Off-shore drilling?

D

DasBoot

Moderator
Since this issue has huge political and social importance, I thought it might fit in here.
In light of our dependance on foreign oil, escalating prices in the USA, and subsequent financial drain on us all, why is there such a vehement outcry AGAINST drilling for oil off our shores?
Is off-shore drilling REALLY that dangerous environmentally?
I understand the obvious repercussions of a major rig mishap, but how often does this happen?
I can't remember EVER hearing about a rig disaster.
Don't we presently have a host of rigs operating safely AND productively off our shores?
Living in Florida as I do, it is quite a hot issue.
If the technology is state-of-the art and risks minimal, why is it not getting the go-ahead?
We DESPERATELY need new fuel sources and I don't think we can afford NOT to take advantage of every potential resource we have.
And I'm NOT a "drill anywhere" advocate either.
I LOVE the beach and I'm an avid fresh/saltwater fisherman.
So what gives?:confused:
 
Florida doesn't want them just because of
I LOVE the beach and I'm an avid fresh/saltwater fisherman.
Click to expand...
When you go to Alabama, Louisiana, Texas there are many rigs you can see from the beach. if one were to have an accident (it will happen one day), the white sand beaches are gone.
 
I've never been on the shores of those states so I can't speak on how the sight of those rigs detracts from the view.
The Fla. rigs would be 10 miles out.
How far is it from any given point on the ocean to the horizon?
Row after row of rigs would be an unpleasent sight I'm sure.
I guess I'm just thinking 1 or 2 in any given spot.
How long have those rigs been in operation?
And have there been any major accidents?
 
Most people who live in coastal areas have no problem with offshore drilling... as long as it is not in their area. A small minority is against any offshore drilling "if it will save just one" (fish, bird, marine mammal, etc.).

The distance to the horizon is a function of how high the viewer's eye is above sea level. The horizon is a little over 3 miles away for a six-foot person standing at sea level. The height of the object being viewed also counts, so a 50-foot oil rig 10 miles out would be just at the edge of visibility to a six-foot person on the beach.
 
Well...

Because I'm one of those "bleeding heart liberals" when it comes to energy, I'd have to say forget drilling regardless of minimal risks. Humans are foolish to think they can tame nature, and the truth of the matter is, leaks WILL happen no matter how "minimal" it is. Leaking oil isn't usually on the news because there's probably not enough that leaks to catch the companies red handed. However, once oil leaks it's really tough to clean it up. As for soaring gas prices you can thank our imperialists for deficit spending, and using up our taxes to fund their secret clubs such as the NSA, and the Department of Homeland Slav... I I mean Security. So what do I propose? Obviously the prices we want for gasoline are unsustainable to keep in the long run, to go trodding into more unstable regions of the world for it is absurd, and drilling at home is just as bad because of the hazards rigs impose not only on wildlife but the people who's livelihood and enjoyment depends on their enviornment. So therefore I would think people just need to bite the bullet, get over it, and actually start investing in alternate fuels such as ethanol, hemp seed oil, and other biodesiels. Oh wait, big oil doesn't want that hence why you can only make 500 gallons of ethanol PER YEAR. So much for captialism right? I'm sick of Monopoly it's time to smash the board up.


Epyon
 
Because I'm one of those "bleeding heart liberals" when it comes to energy, I'd have to say forget drilling regardless of minimal risks. Humans are foolish to think they can tame nature, and the truth of the matter is, leaks WILL happen no matter how "minimal" it is. Leaking oil isn't usually on the news because there's probably not enough that leaks to catch the companies red handed. However, once oil leaks it's really tough to clean it up. As for soaring gas prices you can thank our imperialists for deficit spending, and using up our taxes to fund their secret clubs such as the NSA, and the Department of Homeland Slav... I I mean Security. So what do I propose?
Click to expand...
It sounds like you propose cutting the funding of the NSA and Homeland Security.
 
Well so am I. I rather find the NSA and the DOHS to be rather bust agencies that need to go. We should just have two organizations. FBI for homeland issues and CIA for abroad issues. Save government spending on these two operations and put any excess into something else. Like education and medicine. Besides the Second Amendment is the original Homeland Security!

Anyway, I don't recall Texas having white sand beaches. In fact, Texas has some pretty ugly beaches. (Yes I'm from Texas). Liberals have been telling us about global warming and other environmental issues (endangered animals) that usually are more sensationalistic than realistic. It's just more scare-tactics. If proper procedures are STRICTLY enforced (punishable by the Penal Code, not just getting fired) than accidents and errors are going to be at a minimum. Just like sending into space was risky or how about when they made the atom bomb? Scientists theorized it could ignite the Ozone layer, effectively killing off the entire world in a matter of hours.....everything has risks, especially anything with great rewards.
 
