Drill baby drill

peacefrompaul

Byrnzie wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

For someone rightly calling for intellectual honesty in that Assange thread, it's a bummer to see you apologizing for the administration that's hunting him down. You seem like a savvy dude and I would have imagined the "it could be worse" argument to be beneath you.

Except I'm not apologizing for any administration. I said they're the lesser of two evils. And as for the "it could be worse" argument being beneath me, I'd be a lot more comfortable with a U.S President that possesses a certain amount of intelligence and judiciousness, as opposed to some self-interested corporate huckster who will continue fucking this World where George W. Bush left off.

The U.S government is corrupt to it's core, regardless of who's at the helm. But it's corrupt by degrees. And if it's bad enough now under Obama then the World certainly doesn't need a dangerous jackass like Romney as President.

Degrees? No. It's just straight up corrupt. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit argument. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil.

gimmesometruth27

peacefrompaul wrote:

Degrees? No. It's just straight up corrupt. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit argument. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil.

by that rationale, we should not vote for anyone then.

my vote for obama is a vote against romney and ryan, and it is a shame that it has to be that way, but it is what it is...

peacefrompaul

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

Degrees? No. It's just straight up corrupt. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit argument. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil.

by that rationale, we should not vote for anyone then.

my vote for obama is a vote against romney and ryan, and it is a shame that it has to be that way, but it is what it is...

3rd parties do, in fact, exist.

brianlux

peacefrompaul wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

Degrees? No. It's just straight up corrupt. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit argument. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil.

by that rationale, we should not vote for anyone then.

my vote for obama is a vote against romney and ryan, and it is a shame that it has to be that way, but it is what it is...

3rd parties do, in fact, exist.

That brings up an interesting question- whether to vote third party on principle knowing (in the huge majority of cases) that you candidate will lose or voting for the lesser of two evils because less evil is better than more evil. I've seen families nearly torn apart over this issue. That's when I'd keep it to myself and do what I believe in without damaging the relationships I have around me. But that's just my priorities.

Jason P

peacefrompaul wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

Degrees? No. It's just straight up corrupt. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit argument. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil.

by that rationale, we should not vote for anyone then.

my vote for obama is a vote against romney and ryan, and it is a shame that it has to be that way, but it is what it is...

3rd parties do, in fact, exist.

Can you sell your vote on Craigslist? :think:

gimmesometruth27

peacefrompaul wrote:

3rd parties do, in fact, exist.

go ahead and vote for a third party then. but don't be upset when he gets 1000th of the votes that the other 2 get.

mickeyrat

so since most of the oil extracted from US soil gets sold on the world market at prices SET by the world market, just how are we supposed to benefit by subsidized oil companies being allowed to drill in sensitive areas?

Jason P

mickeyrat wrote:

so since most of the oil extracted from US soil gets sold on the world market at prices SET by the world market, just how are we supposed to benefit by subsidized oil companies being allowed to drill in sensitive areas?

jobs.

pandora

usamamasan1 wrote:

This is one smart dude. I believe he has earned my vote. Obama is in big trouble, this all makes too much sense. Please, educate yourself and read .....

The Romney Plan For A Stronger Middle Class:ENERGY INDEPENDENCE August 23, 2012

A crucial component of Mitt Romney’s Plan for a Stronger Middle Class is to dramatically increase domestic energy production and partner closely with Canada and Mexicoto achieve North American energy independence by 2020. While President Obama has described his own energy policy as a “hodgepodge,” sent billions of taxpayer dollars to green energy projects run by political cronies, rejected the Keystone XL Pipeline as not in “the nationalinterest,” and sought repeatedly to stall development of America’s domestic resources,Romney’s path forward would establish America as an energy superpower in the 21st century.

THE ROMNEY AGENDA:
 Empower states to control onshore energy development;
 Open offshore areas for energy development;
 Pursue a North American Energy Partnership;
 Ensure accurate assessment of energy resources;
 Restore transparency and fairness to permitting and regulation; and
 Facilitate private-sector-led development of new energy technologies.“An affordable, reliable supply of energy is crucial to America’s economic future.

