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, 09:04 PM   #51
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 JiggsCasey View Post
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.
Why don't you let the oil companies make that decision instead of the having government say 'you might lose money, don't do it.' I understand that you say you wouldn't restrict them, but it's a stupid argument.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:06 PM   #52
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 JiggsCasey View Post
for ... how.... long?

a month? 6 months?
Again, what the hell does it matter for how long? 2 months or 20 years, if it can lower gas prices a fraction and make people some money without doing irreparable harm to then environment, why does it matter?
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:09 PM   #53
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Again, what the hell does it matter for how long? 2 months or 20 years, if it can lower gas prices a fraction and make people some money without doing irreparable harm to then environment, why does it matter?
is this a serious question? this entire debate is about cost vs. reward in the face of dwindling supply... it costs a hell of a lot of money to explore, build the infrastructure, extract and refine...

as a CEO of one of these companies, are you willing to pony up the millions or billions so as to extract 4 months of fuel at current US rates of consumption?
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:11 PM   #54
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Why don't you let the oil companies make that decision instead of the having government say 'you might lose money, don't do it.' I understand that you say you wouldn't restrict them, but it's a stupid argument.
Can anyone on this forum debate a topic without a punt to "you're stupid?"

So, my argument is "stupid," and in the next breath you actually ask "what does it matter?" in response to the question of "how much is there?" ... Wow... OK
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:12 PM   #55
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
is this a serious question? this entire debate is about cost vs. reward in the face of dwindling supply... it costs a hell of a lot of money to explore, build the infrastructure, extract and refine...

as a CEO of one of these companies, are you willing to pony up the millions or billions so as to extract 4 months of fuel at current US rates of consumption?
If it can be done at a profit? Yes.

Easy game
Lord Gimik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:12 PM   #56
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 JiggsCasey View Post
is this a serious question? this entire debate is about cost vs. reward in the face of dwindling supply... it costs a hell of a lot of money to explore, build the infrastructure, extract and refine...

as a CEO of one of these companies, are you willing to pony up the millions or billions so as to extract 4 months of fuel at current US rates of consumption?
Again, let THEM make the choice instead of restricting. Do you understand how much research goes into determining the size of the oil deposit before any sort of drilling equipment is even though about being purchased? These oil companies are not stupid, if there is no money to be made then they won't go for it. But if there is money to be made, they will. Again, let them make the decision. The government doesn't even have any downside in this debate, they can only make more tax revenue if the companies decide to drill.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:13 PM   #57
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 JiggsCasey View Post
Can anyone on this forum debate a topic without a punt to "you're stupid?"

So, my argument is "stupid," and in the next breath you actually ask "what does it matter?" in response to the question of "how much is there?" ... Wow... OK
Dude, read what I said. The argument is stupid because it makes no sense. I didn't say anything about you as a poster.

Also, how much oil there is makes has absolutely no bearing on whether or not someone should be able to make their own decision to drill.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:16 PM   #58
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Again, let THEM make the choice instead of restricting. Do you understand how much research goes into determining the size of the oil deposit before any sort of drilling equipment is even though about being purchased? These oil companies are not stupid, if there is no money to be made then they won't go for it. But if there is money to be made, they will. Again, let them make the decision. The government doesn't even have any downside in this debate, they can only make more tax revenue if the companies decide to drill.
unbelievable... clearly you're going to just avoid the question of "how much" ... please don't guess that I lack the comprehension of how much this stuff all costs... it's at the very root of my entire argument here.

ok, let me ask you a different way then... do you honestly believe an oil company is going to "make a profit" when it builds all the infrastructure and exhausts a pool within 6 months?
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:17 PM   #59
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Gimik View Post
If it can be done at a profit? Yes.

Easy game
No comment on the "estimated reserves" fairy tale totals you adhere to then?

Very well.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:19 PM   #60
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 JiggsCasey View Post
unbelievable... clearly you're going to just avoid the question of "how much"

ok, let me ask you a different way then... do you honestly believe an oil company is going to "make a profit" when it builds all the infrastructure and exhausts a pool within 6 months?
Ok, I see you have reading comprehension issues, so I'll do my best to spell it out more clearly.

If an oil company determines they can make a profit through detailed analysis, they will do it. If not, they will not.

