Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > New drilling method opens vast oil fields in US
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
MadCapLaughs
Member
Member


Joined: 05 Jul 2007
Posts: 954 | TRs | Pics
MadCapLaughs
Member
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 1:29 pm 
Also, consider how woefully underfunded the EPA had been, and how certain administrations have tied its hands. The budget coming up for a vote soon makes drastic cuts to the EPA's budget. Hard to blame the EPA when the industry backs politicians who promise to starve the EPA of funds.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 2:36 pm 
If they were not continually over reaching and doing end runs around congress, cutting their budget to interdict this wouldn't be necessary. That said, I don't really care who straightens out what should and shouldn't be allowed, though I suspect it is better left at the State level since they will be most responsive to their citizens.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!



Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 16874 | TRs | Pics
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 2:45 pm 
It's a terrible idea. We shouldn't spend one penny figuring out new ways to poison our atmosphere. We should concentrate solely on replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy. The total power usage of the human race is about 16 terawatts. The sun shine that hits the earth contains 20,000 terawatts. That is just one example of the lack of necessity of burning fossil fuels for energy. Anyone who says they know the long-term results of fracturing subterranean rock formations by injecting poisonous chemicals into the ground is a bare-faced liar. I think fracking should be 100% banned until irrefutable evidence is supplied showing it is completely safe. The burden of proof lies with the frackers, not with the potential victims of the process.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:02 pm 
Slugman wrote:
It's a terrible idea. We shouldn't spend one penny figuring out new ways to poison our atmosphere. We should concentrate solely on replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy. The total power usage of the human race is about 16 terawatts. The sun shine that hits the earth contains 20,000 terawatts. That is just one example of the lack of necessity of burning fossil fuels for energy. Anyone who says they know the long-term results of fracturing subterranean rock formations by injecting poisonous chemicals into the ground is a bare-faced liar. I think fracking should be 100% banned until irrefutable evidence is supplied showing it is completely safe. The burden of proof lies with the frackers, not with the potential victims of the process.
So in other words, we're supposed to use irrational, anti science methods to oppose what you don't like...such as the 'precautionary' principle where you argue someone else should have to prove a negative. We shouldn't spend another penny on non market ready energy...if it's ready, the marketplace will choose on it's own. Tell you what...you spend your pennies on renewable, others will choose not to, and we'll see which gets more usage. The most productive use of capital is that which uses the *cheapest* energy....and the demands of exernal players that we 'lead'don't show up on those balance sheets as far as I can tell. Don't get me wrong..the rainbows are a nice goal. But the only way they will actually work is if they actually work in the real marketplace on their own.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12655 | TRs | Pics
Location: here now
DIYSteve
seeking hygge
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:11 pm 
"EPA overreaching" is on today's Karl Rove talking point list. Nice, MG. Uh, well, one problem with state regulation of widespread contamination of groundwater is that often the pollution migrates across state borders via aquifers, streams and rivers. The mobility of pollutants is why legislation like the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act have no teeth unless they are federally administered. To put things in perspective and to underscore Slug's point the 4 billion barrels (very optimistic forecast) in the Bakken reserve will fuel current level of US demands for 6 months, assuming away the oil used to extract it. Fracking is highly energy intensive, so it's probably more like 4 or 5 months. Fracking also uses vast amounts of fresh water, which, in places like North Dakota is handy for other things, like growing wheat. In terms of effectiveness, it's very obvious that alternative energy development and conservation through regulation and tax disincentives is a much more effective way to curb our independence on foreign oil.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12655 | TRs | Pics
Location: here now
DIYSteve
seeking hygge
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:12 pm 
MtnGoat wrote:
. . . the real marketplace. . . .
If you want a real marketplace, let's start with ending the tax breaks to Big Oil. Real marketplace, my ass.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:21 pm 
Totally not grooving on the fracking deal.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn



Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 3144 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cleaning up the dogma.
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:24 pm 
MtnGoat wrote:
I don't really care who straightens out what should and shouldn't be allowed, though I suspect it is better left at the State level
What? Techniques, procedures, and laws regarding energy production should be left to the states? Nope, it's pretty clear energy production should be under federal control. We should be leading the world in a tectonic shift toward new/renewable energy, with the goal of rendering fossil fuel obsolete. Idealism is certainly not enough. New technology and market forces will, of course, also be required. If our government will sincerely support the latter two, we Americans will supply the idealism.

“I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.” — Harry S. Truman
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!



Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 16874 | TRs | Pics
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:52 pm 
So, mtn goat, you think being careful with the lives of others is "irrational"? That's a bizarre and immoral statement. And your claim of "marketplace" is also ridiculous. For example, the use of diesel fuel leads to 7,000 deaths every year in this country alone. Yet there is no tax on diesel fuel that pays for medical costs and lost wages of these victims. This is the capitalist way: privatize the profits, and socialize the costs. Line your own pockets with money, and who cares if some old people or young children are killed? Let's add a tax to all fossil fuels to offset the problems their use causes. Then you would see that fossil fuels are by far the most expensive forms of energy by far. It's always cheaper to do something in a dirty way than a clean way. If you want to live in a polluted cesspool of a world, I suggest you go find your own planet to pollute, you will have to fight me to ruin this one any more than you already have.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
kleet
meat tornado



Joined: 06 Feb 2002
Posts: 5303 | TRs | Pics
Location: O no they dih ent
kleet
meat tornado
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 3:58 pm 
Blue Dome wrote:
We should be leading the world in a tectonic shift toward new/renewable energy, with the goal of rendering fossil fuel obsolete.
I heard an interesting fact yesterday: the US is still the only country in the world without an energy policy.

A fuxk, why do I not give one?
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn



Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 3144 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cleaning up the dogma.
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 4:08 pm 
kleet wrote:
I heard an interesting fact yesterday: the US is still the only country in the world without an energy policy.
We have an energy policy. It's called the Oil and Gas Industry Lobbyists Grease the Palms of Those Who Govern Our Nation policy, not to mention the many high level government officials from around the world who are out of elective office, and are now the power brokers in gas and oil -- with all of their critical ties to those still in office, intact.

“I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.” — Harry S. Truman
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!



Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 16874 | TRs | Pics
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 4:10 pm 
Hey everybody, mtn goat says that when for example a new drug is developed, it is "irrational" to make the drug maker show it's safe. We should just let it be sold in the millions of doses, because you can't prove a negative, that it won't harm people. It's the exact same principle. Then when people start dying, the deniers will just say it's all a hoax or government conspiracy, and the dying will continue. See "tobacco doesn't cause cancer", or global warming deniers for examples of this irresponsible attitude in action. It's beyond belief that an apparently rational person thinks the burden of proof is on the victims, not the perpetrators. There is no right to pollute the air that we all need to survive. Nor is there a right to do something quite likely to pollute ground water.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Quark
Niece of Alvy Moore



Joined: 15 May 2003
Posts: 14152 | TRs | Pics
Quark
Niece of Alvy Moore
PostThu Feb 10, 2011 4:47 pm 
BigSteve wrote:
Quark wrote:
. . . it doesn't look like they're doing anything legally wrong - if the article is correct and the whole story is told (no way to obtain a permit, and no way for EPA to deny a permit) that's the fault of EPA.
Don't be so quick to blame the EPA unless you can confirm that legislation empowers the EPA to regulate fracking.
I have already covered my ass by saying that I have only read what's in this one article, and if the article is saying everything it should, etc..... wink.gif The EPA said they're requiring permits - if that's wrong, and the EPA is still figuring out jurisdiction and they can't require permits they have no jurisdiction to require, then someone's wrong somewhere. We're being mislead (I'm OUTRAGED! clown.gif ). If there's more to it (and there probably is, as you point out), then there's more to it. chances are a whole slew of permits need to be applied for depending on the location (coastal waters, Corp of Engineers, etc.) Slug, perhaps permits on processes considered within a state can be administered by the state, but there's off-shore exploration too.

"...Other than that, the post was more or less accurate." Bernardo, NW Hikers' Bureau Chief of Reporting
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
tmatlack
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2854 | TRs | Pics
tmatlack
Member
PostFri Feb 11, 2011 3:51 am 
This is all another way for everyone....enviros, energy companys, government....to divert their attention away from alternative energy resources. Frakking, Gulf spill, ANWR, Chehalis coal, tar sands....all part of a much bigger problem: We need a global paradigm shift away from fossil fuels. Tom

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn



Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 3144 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cleaning up the dogma.
Blue Dome
Now with Retsyn
PostFri Feb 11, 2011 4:20 pm 
Yep. Big Oil and our government, which for all intents are one entity, keep the monopoly alive -- no matter how detrimental to the health of our citizens and the environment, not to mention national security. One day, history will not be kind to the alliance.

“I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.” — Harry S. Truman
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > New drilling method opens vast oil fields in US
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum