine beaches and vital mangrove ecosystems.
Ultimately, it appears that Trump’s frustration with Biden stems from the imposition of a ban that he himself instituted during his presidency. The hypocrisy is he did this exact same thing in 2020. He claimed he would open up Americas offshores to drilling to secure America’s oil independence only to backtrack when Republican governors and congressmen opposed drilling off THEIR shores. If you don’t believe it here’s an excerpt from 2020,
“ JUPITER, Fla. (AP) — President Donald Trump expanded a ban on new offshore drilling Tuesday, an election-year reversal likely to appeal to voters in Florida and other coastal states. Two years ago, Trump had taken steps to vastly expand offshore drilling from coast to coast.
“This protects your beautiful gulf and your beautiful ocean, and it will for a long time to come,” Trump said as he announced the expanded drilling ban during an appearance at the Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse.
The president signed a memorandum instructing the interior secretary to prohibit drilling in the waters off both Florida coasts, and off the coasts of Georgia and South Carolina for a period of 10 years — from July 1, 2022, to June 20, 2032.
The existing moratorium covers the Gulf of Mexico, and Trump said the new one would also cover the Atlantic coast — a significant political concern in coastal states like Florida.”
https://apnews.com/article/water-quality-north-carolina-florida-elections-environment-c984829ef78b964cc7d09bf2e0e1ab34
The reality is Trump is just complaining against a ban he too enacted back in 2020. Biden just expanded it a bit more.
I need to expand my rules about trump.
1) trump never lies
2) trump never changes his mind
3) biden and all democrats are evil even if they do exactly as I would have done.
3) biden and all democrats are evil even if they do exactly as I would have done.
You also would have screwed your teenage daughter in the shower? Exactly the same way Slow Joe did?
Disgusting!
If you read through some of the comments about what trump has done or how evil Biden is, it is pretty easy to see this is a fact free web site. Heck, even JT omits facts that disprove most of his assertions.
Just remember, trump never lies and he never changes his mind.
and yet the beaches of the Gulf are as pristine as ever.
So you would deprive the nation, the world of the benefits of energy to avoid another environmental blip like the Deep Water Horizon spill ?
what does more US energy bring ? A more peacefull world as the tyrants in the mideast and russia have less leeverage \\
rising standard of living.
Better health.
Greater freedom.
I suspect most are prepared to trade an occasional oil spill for any of the above much less all of them.
No we are unlikely to Drill of the east coast anytime soon – but only because the low hanging fruit is in the Baken and Permian basins.
Do you think the Norwegians would give up the approx 6500/yr each citizen gets as their share of Norways oil production because of an occasional oil spill ?
Do you think that the people of FL would not vote heavily for offshore drilling and an occasional spill in return for thousands of dollars in pocket per year.
I believe Trump should jail at least 1/2 of the top of DOJ
I prefer 90%