I have a vision for an America that is an energy superpower, rapidly increasing our own production and partnering with our allies Canada and Mexico to achieve energy independence on this continent. If I am elected president, that vision will become a reality by the end of my second term.”
-Mitt Romney

“We have an unprecedented opportunity to make our natural resources a long -term source of competitive advantage for our nation. If we develop these resources to the fullest, we will not only guarantee ourselves an affordable and reliable supply of energy, but also enjoy benefits throughout our economy. Our trade deficit will shrink,our dollar will strengthen, and tens of billions of dollars will flow to the treasury.Perhaps most importantly, we will experience a manufacturing resurgence that delivers more jobs and more take-home pay for middle-class families across the country.” -Mitt Romney


An Achievable Goal:Energy Independence By 2020
While every President since Nixon has tried and failed to achieve this goal, analysts
across the spectrum – energy experts, investment firms, even academics at Harvard University – now recognize that surging U.S. energy production, combined with the resources of America’s neighbors, can meet all of the continent’s energy needs within a decade. The key is to embracethese resources and open access to them.Did You Know?Citigroup: “The Story Of North American ‘Energy Independence’ Is One Of Incredible Potential.”“While the story of North American ‘energy independence’ is one of incredible potential and possibilitythat could alter the geopolitical landscape from the Middle East to the Mid-Continent –public policy mightwell be the most critical factor in determining whether the current steep supply trajectory remains robust for many decades to come or if it fizzles out; trumping both technology and geology.”

Raymond James: “We Are Looking … [At] Actual Oil Independence By 2020.” “After more than threedecades of falling oil production in the lower 48 states, the U.S. is now poised to sharply increase domestic oil production and sharply decrease its dependence on imported oil…Specifically, we are looking… [at] actual oil independence by 2020.”(Raymond James U.S. Research, “Yes, Mr. President, We Believe WeCan Drill Our Way Out of This Problem,”

Manhattan Institute: “A Complete Reversal In Thinking Is Needed To Orient North America Around Hydrocarbon Abundance.”“The underlying paradigms embedded in American energy policy and regulatory structures are anchored in the idea of shortages and import dependence. A complete reversal in thinking is needed to orient North America around hydrocarbon abundance—and exports. In collaboration with Canada and Mexico, the United States could — and should—forge a broad pro-development, pro-export policy to realize the benefits of our hydrocarbon resources. Such a policy could lead to North America becoming the largest supplier of fuel to the world by 2030

Harvard Kennedy School: “The Western Hemisphere Could Return To A Pre-World War II StatusOf Theoretical Oil Self Sufficiency.”“[T]he Western Hemisphere could return to a pre-World War IIstatus of theoretical oil self-sufficiency, and the United States could dramatically reduce its oil importneeds. … [O]ver the next decades, the growing role of unconventional oils will make the Western[H]emisphere the new center of gravity of oil exploration and production

USA Today : “U.S. Energy Independence Is No Longer A Pipe Dream.” (Tim Mullaney, “U.S. Energy Independence Is No Longer A Pipe Dream,” USA Today ,5/15/12)

Bloomberg: “U.S. Energy Supplies Have Been Transformed In Less Than A Decade.” (Asjylyn Loder,“America’s Energy Seen Adding 3.6 Million Jobs Along With 3% GDP,” Bloomberg ,8/13/12)

The Result: The Emergence Of An Energy Superpower
ENERGY INDEPENDENCE HAS WIDE-RANGING BENEFITS FOR AMERICA.
• More than three million new jobs, including over one million in manufacturing;
• An economic resurgence adding more than $500 billion to GDP;
• A stronger dollar and a reduced trade deficit;• More than $1 trillion in revenue for federal, state, and local governments;
• Lower energy prices for job creators and middle-class families; and
• National security strengthened by freedom from dependence on foreign energy supplies.

A successful national energy strategy will have a fundamental influence on the well-being of the nation. An expansion in the affordable, reliable supply of domestically produced energy can bolster the competitiveness of virtually every industry within the country, creating millions of new jobs from coast to coast. With fewer energy imports and more exports of manufactured goods, America’s trade deficit will decline and the dollar will strengthen.The benefits even extend beyond immediate economic growth. The lease payments, royalties,and taxes paid to the American people in return for the development of the nation’s resources can yield literally trillions of dollars in new government revenue. Lower energy prices can ease the burdens on household budgets. And all Americans can rest assured that the nation’s security is no longer beholden to unstable but oil-rich regions half way around the world.

