Why so soft on offshore drilling? | 52 comments (52 topical, 0 hidden)
Hmm (none / 0)
Ya know I find it funny that people would be so ignorant to think that gas from only drop a few cents by the year 2020+.
 
How much crude do you think would be drilled for on our coasts?  Quite a bit, you look at smaller countries and how much crude they find off their shores.  Now, all of this crude goes to the company that is drilling it of course, however, you have a huge influx of crude hitting the global market.  Thereby reducing the cost per barrel on the global market.
 
A few cents off of a gallon of gas?  Are you mental?
 
Its freaking common sense.  Just to let you know, I'm an independent and a progressive, so Mccain is a freaking moron.  But, Dems are just using the tactic to try to stop offshore oil drilling because they want the green vote.  Whos "internal estimates" are you talking about?  The dems of course, and they pulled that number right out of their ass.
 
Get a freaking clue and quit listening to propaganda, use common sense. 

by Lesdeth on 08/02/2008 12:59:06 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The man with the manna (none / 0)

I don't believe you are the real Moses, sir. You sound like Mr. Furious.

My common sense tells me not to listen to people who sputter. If you have facts and figures to back up any of your claims, we're all ears. How much crude? "Quite a bit"; why not "gobs and oodles" or "enough to fill the Albert Hall"?

by ashbul on 08/02/2008 02:30:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Whose internal estimates? (none / 0)

Actually its the Bush White House's internal estimates.

But there is nothing quite like a poster assuminghe just knows the truth without bothering to do any research at all.

Excellent work!

Have you met bobo?  Y'all have a beautiful future together.

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 07:59:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Welcome to TYT (none / 0)
I could say a lot of things but other commenters have already said some of them for me.

At any rate, I don't understand why TYT sometimes attracts so called "independents" who go on to bash "propaganda" when much of the information presented comes from TYT in the first place.  Can someone explain that?

By the way, here is the "propaganda", directly from the EIA. I think it's slightly more relevant than "clues" and your brand of "common sense".

by Tom Hanc on 08/02/2008 11:18:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Conservatives and thinkin' (none / 0)

One thing I have learned about conservatives is they think knowing stuff and understanding it is really easy.

As in it takes no effort or research or peer review or anything.  They think they can just pretty much guess what is true and run with that and they are pretty confident they are right.

I think George Bush and John McCain are men who walk through life assuming their initial uneducated opinion is right about pretty much everything and make no effort to find out.

Then when they say or do something stupid and get laughed at they get angry at all those know-it-all intellectuals who think they are better than them.

They insulate themselves from this by surrounding themselves with people who either agree with them or will pretend to agree with them for a paycheck.

In fact, I think billions of people around the world approach life this way.  The vast majority are conservatively minded.

Me? I like research.  I like learning about stuff.  I don't consider myself knowledgeable on a subject without looking at everything I can find on the matter. 

Thomas Jefferson had this approach.  Bill Clinton did too.  Ronald Reagan did not.  It is what they are talking about when they attack Barak Obama for being an "elitist" and praise silver spoon inherited the presidency Bush for "going with his gut."

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 12:19:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I would counter... (none / 0)
That if you depend on someone elses "research" or "statistics" or "polling numbers" then you are most of the time just spewing and repeating someone elses bias and propoganda... Take this oil drilling thing for example - Who pays these "scientists" who come up with these wildly fluxuating numbers? Oil Companies, Tree Hugger Lobbyist Groups, The Government? None of these "research" sources should be deemed reliable in my estimation... Rich, why are you so opposed to people thinking for themselves and using their own common sense and intuition? Do you loathe the common man (those you espouse to want to help) that you must criticize and deride them for making their own judgements? We're not all academics, but we as a soceity have done pretty well on our own - we don't need pointy dicked theoraticians always telling us that we don't know how to think or live our own lives! That is one of the main problems with Liberalism in this country - they assume to know us better than we know ourselves - and that is shining through with elitism and arrogance this election cycle! Again with the oil drilling bit - either Nationalize oil so we reap the benefits of our own resources or STFU and let them drill - we need ALL the oil we can get until you tree hugging hacks come up with something better for us to use (whatever happened to fission/fusion research for electric generation?) Thanks...

by bobo1 on 08/02/2008 12:36:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
This from the guy who repeats ad nauseum (none / 0)

how Obama is doomed becuase America is full of  uninformed racists who don't care about the issues enough to educate themselves.