None of that makes even a pinprick of difference on whether or not a Company should have the ability to drill.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:47 PM   #61
jthegreat
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,125
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.
If only we had some way to efficiently allocate resources...
jthegreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:59 PM   #62
Skeletori
centurion
 
Skeletori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 118
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by jthegreat View Post
If only we had some way to efficiently allocate resources...
Yes, it would be a huge advance if we could find a method that works in the real world.
Skeletori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 10:10 PM   #63
Rampage_Jackson
veteran
 
Rampage_Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: i knew it would happen
Posts: 2,773
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Can you imagine the profits some energy company will make by producing the first viable alternative to fossil fuels?
The irony of this is that the first company that does do this will likely be bought out by Exxon or one of the other big players. But liberals will still state hate Exxon no matter what.
Rampage_Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:03 PM   #64
BCPVP
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: WI
Posts: 10,806
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
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.
Is the Minerals Management Service good enough for you? According to their 2006 estimate, there's up to 115 Billion bbl of oil and half a quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas.
BCPVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:04 PM   #65
suzzer99
self-banned
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 81,636
Re: Drill, baby, drill

By any chance is there someone who actually knows something who can speak to whether or not "approving offshore drilling" means US subsidies to get set up? It's my impression that most of the oil, natural gas and coal production in this country is *still* subsidized by our govt. Here's one source: http://cleantech.com/news/node/554

Quote:
Greenpeace believes Europeans spend about $10 billion or so (USD equivalent) annually to subsidize fossil fuels. By contrast, it thinks the American oil and gas industry might receive anywhere between $15 billion and $35 billion a year in subsidies from taxpayers.

Why such a large margin of error? The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

* Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
* Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
* Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
* Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
* Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
* Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
* Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
* The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
* Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
* Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
* Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)
Ok so some of those are reaching a little. But still even if the low number is accurate, realize we're not just talking about allowing drilling. We're talking about a very significant and murky level of govt subsidy. Again, I'd love to hear from someone who really knows their stuff (too bad Slim Pickens got busted for trying to build a bot, he was a nuclear power engineer and really knew his energy production facts). But it's my impression that most of the remaining fossil fuel reserves in this country, except maybe for coal, are unprofitable or worth the risk with oil anywhere in it's current ballpark. This would explain why the oil industry is sitting on 10s of 1000s of permits.

Last edited by suzzer99; 03-31-2010 at 11:12 PM.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:05 PM   #66
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barretboy View Post
Ok, I see you have reading comprehension issues, so I'll do my best to spell it out more clearly.

If an oil company determines they can make a profit through detailed analysis, they will do it. If not, they will not.

None of that makes even a pinprick of difference on whether or not a Company should have the ability to drill.
I believe I said from the beginning I wouldn't hinder their ability to drill. Did you miss that part?

Fact is, the detailed analysis is already in. The proven reserve totals off our coasts are negligible. So I guess they won't be drilling. Which was my entire point. Obama is basically saying "have at it. ... It's your books."
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:07 PM   #67
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:
I believe I said from the beginning I wouldn't hinder their ability to drill. Did you miss that part?
No, I was just clarifying the part where you mischaracterized my statements.
Barretboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:09 PM   #68
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPVP View Post
Is the Minerals Management Service good enough for you? According to their 2006 estimate, there's up to 115 Billion bbl of oil and half a quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Guy, stick to 9/11 Truth denial. This discussion is about proven reserves, not undiscovered technically recoverable resources. Do you have any idea how much deep water drilling costs?

From your own link:
These estimates represent the potential quantities of undiscovered hydrocarbons that can be conventionally produced using existing or reasonably foreseeable technology, without any consideration of economic feasibility.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:41 PM   #69
MrScabs
banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lost Vegas
Posts: 593
Re: Drill, baby, drill

I watched his speech and about two hours of talking heads discussing this then read a couple of news stories on it. I still don't know how I feel about this issue one way or the other. He said we have less than 2% of the oil and use more than 20% of it. But how long would it take for us to run out completely if we just used our own oil? If the answer to that question is > 100 years I think we should start using 25%+ of our own oil - and take a gamble on the fact that cars will be getting 200+ MPG by the time we are nearing the end of our reserves or we have made Iraq the 51st state or we have heavily reduced, if not eliminated our dependence on oil or some other thing I can't think of right now.

OTOH if we'd burn through our 2% in a few years or something then I really don't see the point of drilling. Might as well buy the oil from others as our reserves will not only go up in monetary value in time, as the world supply decreases, it will be a significant national security issue for us to even have access to that oil - as many countries might stop selling it altogether.

But I'm admittedly very ignorant on this topic so who knows if any of that applies or even makes sense. I will say that I trust Obama fully at this point and am very happy to have a commander in chief who I know to be a genius and who I know to rely upon experts above his own opinion and yada yada so I can go on doing my thing and just trust he'll work it out.