Well so am I. I rather find the NSA and the DOHS to be rather bust agencies that need to go. We should just have two organizations. FBI for homeland issues and CIA for abroad issues. Save government spending on these two operations and put any excess into something else. Like education and medicine. Besides the Second Amendment is the original Homeland Security!
Click to expand...

And you think that if we shouldered those two institutions with the responsibilities of the other two institutions that their budgets would remain the same?
 
As stated, there are risks in any venture.
I'm glad Columbus didn't let them get the better of him.
Lewis and Clark either for that matter!
While I fully agree that alternate energy sources must be found to replace our finite oil supply, we need fuel NOW.....not 10, 15+ yrs from now.
Actually, with the strides made in ethanol and solar power, maybe it would be sooner.
But we are already set up to use oil on a massive scale.
It will take years for the others to become mainstream.
Even with a major push in that direction.
As it is now, we are dependent on foreign fuel and that's a very dangerous situation to be in.
If drilling were REALLY as dangerous as some say, there would be leaks and spillage almost regularly.
And what's the fuss over Anwar?
From what I've heard, we are talking about an area that compares in size to a postage stamp on a football field!
Are we REALLY keeping ourselves in a vulnerable situation because some Caribou herds might have to go a few miles out of their way?
"Might" I say!
I'm torn on this, but I think the bottom line is we need to do WHATEVER we can to see to it that we are no longer dependent on foreign fuel.
That INCLUDES alternate means.
However, if having 2 or 3 rigs faintly visible on the horizon is the price I have to pay for fuel independence and lower prices, I can live with it.
 
I am in favor of offshore drilling. I think the risk of oil leaking from a ship is just as great or greater than leaking from a rig. I also don't belive that crude oil is our best choice. There are a lot of other options that need to be looked into and perfected. I have watched a program on TV a few times called Amp Heads. These guys build electric cars. They don't own any gas cars and you would be shocked to see the performance they get from these cars.
Rusty
 
Well MM, no it wouldn't, but it'd cut off the unnecessary people and money spent. THere's bound to be some cash left over. Or why not take the money from those agencies and set up funds for Militias in every state to conduct training and procure arms. I'm not talking about the National Guard, but something similiar to what Canada has. That's a better defense and allows for things like Katrina and others to be less horrific.

Besides, if we removed just about 5 billion from the defense spending and put it into education and other venues, we'd be in a lot better shape.
 
Except you burn oil and coal to make that electricty.

All your doing is moving the waste to a location that's not as obvious to you.
 
Drilling in Alaska and drilling offshore would reduce our dependency on foreign oil. How much? I don't know, but any reduction can only be good.

It would also create more jobs: jobs for people who build rig equipment, jobs for people who erect the rigs, and jobs for people who operate them.

It would also increase profits for the US oil companies that do the drilling. I recognize that there are people out there who think that profits are evil, but profits increase the value of a company's stock, and thus increases the value of the portfolio of people who own that stock. Some of those people are even in the middle class. :eek:

It's ironic that many of the people who are pointing fingers at the White House for high gas prices are opposed to further drilling in our own country.

I've seen rigs off the coast of Louisiana. The view was still nice. Much nicer than looking at the old factories like Harley Davidson in many areas in Milwaukee.
 
Except you burn oil and coal to make that electricty.

All your doing is moving the waste to a location that's not as obvious to you.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that if we cut the amount of cars that run on gas by 50% to electric we wouldn't be less dependent on oil. Not all electricity is generated by oil and coal. They actually produce electricity now with wind, water and nukes. I didn't think coal was an issue. I haven't seen where we are importing coal or getting it from an offshore rig. I guess there are things that aren't obvious to a lot of people here. JMO
Rusty
 
Epyon,
If drilling rigs are so bad why is that you find all of the sport fisherman concetrated around them . The rigs attract algae which in turn attract the larger members of the food chain. the same reason the recently sunk a stripped down carrier--to form an artifical reef. Yes accidents happen but such is life.

Bob
 
Well MM, no it wouldn't, but it'd cut off the unnecessary people and money spent. THere's bound to be some cash left over. Or why not take the money from those agencies and set up funds for Militias in every state to conduct training and procure arms. I'm not talking about the National Guard, but something similiar to what Canada has. That's a better defense and allows for things like Katrina and others to be less horrific.
Click to expand...
If I thought the two beaucracies would remain as efficient as the four, not that they're evr going to be all that efficient mind you, then I'd be for it. Federally funded state militias have about as much chance as a "Rifle behind every blade of grass" project.

Besides, if we removed just about 5 billion from the defense spending and put it into education and other venues, we'd be in a lot better shape.
Click to expand...
I think our education problems are due to poor socialization ratehr than lack of funding, at least in most cases. I also think we don't need to be cutting any defense projects right now, though I'm sure we could find $5 billion in beauracratic waste without cutting anything.
 
To Bob41081...