 Now the common man's gut's opinion is something we should treat as equal ground with the opinions of experts, because your ultra-bleak world view assumes every one of them is corrupt even though a majority of them say that offshore drilling will (at best) do very little.  Yeah I am sure the tree huggers can out bribe the oil companies.

 

by richardshort2001 on 08/02/2008 12:58:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Thank you (none / 0)
for saying what needed to be said "Yeah I am sure the tree huggers can out bribe the oil companies".

That's the same line we also need to remind people of when they say global warming is well funded scam.

by Tom Hanc on 08/02/2008 01:05:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I rest my case (none / 0)

Not sure I can add anything that would help my point more than bobo just did.

Let's all take a second to remember that the post above comes from a classroom teacher.

I have to wonder does he teach his kids to ignore science, logic, fact and evidence and trust their own instincts or his?

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 01:10:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Our instincts (none / 0)
are to fuck, fight and stuff our faces full of fatty, sugary foods.

Oh, and to lay around and conserve energy.  Sometimes our instincts make sense but many other times it needs to be balanced out or overpowered by our prefrontal cortex.

by Tom Hanc on 08/02/2008 01:15:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
oy (none / 0)

Bobo, you bring up a good point--that sources of "scientific" information should be scrutinized before being swallowed hook, line, and sinker, but then you go and discount all research just because some sources may be suspect. That is the crazy-man approach ;)

We desperately need to use scientific experts to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of actions we take in this world.  it is crucial that people learn to apply their critical thinking skills to examining sources of information.  It really isn't all that hard.  You need to follow the money, number one, and it isn't that hard these days to research groups on the internet to determine whether politics is playing into their data.  My company, for example, is a consulting firm that works with large utilities, but we don't sign contracts where data (i.e., data that doesn't back up a specific action) will be kept confidential by the company because it will compromise the science involved.

Joe Sixpack does not have the knowledge to weigh these decisions and all their potential environmental and economic implications on his own.  He does not have the objectivity to weigh the potential effects on society or the environment as a whole over the long term.  If we keep making decisions based on short-term political gain and corporate greed, we ensure our own sad fate.

by desertpear on 08/02/2008 02:38:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ament n/t (none / 0)
...

by Tom Hanc on 08/02/2008 02:53:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Dear Pear (none / 0)

Great post.  100% correct.  I would throw in something about replicable results so it can't just be the work of one evil entity but you are missing the point.

Everyone else here (and most people in the world) get this.  Bobo has all this information.  He just chooses to reject it.  Explaining it to him again is a waste of time.

Exposing him to reality isn't going to wake him up, it is just going to send him farther back into his cave.

Personally, I think the best approach is to humor him to his face and analyze him behind his back.

That are only "talk" to him when he seems sober.

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 05:08:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
See (none / 0)

This is why I love Ken's posts. It is all circular bull shit.

"I drilled three wells on my land, and I was receiving royalty checks in less than a year. The AMERICAN OIL, produced on my land, was shipped to Texas refineries. The AMERICAN OIL,AMERICAN OIL produced on my land created significant tax revenue for the state of Texas and the U.S. Treasury. The AMERICAN OIL, produced on my land, helped reduce the dependency of this country on oil imported from the Middle East.  produced on my land, created many good paying jobs for roughnecks, routstabouts, drillers, truckers, refinery workers, and the like. The AMERICAN OIL produced on my land created significant tax revenue for the state of Texas and the U.S. Treasury. The AMERICAN OIL, produced on my land, helped reduce the dependency of this country on oil imported from the Middle East. "

Ken also predicts that the price of oil will plummet soon. 

