I think its quite interesting that less than a year before he leaves office he's fighting to open up off-shore drilling. Looks like he's trying to guarantee he has a nice post-presidency income.
He needs to do something a little more than a stroke of the pen like get off his rear a work harder at alternative options.
I find it interesting that he not only does this just before leaving office, but it was his "Dad", Bush sr that closed the offshore drilling to begin with! Now he contimues to make it look like it is all the Democrat's fault that we cannot drill there.
Shrub needs to go away quietly, seriously. What a tool he is.
I said it yesterday and I will repeat it today. The state of California is going to take 90% of the profits from off shore drilling and dedicate it to alternative fuel sources as well as the equipment and personnel needed for disaster cleanup (you know it is going to happen). If forced Big oil will be limited to 10% of the profits while putting up all the cost of the off shore drilling project. We have the contract rights and they can sign it or move on. That is of course if we are forced into drilling where the California voters have said they don't want anyone to drill. - raycar - San Jose, CA
raycar: I believe that increased domestic drilling will be a reality within the next 5 years. It's in how we go about doing it that matters.
How about adding one more item to what you've suggested and ask the oil companies to come up with the money for a bond that is designed to insure that any damage from drilling will be fully paid for by the oil companies. If no damage comes about from drilling, they get their money back with interest once they're done drilling.
We know that the supreme court will do everything in its power to keep the oil companies from being accountable when they operate in international waters, so we need to get the assurance of safe drilling a priori.
Ray Cr:
Your comment:"the oil companies to come up with the money for a bond that is designed to insure that any damage from drilling will be fully paid for by the oil companies. If no damage comes about from drilling, they get their money back with interest once they're done drilling.
Excellent idea, the only thing I see is that Bush/Chenney Oil compadres will never send that oil into the American market, they will sell it for profit on the global market and we will NEVER see a dip in price. Americans don't have a lack of supply, they have lack of MONEY!!!
Dear Mr. Bush: Fix the economy and stop SELLING OUT THE AMERCAN PEOPLE FOR YOUR PROFIT
We know that the supreme court will do everything in its power to keep the oil companies from being accountable when they operate in international waters, so elect different judges next vote!
um, how much of those "off limits" areas actually have oil? growing up in delaware we never once heard about the state's untapped oil reserves.
noz: good point. I usually bring that up, but not this time around. Most of Alaska isn't off-limits, and consequently only those areas that have oil are currently being developed. Most of the continental 48 "off-limits" areas don't have a lot of oil (there's something like 2.9 million acres that could be developed off of the Delaware shore but I don't think much will be pumped out of there any time soon since it's difficult to get to). And that's about it for the Atlantic. As for the Pacific: there's really only Southern California that probably has enough around to get to easily. Maybe some in OR/WA, but that's iffy. So the map is altogether quite misleading and inaccurate.
Moreover, the parts that are currently still off-limits where it's the easiest to get oil from (the Gulf of Mexico by Florida) are going to remain off-limits until 2022 due to the compromise in 2006. Unless of course, Congress also overturns that and forces drilling on Florida.
I think we should let Bush and the Republicans try to do that to Floridians: it might not be a swing-state for too much longer then!
Yes a bond is a good idea. raycar - San Jose, CA
Gravatar - A ton. I remember back in the 1950's that one of the largest natural gas fields ever discovered was off the coast of California. My memory could be shaky at this age but even if it is all you need to do is look at the oil fields in southern California (still working as well as those gone dry) to get an idea of how much oil is in our states geographical location. The money we are talking about is a king’s ransom and Big oil is king. - raycar - San Jose, CA
You are making the assumption that the map is accurate. I don't think so. I believe that a good portion of our oil fields are caped and not on the map. Countries like ours do not show their hand to the other players. The USA is using up as much of the foreign oil as they can and only drilling more when given no choice (as now with pressure from abroad and at home). Do not believe for a minute that the powers are going to allow this country to run out of any resource it needs to grow and maintain power. It just isn't realistic to think we are showing all our cards at this early date. If we were really as desperate as they say we would have had alternative fuels years ago. - raycar - San Jose, CA
AMEN raycar!
I just received an email from Barbara Boxer, from your neck of the woods, asking to sign a petition against the off-shore drilling. In her note it says that the oil companies have plenty of leased land, but are not drilling on what they already have. Its just a ploy to build their asset base. Its just "Shrub" giving his oil buddies a fabulous going away gift!
How do I get on her list? raycar - San Jose, CA
I think it's a pretty straight-forward inbox stuffer--something like this--you give the e-mail account, her office sends out e-mails every other day.
BTW: I could imagine that the powers that be know more about how much crude might be out under the OCS than they admit, but do you really trust our system enough to have come up with alternatives before we face the real chance of running out of oil? If we're desperate enough we can always squeeze it out of the rocks (oil shale or even coal-to-liquids) until future generations come up with the bright ideas...
www.barbaraboxer.com
Yes - Their like any other industry that is feeding on large profits. They are years ahead in planning. The problem with fortune telling is that the best of them can see no more that 10 to 15 years in advance. That is because that is as far as their control of the market goes. Most barely see 3 to 5 years in advance. That is because the technology is advancing so fast. I believe they picked their alternative right after the Second World War and it is coal. Germany converted it and the story has always been "no one has ever found the formula". Bull, they have it and probably have since the beginning of the fifties. Nuclear energy is also at the top of their list. You can bet that both sources have been heavily invested in by the powers to be. Bio is a problem for them at this time because any farmer can enter the market. Just my thoughts on the matter. - raycar - San Jose, CA
***Most of Alaska isn't off-limits, and consequently only those areas that have oil are currently being developed***
Maybe you should read a bit more:
Shell announced today that it has decided to forego its planned 2008 Beaufort Sea drilling program because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has not yet ruled on a lawsuit over Shell’s Beaufort Sea exploration plans. The company had planned to do some top-hole drilling at its Sivulliq prospect on the west side of Camden Bay during the summer open-water season.
“Shell believes this is the responsible decision given the continuing uncertainty and need for our workers and contractors to pursue other opportunities,” Shell spokesman Curtis Smith said, in announcing the decision.
The company will proceed with other offshore activities, including scientific baseline studies, marine mammal monitoring and data gathering, Smith said. And seismic acquisition in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will continue as planned, he said.
The program that will continue in 2008 will require hundreds of contract personnel, including marine mammal observers, subsistence advisors and call center operators, most of whom are Alaskans, Smith said.
The 9th Circuit lawsuit involves an appeal by the North Slope Borough, the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission and several environmental organizations against MMS approval of Shell’s exploration plan. That appeal has resulted in a court injunction on Shell’s Beaufort Sea drilling activities until the case is settled. The court heard oral arguments in December but has yet to issue a ruling.
Commenting by HaloScan