The Result: A Resurgence In American Manufacturing
THE IMPLICATIONS OF AMERICA’S ENERGY REVOLUTION ARE ENORMOUS.
• A long-term competitive advantage for U.S. industry thanks to lower costs; and
• Millions of new jobs upstream in the industries that supply energy producers, in the energy production process itself, and downstream in the industries from manufacturing to petrochemicals to transportation that can utilize the output. The revolution in U.S. energy production will not just expand economic opportunity within the energy industry. Upstream businesses that supply the industry will experience a surge in demand, and perhaps the greatest benefit will occur downstream as manufacturers gain access to a more affordable and reliable supply of energy and feedstock. America’s natural resources can be a long-term competitive advantage for American manufacturing and their development is the key to a reindustrialization of the U.S. economy.

The Romney Agenda: Federal Lands
EMPOWER STATES TO CONTROL ONSHORE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.
• States will be empowered to establish processes to oversee the development and production of all forms of energy on federal lands within their borders, excluding only lands specially designated off-limits;
• State regulatory processes and permitting programs for all forms of energy development will be deemed to satisfy all requirements of federal law;
• Federal agencies will certify state processes as adequate, according to established criteria that are sufficiently broad, to afford the states maximum flexibility to ascertain what is most appropriate; and
• The federal government will encourage the formation of a State Energy DevelopmentCouncil, where states can work together along with existing organizations such asSTRONGER and the IOGCC to share expertise and best management practices.In the midst of the energy revolution taking place on state and privately-held lands across America, oil and gas production on federal lands somehow plummeted last year. This was no accident. President Obama has intentionally sought to shut down oil, gas, and coal production in pursuit of his own alternative energy agenda. Federal land open for exploration has declinednearly 20 percent on his watch, and the rate of permitting is down 37 percent. It now takes a shocking 307 days to receive the permits to drill a new well. Compare that record to what states have achieved on the land under their supervision. States have crafted highly efficient and effective permitting and regulatory programs that address state-specific needs. The state of North Dakota can permit a project in ten days. Colorado does it intwenty-seven. Nor do these processes pose any greater environmental risks. To the contrary,from oil and gas and coal to wind and solar and biofuels, states are far better able to develop,adopt, and enforce regulations based on their unique resources, geology, and local concerns

The Romney Agenda: Offshore Areas
OPEN OFFSHORE AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT.
• Establish a new five-year offshore leasing plan that aggressively opens new areas for development beginning with those off the coast of Virginia and the Carolinas;
• Set minimum production targets for each five-year leasing plan, requiring annual reportsto Congress on progress in reaching goals and implementation of new policies to compensate for any shortfall; and
• Guarantee that state-of-the-art processes and safeguards for offshore drilling are implemented in a manner designed to support rather than block exploration and production. The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) is a vital national resource held in trust by the federal government for the American people. Since day one, the Obama Administration has worked systematically to shut down the development of this resource. The Administration has cancelled more leases than it has held and slowed the rate of permitting by over 60 percent. As a result,offshore oil production declined 14% last year and production in the Gulf of Mexico this year will be 25 percent below what had been expected before the Obama policies took effect. Beyond the Gulf of Mexico, President Obama has stifled efforts at exploration entirely. Off the Atlantic coast, for instance, billions of barrels of oil await development and a bipartisan consensus in Virginia supports doing just that. Unfortunately, the President chose to block accessto those resources and cancel leases that had been planned in the area. Decisions made today about access to energy resources affect investment and production for decades into the future.Opening greater access and streamlining permitting will not only increase production in areas where resources have already been identified, but also speed the identification and development of new resources.

