Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics political discourse

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-31-2010, 07:04 PM   #26
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynton View Post
So, let me just ask straight out here: forgetting the politics for a moment, does anyone here have a clear preference either for or against the contemplated increase in off-shore drilling? Or do most people just assume it doesn't really matter much?
The "drill baby drill" crowd can't decide what it wants to be angry about. First, they're convinced domestic drilling will "help get us off our foreign dependence, " and damned liberals won't let us. Then, when it's shown the proven totals off our shores are negligible, they freak out with "So!?!?! Let them drill anyway and find out!"... Nevermind that drilling isn't exploration, and drilling doesn't just occur blindly. Instead, incredibly expensive seismology is required before drilling can be conducted. When that seismology comes back with abundant proven reserve totals, THEN you weigh whether or not to drill.

To a proponent of "just dig deeper," the process of finding and extracting crude oil is apparently effortless, and we can just drill dry holes all over the place and move the infrastructure to the next zone like it's nothing.

Personally, I'm of the same mind that the administration is now taking. F' em. Let them drill. And go out of business in the process. They'll learn.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:05 PM   #27
jthegreat
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,125
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynton View Post
Bravo. As I recently remarked elsewhere, I think it's worth occasionally considering the possibility that politicians may recommend a policy on the merits.

Here, I think people are quick to assume that Obama doesn't really believe the increased off-shore drilling is a good idea because they believe his views fit comfortably into the mainstream of liberal/environmentalists. This is why I imagine that no one really took his campaign words seriously in this context. Liberals and conservatives alike probably doubted he'd follow through.

At the same time, the article I quoted above provides some more ammunition for being cynical, imo. Specifically, it looks like this is just a very preliminary step, and that actual off-shore drilling is many years away. For that reason, the announcement may not amount to much of anything concrete.
I'm totally cynical about his motivations for this stance, but I do agree with it nonetheless.
jthegreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:13 PM   #28
jthegreat
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,125
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Obama doesn't ball.

He loves

And then he goes and does what his controllers, (the black plumbers who swat this world) TELL HIM TO DO.

lol if you think French politics is rational, blue, intelligent or wide. It is itchy, co-opted and willingly pathetic.

We all teach our beeyotches that it is NEVER correct to poke.

The main "radicals" that federally elected and appointed officials have is... yeah... aiming.

France, land of the pseudo-excellent and home of the jerks.
nice
jthegreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:15 PM   #29
Lord Gimik
banned
 
Lord Gimik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,223
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
nevermind the fact that there's about 8 hours of oil off the coast of Florida, and perhaps 3 months of it at ANWR...

be our guest... drill away... and go bankrupt in the process....
A few orders of magnitude are missing from your calculations.
Lord Gimik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:25 PM   #30
ShortyTheFish
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,941
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian J View Post
the fact that liberals would oppose anything I agree with, is pretty damning of liberals imo
FYP

Quote:
Originally Posted by obsidian View Post
Saying that there isn't enough really isn't a reason by itself to be against it. It's not as if offshore drilling and clean energy are mutually exclusive options available.
But wouldn't it be better to invest the millions of dollars going into this toward safer, stronger, and more long-term projects? At this point, investing much more money into our quickly diminishing oil resources when perfectly good alternatives are out there is, IMO, a ridiculous waste of our tax dollars.
ShortyTheFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:28 PM   #31
Huehuecoyotl
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Huehuecoyotl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: It's hard to get by on a smile
Posts: 21,165
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortyTheFish View Post
FYP
But wouldn't it be better to invest the millions of dollars going into this toward safer, stronger, and more long-term projects? At this point, investing much more money into our quickly diminishing oil resources when perfectly good alternatives are out there is, IMO, a ridiculous waste of our tax dollars.
Yea but there isn't a huge pie chart in the sky where we get to divide everyone's money into what WE think are good ideas. If the ROI on offshore drilling is more than the ROI of clean energy then drilling gets that investor's money and if not clean energy gets that money. To each their own.
Huehuecoyotl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:28 PM   #32
Barretboy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Barretboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: i ain\'t got my taco
Posts: 7,390
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
But wouldn't it be better to invest the millions of dollars going into this toward safer, stronger, and more long-term projects? At this point, investing much more money into our quickly diminishing oil resources when perfectly good alternatives are out there is, IMO, a ridiculous waste of our tax dollars.
Why not both? That's what I don't understand.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 07:31 PM   #33
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Gimik View Post
A few orders of magnitude are missing from your calculations.
Really? Well, why don't you show me the proven reserve totals at these locations and global rates of consumption you seem to be working with.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:03 PM   #34
Lord Gimik
banned
 
Lord Gimik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,223
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
Really? Well, why don't you show me the proven reserve totals at these locations and global rates of consumption you seem to be working with.
Exactly, please be quiet.

You're just playing stupid little word games. We both know there are orders of magnitude greater quantities of oil than the "proven" numbers suggest.
Lord Gimik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:09 PM   #35
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Gimik View Post
Exactly, please be quiet.

You're just playing stupid little word games. We both know there are orders of magnitude greater quantities of oil than the "proven" numbers suggest.
Please educate yourself. Proven reserves are the only figures that matter, not tinker bell reserves. I've never deviated from that assertion. YOU are the one playing word games.

If your company "estimates" a trillion barrel pool 150 miles under the earth, who gives a ****?

"Hope" away all you like, if that's what you prefer to rest domestic energy policy upon, "Lord."

I'm sure if you keep digging deeper, there's bound to be guesstimated reserves down there somewhere. Maybe even at the mantle. Nevermind the costs to your company to get to it.

Anyhow, I knew you wouldn't site a source.

You're awesome.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:12 PM   #36
Omar Comin
fantasy failure
 
Omar Comin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: hold on we're going home
Posts: 27,329
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Haha at Lord accusing someone of playing word games and then doing the exact same thing, well done chap.
Omar Comin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:14 PM   #37
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 79,271
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
It's my understanding (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that the main contention against offshore drilling is 1) the possibility of a potential spill, which could severely damage the surrounding ecosystem, 2) the drilling activity could affect fishing in the surrounding area and 3) that the platforms themselves disturb the marine life directly below it and the latter of which seems like a pretty weak argument given that the platforms themselves are about half the size of a football field.

Any that I'm missing? Because these, in general, seem to be pretty unlikely/not affecting any appreciable amount of sea life. But I'm not a marine biologist.
Depending on how close to shore, the platforms mar the view (minor one).

We would probably have much more offshore drilling in this country if not for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969_Sa...bara_oil_spill
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:20 PM   #38
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 79,271
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Why not both? That's what I don't understand.
What large-scale solar and wind power really needs is a massive DC backbone built from the SW to the Great Plains. This will be a huge project and my guess is given the economy and the kerfuffle over healthcare that this isn't really the best time to introduce such a thing. But maybe in a couple years when the economy improves. (http://blog.sustainablog.org/scienti...ar-grand-plan/)

Or maybe we'll have to wait until a republican proposes and champions it. Since they refuse to reach across the aisle on anything anymore.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:25 PM   #39
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
What large-scale solar and wind power really needs is a massive DC backbone built from the SW to the Great Plains. This will be a huge project and my guess is given the economy and the kerfuffle over healthcare that this isn't really the best time to introduce such a thing. But maybe in a couple years when the economy improves. (http://blog.sustainablog.org/scienti...ar-grand-plan/)

Or maybe we'll have to wait until a republican proposes and champions it. Since they refuse to reach across the aisle on anything anymore.
this...

although, time is a serious issue now. ... should have started this process 30 years ago, let alone 10.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:35 PM   #40
Barretboy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Barretboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: i ain\'t got my taco
Posts: 7,390
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
What large-scale solar and wind power really needs is a massive DC backbone built from the SW to the Great Plains. This will be a huge project and my guess is given the economy and the kerfuffle over healthcare that this isn't really the best time to introduce such a thing. But maybe in a couple years when the economy improves. (http://blog.sustainablog.org/scienti...ar-grand-plan/)

Or maybe we'll have to wait until a republican proposes and champions it. Since they refuse to reach across the aisle on anything anymore.
You didn't answer my question at all, why not both?
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:38 PM   #41
ShortyTheFish
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,941
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
this...

although, time is a serious issue now. ... should have started this process 30 years ago, let alone 10.
Exactly. The fact is, if we're ever going to have some major shift away from oil (which WILL happen eventually), it'd better happen sooner rather than later. We can't just keep saying "drill, baby, drill" or "why not both?" when it continues to destroy the environment (ugh, here we go again with the environment ) or the fact that there's a limited amount of oil out there and consumption of it is reaching (maybe already at) insane levels.