Props on the student loans by the way Barry. Though you need to not let your exuberance about your rush of cards lately show through so much in your speeches. Starting to look like a 15 year old before his first date while reading from your teleprompters.
MrScabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:42 PM   #70
BCPVP
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: WI
Posts: 10,806
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
Guy, stick to 9/11 Truth denial. This discussion is about proven reserves, not undiscovered technically recoverable resources. Do you have any idea how much deep water drilling costs?

From your own link:
These estimates represent the potential quantities of undiscovered hydrocarbons that can be conventionally produced using existing or reasonably foreseeable technology, without any consideration of economic feasibility.
So what?



You must really be smarting from getting owned in that thread that you have to throw out ad homs in ever thread we're in.
BCPVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:47 PM   #71
adios
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Russian Troll
Posts: 20,749
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynton View Post
Here's an issue I'm genuinely agnostic about: off-shore drilling. (I didn't notice any threads on it.)

My recollection is that Obama campaigned on somewhat of a vague promise to increase off-shore drilling, a promise which I imagine both sides of the political aisle did not take very seriously.

So, today we get this story about Obama opening up some areas for more drilling





Predictably, liberals are upset, and conservatives are unimpressed.

Aside from the usual environmental concerns, liberals are irritated that Obama may be making a concession, without getting any promise of votes on climate change.

Bradford Plumer discusses:



But another possibility, Plumber remarks:



Politics aside, the NYT article linked above makes it appear that any actual drilling is many years away, and may never occur:



Anyone have any opinions to offer on this topic? As I said at the start, I'm agnostic, both on the merits and the politics of it all.
Strange title for your post since it's not about drilling, it's about exploration as you indicate in your actual post.
adios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 11:51 PM   #72
obsidian
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,957
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortyTheFish View Post
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.
This isn't going to waste tax dollars. If anything, it will generate them.
obsidian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:00 AM   #73
Ineedaride2
Politics Court Jester
 
Ineedaride2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Warning: This post contains sarcasm
Posts: 22,828
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Drill. Don't drill. Whatever. We don't drill, we don't have any spills. We do drill, we get another tax revenue stream in the U.S. and 2 cent per gallon cheaper gas in exchange for potentially killing some sea life and idiot swimmers who aren't scared of black water. Either way, the game is potentially zero-sum.


Out of curiosity, I did a pre-election search for Obama and "offshore drilling", and the results were INCREDIBLY unsurprising.:

6/18/2008

Obama challenges McCain on offshore oil drilling, security

Quote:
Obama and McCain also clashed over energy policies. McCain accused his Democratic opponent of recycling impractical ideas by supporting a tax on windfall oil company profits. Obama criticized his rival's proposed energy plan which called for an end to a federal moratorium on offshore oil drilling.
Candidates Clash on Impact of Offshore Drilling

July 16, 2008

Quote:
AMOS: John McCain and Barack Obama agree the price of oil is painfully high. They disagree on what to do about it. And we begin with one of their major differences, on offshore oil drilling. President Bush has lifted a ban on drilling in many areas. That ban came partly in response to a 1969 spill in California.
Quote:
JOYCE: Days later Senator Barack Obama fired back in Jacksonville, Florida, where drilling isn't such a popular idea.

Senator BARACK OBAMA (Democrat, Illinois): It would have long-term consequences for our coastlines but no short-term benefits since it would take at least ten years to get any oil.

JOYCE: And that's not soon enough, he says.

Sen. OBAMA: Offshore drilling would not lower gas prices today.
Aug 3, 2008

Obama's offshore conversion: helps but battles loom

Quote:
Sen. Barack Obama's conversion in favor of offshore drilling on the road to the White House will ease the standoff in the U.S. Congress over energy but forging a veto-proof bill still faces big hurdles.

The Democratic presidential candidate said he would back limited offshore drilling as part of a broader package, signaling support for legislation unveiled by a bipartisan group of senators just before Congress recessed on Friday.
"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama told The Palm Beach Post in Florida on Friday.

In a nutshell, Obama didn't give a **** either way during his campaign. I'm suggesting that sometime within the last 3 weeks he flipped a coin over a shot of Tequila and heads won out.

(Heads is ALWAYS drill for oil)
Ineedaride2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:27 AM   #74
suzzer99
self-banned
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 81,636
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Yeah after reading some of that stuff, it seems this is probably more about neutralizing another republican talking point before the campaigns get into high gear.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 01:54 AM   #75
Fedorfan
veteran
 
Fedorfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,931
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
Yeah after reading some of that stuff, it seems this is probably more about neutralizing another republican talking point before the campaigns get into high gear.
This, surprised this wasn't mentioned in the first 5 posts, forum really slipping lately...
Fedorfan 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 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online