Good, for once I am pleased without reservation by an Obama decision.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36110038/ns/business-oil_and_energy/
QuoteObama to allow oil drilling off Virginia
President will also reject some new sites planned in Alaska
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
Associated Press Writer
updated 12:25 a.m. ET March 31, 2010
WASHINGTON - In a reversal of a long-standing ban on most offshore drilling, President Barack Obama is allowing oil drilling 50 miles off Virginia's shorelines. At the same time, he is rejecting some new drilling sites that had been planned in Alaska.
Obama's plan offers few concessions to environmentalists, who have been strident in their opposition to more oil platforms off the nation's shores. Hinted at for months, the plan modifies a ban that for more than 20 years has limited drilling along coastal areas other than the Gulf of Mexico.
Obama was set to announce the new drilling policy Wednesday at Andrews air base in Maryland. White House officials pitched the changes as ways to reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil and create jobs — both politically popular ideas — but the president's decisions also could help secure support for a climate change bill languishing in Congress.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
The president, joined by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, also was set to announce that proposed leases in Alaska's Bristol Bay would be canceled. The Interior Department also planned to reverse last year's decision to open up parts of the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. Instead, scientists would study the sites to see if they're suitable to future leases.
Obama is allowing an expansion in Alaska's Cook Inlet to go forward. The plan also would leave in place the moratorium on drilling off the West Coast.
More Gulf of Mexico platforms possible
In addition, the Interior Department has prepared a plan to add drilling platforms in the eastern Gulf of Mexico if Congress allows that moratorium to expire. Lawmakers in 2008 allowed a similar moratorium to expire; at the time President George W. Bush lifted the ban, which opened the door to Obama's change in policy.
Under Obama's plan, drilling could take place 125 miles from Florida's Gulf coastline if lawmakers allow the moratorium to expire. Drilling already takes place in western and central areas in the Gulf of Mexico.
The president's team has been busy on energy policy and Obama talked about it in his State of the Union address. During that speech, he said he wanted the United States to build a new generation of nuclear power plans and invest in biofuel and coal technologies.
"It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development," he warned.
Obama also urged Congress to complete work on a climate change and energy bill, which has remained elusive. The president met with lawmakers earlier this month at the White House about a bill cutting emissions of pollution-causing greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020. The legislation would also expand domestic oil and gas drilling offshore and provide federal assistance for constructing nuclear power plants and carbon sequestration and storage projects at coal-fired utilities.
White House officials hope Wednesday's announcement will attract support from Republicans, who adopted a chant of "Drill, baby, drill" during 2008's presidential campaign.
The president's Wednesday remarks would be paired with other energy proposals that were more likely to find praise from environmental groups. The White House planned to announce it had ordered 5,000 hybrid vehicles for the government fleet. And on Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department are to sign a final rule that requires increased fuel efficiency standards for new cars.
More from msnbc.com
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press.
:thumbsdown:
<_<
Virginia is one of the most beautiful states in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
Hmm... job prospects in the mid-atlantic..
pros - weather is better than here
cons- CDM i the region
hmmm... better not.
IIRC there was some discussion of this topic during the campaign. :hmm:
Quote from: Queequeg on March 31, 2010, 04:19:25 AM
<_<
Virginia is one of the most beautiful states in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
If the Euros can do it without messing up, so can we.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 31, 2010, 06:27:14 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on March 31, 2010, 04:19:25 AM
<_<
Virginia is one of the most beautiful states in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
If the Euros can do it with messing up, so can we.
I don't think there was ever a question if we can mess it up.
Tim, you are such a fucking idiot.
Quote from: Martinus on March 31, 2010, 06:45:25 AM
Tim, you are such a fucking idiot.
Why? In relation to this thread?
Quote from: Razgovory on March 31, 2010, 06:27:51 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 31, 2010, 06:27:14 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on March 31, 2010, 04:19:25 AM
<_<
Virginia is one of the most beautiful states in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
If the Euros can do it with messing up, so can we.