If drilling rigs are so bad why is that you find all of the sport fisherman concetrated around them . The rigs attract algae which in turn attract the larger members of the food chain. the same reason the recently sunk a stripped down carrier--to form an artifical reef. Yes accidents happen but such is life.
Click to expand...

It's one thing to create artifical reefs to replace lost coral, as for oil rigs in general in my eyes it is a problem because the negatives outweigh the positives. When accidents are preventable, and there are viable options which aren't being utilized because oil companies make sure government keeps alternate energy from budding there is no excuse as to why we should bother drilling for a NON-RENEWABLE resource. Oil doesn't come back as fast as biodesiels, it takes millions of years to form and it needs the right amount of heat and pressure to do it. On top of that, oil accidents and pollutants produced by it when burned can be eliminated with the coming of better fuels that are renewable. Oil is also extremely difficult to clean up, the damage is long term it affects not only wildlife but people living around the spill. I'm very much certain that had our government not been bought out by corporations our alternate energy would've been here by the 60s and 70s during the first energy crisis. Also by the 80s and 90s we wised up about the damages humans cause to our environment that; should've been a wake-up call to corporations to seek another alternative because oil is short term and damaging long term. So sure, let's go ahead and use up all our resources, cut every tree, and mine every mountain, burn up as many fossil fuels without thinking of consequences and then wonder why our climate has gone chaotic. Then we can look in hindsight and say "that was an accident such is the way of life" why let accidents happen when they can be prevented? Preventable and forseeable accidents are caused by human stupidity.


i'd rather use up other people's oil now and when that's gone...
Click to expand...
Don H, one of two things would happen in the scenario. 1) The developed countries will have alternate fuel (and selling that fuel to others) with the exception of us "stupid Americans" and we'll be the laughing stock of the world for using such outdated fuel, or B) The rest of the world is still addicted to oil, and now it's America vs. the world over oil.


Epyon

P.S: To DasBoot, sure drilling now would cause temporary price drops, but long term it will only spike it more, do you really think oil bases their prices depending on what's happening on the Middle East? I smell camel $417 and it's coming from that gass station. The point of any corporation is maximum profit with minimum risks. I'll bet you anything that they are free to charge the people whatever price they wish because Americans are hooked on gasoline it's our herion we have to inject it otherwise we can't keep things going. Oil companies look for excuses to increase prices for something that's going to die out one way or another. Israel attacks Hezbollah, prices drop a little, some car bomb blows up in an oil field in Iraq, oh no prices spike up really high! (wait, I thought we WEREN'T drilling in Iraq, and I thought we were to make sure that oil goes to the Iraqi economy, oh wait it does, because we control their government and economy, so we can take all that oil and pay much less than what we pay the Saudis.) Saudis decide to pump out more oil to us, prices drop slightly. Later on, Saddam Hussein farts a big one in court killing everyone in a five mile radius, he escapes in a jeep with Osama bin Laden, the two ride off into the sunset like Indiana Jones, and all of a sudden the prices go up by a few hundred dollars because now we have more maniacs on the loose, and we're stuck paying for it and want to drill more to drop the prices and are too stupid to see that we MUST find another way. (By the way, I know there were exaggerations but I hope it got the point across.)
 
1. The world is NOT running out of oil, it is running out of EASY oil. Oil does not just come out of holes in the ground. Canada has over 1 billion bbls of oil locked in N. East Alberta in tar sands. The point at which it is economically feasible to exploit this resource is $70 bbl. That point has been reached and NE Alberta is experiencing a boom. Rising crude prices also make bio-fuels more cost effective

2. Soaring gas/oil prices have nothing to do w/ imperialist spending. It is supply and demand. Asia in general and China and India in particular are the driving forces as their economies are growing at a rapid pace.

3. Global warming is real. It is not a scare tactic. The scientific community does not dispute global warming. Even the Bush administration now admits there is a problem. The cause is primarily CO2 from fossil fuels, however methane escaping from the thawing tundra is beginning to be a significant factor, and one we cannot control.

4. ANWR oil will not be available for 6-8 years. The amount of oil there is reported to be about 6 months supply at TODAYS consumption rates.

5. The most practical solution is less consumption. Consuming less will actually bring the price DOWN. It will also slow global warming. But that means sacrifice and American people don't like sacrifice.

6. The US has 5% of the worlds population. It consumes 25% of the worlds non-renewable energy resources and produces a corresponding amount of greenhouse gasses.

7. Off shore oil platforms do NOT look better than the Harley plant in Milwaukee. They DO look better than the old Allis-Chalmers plant in West Allis.

8. The simplest solution to the current energy problem in the US is to annex Canada and Mexico. That will give us enough energy reserves to last well into the next century. It will also eliminate the NAFTA dispute and the illegal immigrant problem as all Canadians and Mexicans will become US Citizens. While Canada might balk at this our army is bigger than their army. The Mexicans will love the idea as it will raise the standard of living for 97% of the population to the poverty level.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top