Seriously, how long and how much money are we willing to put into oil before people finally admit, "You know what, this is a dying horse that we should probably stop beating."
ShortyTheFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:39 PM   #42
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 79,271
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
You didn't answer my question at all, why not both?
It seems like drill baby drill is just one last hit off the crack pipe. Maybe even a resin hit at this point. By most accounts I've read they've already grabbed all the easy access stuff. The whole idea of gigantic untapped reserves just right offshore and that the dems are holding us back from oil independence is just another BS republican talking point. Like shale oil.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:41 PM   #43
Barretboy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Barretboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: i ain\'t got my taco
Posts: 7,390
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Seriously, how long and how much money are we willing to put into oil before people finally admit, "You know what, this is a dying horse that we should probably stop beating."
Because it's not a lightswitch you can flip overnight like so many people seem to suggest.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:43 PM   #44
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 79,271
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Because it's not a lightswitch you can flip overnight like so many people seem to suggest.
What exactly is your argument here?
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:43 PM   #45
Barretboy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Barretboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: i ain\'t got my taco
Posts: 7,390
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
What is your argument here?
That alternative energies research and offshore drilling can co-exist. If you dont think that BILLIONS upon BILLIONS are not being invested in alternative energy, you are insane. Can you imagine the profits some energy company will make by producing the first viable alternative to fossil fuels?
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:47 PM   #46
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 79,271
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Personally I'm not opposed to all drilling if the economics make sense and the environmental impact is determined to be minimal. I just think putting the majority of our efforts towards renewable makes a lot more sense. For one thing if the oil can't profitably be extracted without a subsidy, forget it.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:51 PM   #47
Barretboy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Barretboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: i ain\'t got my taco
Posts: 7,390
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
Personally I'm not opposed to all drilling if the economics make sense and the environmental impact is determined to be minimal. I just think putting the majority of our efforts towards renewable makes a lot more sense. For one thing if the oil can't profitably be extracted without a subsidy, forget it.
I'm with you, but it doesn't make sense to prevent offshore drilling in the meantime, because it isn't even your money (read: government funds) that are being used to pay for such drilling, it's the oil companies'.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:57 PM   #48
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
I'm with you, but it doesn't make sense to prevent offshore drilling in the meantime, because it isn't even your money (read: government funds) that are being used to pay for such drilling, it's the oil companies'.
While I wouldn't restrict them from losing money if they so choose if I were the administration, I would advise them not to do so. These are the same companies that will be leaned on to pave the way for innovation towards alternatives. It's in the government's best interest to keep them healthy and afloat.

That is, once they finally openly admit global light crude oil depletion, a reality which many of them still desperately dance around to this very day.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:57 PM   #49
Wynton
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wynton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Graphville
Posts: 15,188
Re: Drill, baby, drill

From the annals of Kos, I found this diary, which had a couple of noteworthy factoids.

First, the diarist argued that the entire announcement was a big bluff, because new drilling will not occur for many years, if at all:

Quote:
more than 44 million acres of onshore public lands are leased for oil and gas development and yet most of it is not being drilled. All tolled (onshore and offshore), 68 million acres are leased and sitting idle. Over 10,000 permits are currently 'stockpiled' by industry...

...It has been estimated that if all of those currently inactive leases were drilled, the USA would produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas EVERY DAY, accounting for a doubling of US oil production and a 75% increase in US natural gas production. The Minerals Management Service tells us that about 80% of fossil fuels available in offshore are currently available for development.
The author states that "From 2001 to 2006, under George Bush, only one offshore oil rig was installed, off the coast of Louisiana. One, in six years." And then he includes this map"



And then the diary summarized some of Obama's statements in 2008 (the original text includes links, but I'm not bothering to copy those):

Quote:
October 7, 2008:

"I believe in the need for increased oil production. We're going to have to explore new ways to get more oil, and that includes offshore drilling".

August 1, 2008:

"Sen. Barack Obama suggested he could accept an expansion of offshore oil drilling today if it is in a broader package of energy measures that would free the logjam on energy bills in Congress.

"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."

"Obama, through his Senate office, issued a written statement welcoming a proposal sent to Senate leaders Friday by 10 senators -- five from each party -- that would lift drilling bans in the eastern Gulf of Mexico within 50 miles of Florida's beaches and in the South Atlantic off Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia, but only if a state agrees to the oil and gas development along its coast."
August 4, 2008:

"Sen. Barack Obama today softened his opposition to new offshore drilling, saying in a speech at Michigan State University that he is "willing to consider" allowing additional drilling in a limited number of offshore areas if it helps Congress pass energy legislation."

"In his speech, Obama indicated that his shift on offshore drilling is political, not philosophical. "I still don't believe that's a particularly meaningful short-term or long-term position," he said, but added that he did not want to make "the perfect the enemy of the good."
Wynton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:02 PM   #50
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,152
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynton View Post
From the annals of Kos, I found this diary, which had a couple of noteworthy factoids.

First, the diarist argued that the entire announcement was a big bluff, because new drilling will not occur for many years, if at all:
Quote:
more than 44 million acres of onshore public lands are leased for oil and gas development and yet most of it is not being drilled. All tolled (onshore and offshore), 68 million acres are leased and sitting idle. Over 10,000 permits are currently 'stockpiled' by industry...

...It has been estimated that if all of those currently inactive leases were drilled, the USA would produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas EVERY DAY, accounting for a doubling of US oil production and a 75% increase in US natural gas production. The Minerals Management Service tells us that about 80% of fossil fuels available in offshore are currently available for development.
for ... how.... long?

a month? 6 months? ... there's no mention of how much.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online