He has also predicting uber cheap gas prices in the near future.

So ask Ken 2 questions.

1. If he is so knowledgeable about the future of the oil markets then when is it no longer profitable for him to keep pumping and send all these "roughnecks, routstabouts, drillers, truckers, refinery workers, and the like" to the unemployment line? If you were alive in the late 80's and early 90's and read the papers, you are familiar with what happens to Texas oil men when the price of oil plummets.

 2. Why would I invest multi billions of dollars into off shore rigs if I knew the price of oil is going to drop any day because this is just a bubble?

For the oil companies, this is business and business is a balancing act. For the Republicans this is more bull shit and that is why I no longer vote for them.

Dolla, dolla bill y'all. 

by z1p101 on 08/03/2008 04:59:34 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Typical (none / 0)

Personal attacks instead of answers.

"Zippy is a typical liberal. He doesn’t have any solutions to the problems. He just wants to sit on his ass and complain."

I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing out the obvious.

"Simple-minded liberals like Zippy don’t realize that drilling rigs are portable. You set up a rig and punch a hole. You hit an oil pocket, and set up the recovery units. Then you move the rig to another target. It doesn’t take 20 years. It takes less than a year on land."

No, I'm very well aware of how off shore rigs can be moved around and the specialized barges used to do it. Believe it or not there is a whole show on the Discovery channel about it. However, you do need the rigs in the first place to move around so I guess you are saying that there are currently off shore rigs sitting around doing nothing or working lack luster wells. Or are they going to spend multiple billions on new ones knowing that "The oil bubble should last another 3-4 years"? That is the original point and I guess you missed it.

"In the meantime, we can create hundreds of thousands, if not millions of high paying jobs, at a time when the economy really needs the help."

Who is we? We have nothing to do with it. There are currently drilling opportunities available the the energy companies are not taking advantage of and I can't see why they will run out and start doing it just because they have a few more miles available. Like I said in the past, I'm sure they have some real sweet spots they have their eyes on but we both know this mass drilling that you keep talking about is not going to happen. It is simple business and bottom line stuff.

"Allow oil companies to drill anywhere they want, including offshore, Rockies, ANWR, DisneyWorld, even the lawn of the White House as long as they pay a royalty to the U. S. Treasury of 25% of the market price for every drop of oil produced."

We both know that is not going to happen cut the shit with that one. However, if environmentalists really wanted to stop US drilling, that would be the perfect way to do it.

I'm just being "intellectually honest" here and it has nothing to do with being conservative or liberal. I just don't enjoy the sensation of having smoke blown up my ass. 

by z1p101 on 08/03/2008 12:53:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
25% is lowballing (none / 0)
as far as I'm concerned.

by hazmat on 08/04/2008 12:38:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Canada does 40% (none / 0)

by ProfRich on 08/04/2008 12:42:34 AM EST

[ Parent ]
No word (none / 0)
 on my free market solution from ken. We could go higher if Yukos is willing to pay. Hey, 60% is a bargain, maybe we'll get some action from Hugo Chavez. I think we should revoke all current leases that haven't been drilled and start looking for clients willing to play ball.

by hazmat on 08/04/2008 01:10:25 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Doesn't matter (none / 0)

The oil companies are bitching and moaning about what they have to pay now. Do you really think they are going to drill anywhere with a 25% skim off the top?

Ken knows that and that was the BS I was calling out. 

by z1p101 on 08/04/2008 02:36:05 AM EST

[ Parent ]
that's because (none / 0)
they don't have any competition. Currently this resource is managed for the benefit of the oil companies exclusively.

by hazmat on 08/04/2008 11:29:01 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes, they absolutely will (none / 0)

Or at least someone will.

