RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Bush admin still trying to drill off California Coast(23 posts)

Bush admin still trying to drill off California Coastjrm
Aug 21, 2003 3:36 PM
Earlier this year, a federal judge affirmed California's right to review all offshore development plans, putting an end to efforts by the Bush administration to drill for oil in the waters off the Golden State. Now, the administration is quietly rewriting federal rules to curtail states' rights to control what happens beyond their beaches. The proposed revisions to the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act would eliminate the traditional
deference given to state agencies on the environmental impacts of drilling and other proposed activities along their coastlines, and would instead position federal agencies, not state ones, as the ranking experts. States are not taking the changes lying down, however, and a letter signed by 91 members of Congress called them a
"pernicious assault on states' rights."

Los Angeles Times, Kenneth R. Weiss, 21 Aug 2003
www.gristmagazine.com/forward.pl?forward_id=1417
and a renewed push for ANWRrufus
Aug 21, 2003 3:41 PM
congress is trying to separate out the parts of bush's energy bill that deal with upgrading the electrical grid, hoping it gets passed quickly, but the admin is blocking that by insisting that drilling in ANWR be tacked on to that section also.

so, does he really ant to upgrade the grid, or just play political games over the issue?
Typical "It's fine as long as it's ...Live Steam
Aug 21, 2003 4:03 PM
not in my backyard" syndrome. Where is our oil supposed to come from? Everyone agrees that we should decrease our dependency on foreign oil, but no one wants drilling in their state or in other states for that matter. Unless someone discovers a new source of energy, we are going to remain an oil dependant nation. Known alternatives are not practical at the present time and conservation will only go so far as our population is ever growing. If there are readily available sources within our borders, I say we need to exploit them to their fullest. It should be done responsibly, but it should be done.
New sources of energy have been known for centuries.czardonic
Aug 21, 2003 4:15 PM
But Bush types and the oil industry they represent will see the last drop of oil sucked from the earth and the last oil dollar to be made lining their pockets before they stop obstructing the development of wind and solar engery.

The desire to "exploit" domestic oil to its fullest is a political, and ultimately economic, priority, not a necessity or a practicality.
New sources of energy have been known for centuries.Live Steam
Aug 21, 2003 4:34 PM
I see. We will just line the landscape with wind farms that no one wants in their backyard either. Or plaster every square inch of the landscape with solar panels that happen to be made with components from petroleum based products. If you do a little research you will find that neither is very practical at this time. Neither can provide anywhere near enough energy to even dent our daily requirements and neither of these sources are practical in many areas of the country. Nuclear power is easily accomplished and is widely used in Europe, every socialist/liberals favorite model of perfection, but no one wants one of them in their backyard either. And what do we do with all of that waste? There is no simplistic answer as you would like to have us believe. And yes, economics does play a major role in what is done and when - and not for the reasons you wrote above either. Many past presidents didn't have the ties you're post Bush having, but they did nothing different. Why? Because it is a conundrum until a true alternative is discovered.
I didn't say it would be simple.czardonic
Aug 21, 2003 4:54 PM
Nor did I say it could be on-line tomorrow. Nor did I say that everyone would like it. But given the choice between a wind or solar farm in their backyard and an fossil fuel burning or a nuclear reacting power plant, my money is that people will choose the former. (Anyway, I'm already on record here saying that anyone who objects to wind farms needs to get their priorities straight). I live in CA, and I would rather see a forrest of windmills off the coast than a bunch of oil rigs. And I am a liberal! So I guess you are getting all worked up over nothing.

Bush is simply the most artless shill for the oil industry. Their undue influence in politics is long standing. There is no conundrum. Their is simply a lack of initiative and some severly misplaced priorities.
I didn't say it would be simple.Live Steam
Aug 21, 2003 5:27 PM
I haven't gotten worked up - yet! All I am saying is that the same people reacting to domestic oil drilling in a negative way will find something wrong with the alternatives. As I understand it, wind farms are detrimental to certain natural occurrences such as the migration patterns of birds, certain insect populations and other naturally occurring events. So, it would stand to reason that some naturalists/ecologists will have objections to their use. I would also suspect that many won't share your appreciation for their physical appearance covering the landscape either. You can lay this on Bush all you want, but it is a partisan position. Heck, we should just use our neocon aggression and take all the oil we want from the Middle East. Isn't that what Hitler I mean Bush should do?
But you are glossing over my larger point.czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 8:52 AM
Which is that while you can find someone to object to anything, wind power will attract much less objection than building dams or polluting the air and water with fossil fuel or nuclear byproducts.

I am aware of the concerns about birds, but not aware that the possibility of solving those problems has been ruled out.
Do you have some proof that ...Live Steam
Aug 22, 2003 9:37 AM
"wind power will attract much less objection"? This is your assertion and not fact. People object to development of new homes that house fellow human beings. I don't see them being very receptive to having a wind farm in their backyard. I agree that alternative sources of fuel should be explored, but burning fossil fuels is not the voodoo mny want us to believe and the supplies available are not as limited either.
I never claimed to. Do you doubt my supposition? (nm)czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 9:40 AM
star wars missile defense isn't practical eitherrufus
Aug 21, 2003 5:02 PM
at this time, but that doesn't stop this administration from throwing billions at it. you'd be surprised how practical certain technologies become when the resources devoted to it grow.
It will be by the time of Darth Vader's rise to power. (nm)czardonic
Aug 21, 2003 5:06 PM
Yes, ladies and germs, he HAS a sense of humor that livessn69
Aug 21, 2003 6:42 PM
up to his name.

Nice one, amigo, that actually really made me guffah out loud.

As for SW of the non-Sith variety,...what a techno-horror. Like trying to shoot a bullet with a slower bullet. That sucker is decades (and mega bucks) away from technical reality.
More like terabucks away nmPdxMark
Aug 21, 2003 7:31 PM
I try. (nm)czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 8:53 AM
i say we import it all before we even touch a drop of our own nmrufus
Aug 21, 2003 4:27 PM
Actually, not a bad plan!jesse1
Aug 22, 2003 2:33 AM
If we're able to keep our reserves intact until the overseas reserves are depleted, we'll be the big oil honchos! Then the OPEC ministers kids will be flippin' burgers at Mickey-D's! Unfortunately, it won't happen in our lifetime.
Would that be the same NIMBYism infecting Florida?The Walrus
Aug 21, 2003 6:57 PM
Strange how the feds acceded to Florida's opposition to offshore drilling, but continue to scream about how we need to reduce our dependance on foreign oil by going after California's offshore deposits. Of course, I'm certain that it was pure coincidence that Florida's governor is George II's brother...
Hey, what are brothers for? :O) nmLive Steam
Aug 21, 2003 7:07 PM
yep, Bush stays bought.dr hoo
Aug 21, 2003 7:45 PM
Accounts are kept. Paybacks are made.
Only an assumption on your partLive Steam
Aug 21, 2003 7:53 PM
It is actually slanderous for you to say it without proof, but who's keeping tabs? Beside, as it was said before Bush was president - they all do it :O)
No, I read it on the 'net.dr hoo
Aug 22, 2003 3:58 AM
Would anyone on the internet lie?

Besides that was a compliment. Honest politicians stay bought... errrr, remember their friends!
Typical "It's fine as long as it's not in Jeb's backyard...jrm
Aug 22, 2003 6:40 AM
The bush admin's proposal EXCLUDES the state of Florida. Jeb requested thati should add...