The Romney Agenda: North America
PURSUE A NORTH AMERICAN ENERGY PARTNERSHIP.
• Approve the Keystone XL pipeline;
• Establish a regional agreement to facilitate cross-border energy investment,infrastructure, and sales;
• Promote and expand regulatory cooperation between governments to encourage responsible energy production, including the creation of a forum for sharing best practices and technologies; and
• Institute fast-track regulatory approval processes for cross-border pipelines and other infrastructure. North America is the fastest-growing oil and gas producing region in the world, and the continent now has an opportunity to achieve freedom from OPEC that would not have even been contemplated just ten years ago. Unfortunately, President Obama has chosen to turn his back on America’s neighbors. He rejected the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have dramatically increased the supply of Canadian oil to the U.S. market, and now Canada plans to send that oil to China instead. Today, America still imports more oil from OPEC than it does from Canada and Mexico. As Canadian Prime Minister Harper notes, fostering a greater North American energy partnership that replaces OPEC imports with stable supply from secure sources at discounted prices should be a “no brainer.” And Mexico is now displaying a renewed interest in collaborating with outside partners to increase development of its own plentiful resources. By collaborating with these countries on energy development, America can guarantee itself areliable and affordable supply of energy while also opening up new opportunities for American businesses and workers in the region.

The Romney Agenda: Resource Evaluation
ENSURE ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF ENERGY RESOURCES.
• Approve permits for seismic surveys and exploration offshore to immediately update decades-old information;
• Require the sharing of onshore geological and geophysical information with theDepartment of the Interior;
• Undertake new seismic analysis in offshore areas not included in the new lease plan; and
• Collaborate with Canada and Mexico to ensure accurate inventory of their resources and sharing of data.Every assessment of America’s energy resources indicates tremendous potential. Yet many of these assessments are outdated, based on decades-old technology, and lacking in the data that only becomes available once development begins. President Obama has used this lack of information, coupled with confusion over the difference between “proved” reserves and recoverable resources, to argue incorrectly that America’s resources are scarce. The American people and their policy makers must have a realistic picture of the nation’s true resource abundance in order to make informed decisions about the future of American energy policy. Already, private sector exploration yields valuable public data when it occurs offshore. But in areas where no exploration is allowed to occur, conducting detailed surveys becomes all the more important. There is no excuse for placing any area so far off-limits that its potential cannot even be determined. And when exploration occurs onshore, that information should be shared to help develop the fullest possible picture of America’s energy potential.

The Romney Agenda: Regulatory Reform
RESTORE TRANSPARENCY AND FAIRNESS TO PERMITTING AND REGULATION.
• Implement measured reforms of environmental statutes and regulations to streng then environmental protection without destroying jobs, paralyzing industry, or barring the useof resources like coal;
• Improve the environmental review process by setting clear deadlines and statutes of limitations, requiring better coordination between federal agencies, and allowing state reviews to satisfy federal requirements;
• Prevent agencies from using “sue-and-settle” techniques behind closed doors to circumvent the public rulemaking process, impose onerous regulations, and tie the hands of future administrations; and
• Disclose federal funds spent reimbursing groups for lawsuits against the government. Government oversight is of course crucial to any safe and responsible development of natural resources. But statutes and regulations that were designed to protect public health and the environment have instead been seized on by environmentalists as tools to stop development altogether. President Obama’s Administration, similarly opposed to the development of the nation’s resources, has embraced this approach — going so far as to implement regulations designed to “bankrupt” the coal industry and actually being held in contempt of federal court for illegally imposing a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Overregulation, permitting delays, endless reviews, and senseless litigation interfere with all forms of energy production,from oil and gas drilling to nuclear and coal power generation to the construction of wind farms and solar plants. Modernizing America’s complex environmental statutes, regulations, and permitting processes is crucial to ensuring that the nation can develop its resources safely and efficiently.Laws should promote a rational approach to regulation that takes cost into account. Regulationsshould be carefully crafted to support rather than impede development. Repetitive reviews andstrategic lawsuits should not be allowed to endlessly delay progress or force the government intoimposing rules behind closed doors that it would not approve in public. Energy development, economic growth, and environmental protection can go hand-in-hand if the government focuses on transparency and fairness instead of seeking to pick winners and repay political favors.