Canada has no problem getting takers on its 40% rate.

And since these are MNCs who are mostly HQed for tax purposes outside the US and just sell to the highest bidder on the world market I see no reason why we should give an "American" company and competitive advantage.

by ProfRich on 08/04/2008 11:30:46 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Good lord Rich (none / 0)

Please don't tell me you just used the "it works in Canada so it will work here" line. I apologize but I am going to have to use the Bobo tone here.

What planet do you friggin liberals live on that you just don't realize that that the "it works in Canada" line gets 0 traction here and when are you going to get your heads out of your collective asses. There will be no 25% royalty payments but if there were this is how it plays out.

The sweetest contracts will be given to the companies with the most lobby muscle and those
companies who get the contracts of course will promise to work them in good faith. However, with a little market manipulation on their part the price of oil mysteriously drops $20 to $30 dollars a barrel. Not enough to keep the American people from being pissed off at the pump but just enough for those drilling companies to say "it is not in our financial interest to drill now because of the recent drop in oil prices and the 25% "Tax".

The Republicans suggest a lift on the %25 royalty for the "good of the people"  and start yelling once again about how the Democrats are blocking economic growth and energy independence by creating this hardship on the "evil energy" companies who just want to make a profit the "good ole American way" but The Democrats insisting on keeping this %25 "re distribution of wealth" is blocking progress and job creation for hard working American citizens.

The Democrats of course counter with the oil companies will still be making money and Canada does %40 and the caribou and..... And take a look at where their interests lie also.

In the end the %25 royalty disappears. Republicans get some political miles out of it to make up for their constant fuck ups elsewhere, oil companies still don't drill unless they have cited a mother load but by that time Americans attention will be on the next dog and pony show.

Does any of this sound familiar?Have you ever seen any of this before? And please don't give me this "we will implement a use it or loose it" line.

That is the way the world works Rich. 

by z1p101 on 08/05/2008 03:33:18 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Slow down, Zip (none / 0)

The only thing I said is that a 40% premium will not stop the oil companies (same ones drilling in Canada as down here) from drilling oil.

That is inarguable.

Whether or not the Dems are too chickenshit to stand up for it is a different issue entirely.

Thanks the baseless rant against something you assumed I was saying though!

by ProfRich on 08/05/2008 06:49:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]
LOL (none / 0)

Sorry man. I was just using my particular sense of humor to try to drive a point home. I using Bobo's tone would have made that obvious but...

Anyway, anyone who has been paying attention to what has been going on over the last 20 years quickly realizes there will be no reasonable royalties  paid on US oil drilling so it is not even worth talking about.

by z1p101 on 08/05/2008 11:03:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
OK Ken (none / 0)

What are you talking about?

"Obama is now born-again pro-drilling. He wants to drill everywhere. One more zippy prediction bites the dust..."

When and where have I ever made any statements about Obama and his stance on oil drilling?

"..."Bush will be impeached", and on and on and on."

No, I have never said that. Actually you can find multiple posts by me stating that Bush will not be impeached and explaining why.

"...and "Bush will leave Iraq""

never said that either.

"...One more zippy prediction bites the dust, along with "the surge will divide republicans..."

I outlined an either/or scenario.  Republicans decided to back Bush and now they are loosing in Mississippi. Trust me, I'm thrilled about it. Don't make me pull quotes and outline how much damage backing Bush has done to the Republican party just like I talked about.

by z1p101 on 08/05/2008 10:42:08 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Oh (none / 0)

So I guess I should start searching eBay for some good used drilling equipment just in case that happens. Or maybe Mr Peabody is currently not using his way back machine.

What the frig is it with you and all these what if's and ridiculous hypotheticals? Do you really believe Exxon Mobil is ever going to allow you to park your rusty little rig right next to theirs?