The Romney Agenda: Innovation
FACILITATE PRIVATE-SECTOR-LED DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES.
• Focus government investment on research across the full spectrum of energy-related technologies, not on picking winners in the market;
• Support increased market penetration and competition among energy sources by maintaining the RFS and eliminating regulatory barriers to a diversification of the electrical grid, fuel system, or vehicle fleet;
• Ensure that policies for expanding energy development apply broadly to energy sources,from oil and gas exploration, to coal mining, to the siting of wind, solar, hydroelectric,and other renewable energy facilities; and
• Revitalize nuclear power by equipping the NRC to approve new designs and to license approved reactor designs on approved sites within two years.The federal government has a role to play in facilitating innovation in the energy industry.History shows that the United States has moved forward in astonishing ways thanks to investments in basic research that have produced breakthroughs to benefit entire industries.Unfortunately, President Obama’s poor understanding of the private sector has spilled directly into his energy policy, as he sought to have government play venture capitalist and spend billions of dollars subsidizing his chosen companies and technologies. Meanwhile, as companies like Solyndra were going bankrupt and the wind industry was shedding 10,000 jobs, revolutionary innovation in the private sector was paving the way for energy independence and an economic resurgence.Instead of distorting the playing field, the government should be ensuring that it remains level. The same policies that will open access to land for oil, gas, and coal development can also open access for the construction of wind, solar, and hydropower facilities. Strengthening and streamlining regulations and permitting processes will benefit the development of both traditional and alternative energy sources, and encourage the use of a diverse range of fuels including natural gas in transportation. Instead of defining success as providing enough subsidiesfor an uncompetitive technology to survive in the market, success should be defined as eliminating any barriers that might prevent the best technologies from succeeding on their own.

thanks for posting!

brianlux

Jason P wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

so since most of the oil extracted from US soil gets sold on the world market at prices SET by the world market, just how are we supposed to benefit by subsidized oil companies being allowed to drill in sensitive areas?

jobs.

Maybe instead, put those same people to work developing cleaner alternative energies that don't harm sensitive areas or create as much pollution.

peacefrompaul

brianlux wrote:

Jason P wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

so since most of the oil extracted from US soil gets sold on the world market at prices SET by the world market, just how are we supposed to benefit by subsidized oil companies being allowed to drill in sensitive areas?

jobs.

Maybe instead, put those same people to work developing cleaner alternative energies that don't harm sensitive areas or create as much pollution.

That would be ideal, though, I'd rather they not be government jobs. I think the competition would get us some better results in a shorter amount of time.... we may disagree there.

brianlux

peacefrompaul wrote:

That would be ideal, though, I'd rather they not be government jobs. I think the competition would get us some better results in a shorter amount of time.... we may disagree there.

No, actually I'm good with that.

peacefrompaul

brianlux wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

That would be ideal, though, I'd rather they not be government jobs. I think the competition would get us some better results in a shorter amount of time.... we may disagree there.

No, actually I'm good with that.

:-P :thumbup:

DS1119

Drill it up.

Moonpig

DS1119 wrote:

Drill it up.

Now you see, case in point, why go out of your way to wind people up?? is it a slow day for you? You come across as very angry.

Explain to me why you want to "drill it up", seriously, I want to get both sides of the coin. What are the pros and cons, as you see them

DS1119

Moonpig wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Drill it up.

Now you see, case in point, why go out of your way to wind people up?? is it a slow day for you? You come across as very angry.

Explain to me why you want to "drill it up", seriously, I want to get both sides of the coin. What are the pros and cons, as you see them

The more oil the better. The more natural gas the better. Lower prices. Simple supply and demand. Frack the whole country I say.

Moonpig

DS1119 wrote:

Moonpig wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Drill it up.

Now you see, case in point, why go out of your way to wind people up?? is it a slow day for you? You come across as very angry.

Explain to me why you want to "drill it up", seriously, I want to get both sides of the coin. What are the pros and cons, as you see them

The more oil the better. The more natural gas the better. Lower prices. Simple supply and demand. Frack the whole country I say.

That's it? that's the basis for your whole argument. Hell my 4 year old could have told me that. I'm asking why you believe what you do and you come back with that - Frack the whole country?? as long as it doesn't impeed on how you go about your life is it?

What is your understanding of what fracking is; as in what does it involve?

DS1119

I fully understaand what fracking is. It has created jobs...lowers consumer's costs for power...and has decreased the need for burning coal as a source of energy. Frack the whole country.

Cliffy6745

I sure as hell hope the potential fracking in Upstate New York doesn't force Ommegang to move. That would be a damn shame. That is quite possibly the greatest property in the country.

Byrnzie

DS1119 wrote:

Drill it up.

Sure, fuck America, as long as it guarantees a short term monetary profit for the 1%'ers. And yet you pretend that ransacking the environment is for the good of the people?

When will it occur to you that you are the problem, and not the solution?