Once again Ken, spare us with this bull shit. 

by z1p101 on 08/05/2008 11:15:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I fogot one thing (none / 0)
The oil companies now get to work that mother load without the %25 skim off the top.

by z1p101 on 08/05/2008 04:23:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
rightwing talk radio points (none / 0)
Ken: Trust me.

Trust me?!? So the very ones who got us into this mess, airlines ready to go out of business, GM and Ford stocks at all time low, US economy in recession, gas at $4 a gallon, the ones who got us here, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Ken Lay, Halliburton, Exxon, now we're supposed to trust them to get us out of it? Pass the crack pipe Kenny boy, gimmie a hit a that shit.

Ken, be honest about one thing, you want the democrats to roll over.

Ken's big rig drill get her done fix it plan:

1) Get Dems to roll over and tuck their tails and play nice and concede on, fill in the blank, the surge, torture, fisa, et cetera et cetera

2) Get Dems to roll over on off shore drilling

3) Get Dems to roll over on the election, and "concede" that John McCain and the republicans are the ones to get us out of the mess they got us into

I'm all with ya Kenny boy, if you and your kind are finally ready to start taking the blame for fucking things up so bad. This plan of yours sounds just GREAT! Hmm, too bad you didn't think of it before Halliburton invaded Iraq, think of all the lives we could have saved! Not to mention the billions! Think about it, Exxon can turn over all those Iraqi oil fields!

We're still going to be driving gas guzzling SUV's 40 years from now? Have you checked the stock price of GM and Ford lately? They aren't even going to be around in two years let alone 40.

Ken, where's your crystal ball? It is more cracked than your head or your pipe. You wanna look 40 years into the future and you can't even look two years into the future. I mean if you'd been right about anything in the past two years except for maybe college football, maybe I'd believe you. But you were dead wrong on the midterms, on the recession, on jobs, on the housing bubble, on the credit crisis. But that isn't surprising because you just reiterate anything you hear on rightwing talk radio, which just spouts the same shit all the time: shut up you liberal fool you don't know what you're talking about we've got these experts to put you straight. And here are statistics to back up my lies. 

Are we in a recession yet? "The U.S. economy is experiencing a minor downturn" as of the second quarter, according to you. But we started a recession last December. Which somehow the "fools" as you call them, Professor, Bfaul among others spotted at the time, how can this be?

Forty years into the future, please put away your crystal ball and predict one thing correct in the next month that doesn't have to do with sports or your own bank account.

Whatever you do, don't click this link (studies show you're more likely if you shouldn't)

by tiggerporn on 08/03/2008 11:04:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Once agai, Ken inadvertently backs me up (none / 0)

I have read thousands of posts about energy on here, but I have never pretended to know shit about energy.  I pointed out the 2030 estimate came from the White House but that was about knowing the news, not knowing energy.

I have expressed my opinion about some basic concepts but have never argued the details of energy with anyone in any of my hundreds of posts.

I know you assume I did because you don't bother to make sure you are right.  I try very hard to.

by ProfRich on 08/03/2008 02:08:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ken loves oil, big surprise (none / 0)

No surprises here for me, but thanks for helping the new readers know where your posts are coming from.  The blog postings on Edwards' secret love-child, rap songs, and O'Reilly are also indicators of your expertise in ridiculous Republican talking points. 

I'd like to know where I said I was an oil expert.  Most definitely I am not and don't care to be, but I do have the ability to read and analyze information from disparate sources and form an intelligent opinion and I have my vote.  Your pro-drilling-everywhere, pipe-laying fantasies are very extreme both socially and scientifically, and are also driven solely by your personal financial motives, so you win no converts here.

by desertpear on 08/03/2008 06:56:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
boo hoo (none / 0)
Ken says I am not intelligent ;(  I was trying to be funny about Romney torturing his dog, oilman.  Didn't the words "waterboarding" his dog clue you in on that?  Who is the smart one here?

by desertpear on 08/03/2008 08:50:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Why so soft on offshore drilling? | 52 comments (52 topical, 0 hidden)