I don't think there was ever a question if we can mess it up.
:lol: You know what I meant.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 31, 2010, 05:11:09 AM
IIRC there was some discussion of this topic during the campaign. :hmm:
I guess it's sorta like how Bush opposed any nation-building, right?
Quote from: Queequeg on March 31, 2010, 04:19:25 AM
<_<
Virginia is the greatest and most beautiful state in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
Fixed.
Anyway, I'm reasonably confident that if this goes through, there will be sufficient environmental/pollution control measures put in place. Unlike other states, we generally have pretty sensible voters and politicians.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 31, 2010, 04:19:25 AM
<_<
Virginia is one of the most beautiful states in the country. Hope this doesn't do any harm.
Tainted.
:punk: Good call, Barry. I still haven't forgiven you for the other stuff but it's nice to agree on something.
Drill baby drill.
Congradulations to beautiful Virginia. I wonder how many carpetbaggers this industry will bring down?
I question his decision to not extend it to the Pacific Coast and Alaska. If this is so great as he claims, why doesn't he agree with the House Minority Leader and allow drilling there as well?
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 01:10:22 PM
I question his decision to not extend it to the Pacific Coast and Alaska. If this is so great as he claims, why doesn't he agree with the House Minority Leader and allow drilling there as well?
I assume Virginia wants it and many left leaning states on the Pacific Coast don't want it. I don't know what's happening in the Alaskan case, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's related to some sort of national park.
Good, finally. We rely on oil and gas so heavily, and will likely rely on those for years to come even with new green tech. It makes sense to drill; makes no sense to not drill and continue importing, especially when N. America has such huge reserves of natural gas.
However, I really don't expect much to happen as this will be opposed by enviros and who ever else, for years, likely until the idea of drilling collapses. Heck, we can't even get wind turbines off the coast of Massachusetts!! I'd love some oil drills off the MA coast, to bring in some state revenue. And I think that financial incentive may give some of the states included in this new drilling proposal reasons to support it. Mass isn't in the proposal; after all, we have our not yet ready for prime time wind farm.... not yet. ;)
Quote from: Fate on March 31, 2010, 01:14:58 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 01:10:22 PM
I question his decision to not extend it to the Pacific Coast and Alaska. If this is so great as he claims, why doesn't he agree with the House Minority Leader and allow drilling there as well?
I assume Virginia wants it and many left leaning states on the Pacific Coast don't want it. I don't know what's happening in the Alaskan case, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's related to some sort of national park.
Right, but it just seems incredibly political. If you really think this is a guy idea and ownt' harm the environment, you should suport drilling everywhere.
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:30:54 PM
Right, but it just seems incredibly political. If you really think this is a guy idea and ownt' harm the environment, you should suport drilling everywhere.
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
I agree with you, but am skeptical that Obama decided not to promote exploration in the Pacific coast and northeast because of geologic factors.
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:44:10 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
I agree with you, but am skeptical that Obama decided not to promote exploration in the Pacific coast and northeast because of geologic factors.
Public support is a legit factor as well.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 31, 2010, 02:50:37 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:44:10 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
I agree with you, but am skeptical that Obama decided not to promote exploration in the Pacific coast and northeast because of geologic factors.
Public support is a legit factor as well.
Why? America isn't a democracy.
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 01:10:22 PM
I question his decision to not extend it to the Pacific Coast and Alaska. If this is so great as he claims, why doesn't he agree with the House Minority Leader and allow drilling there as well?
I wouldn't invest in that when we've been expecting a MAJOR earthquake off the OR/WA coast...
Is that where the Machine is pointed these days?
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:30:54 PM
Right, but it just seems incredibly political. If you really think this is a guy idea and ownt' harm the environment, you should suport drilling everywhere.
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
Exactly.
In this case, drilling doesn't really make sense offshore in Virginia because the amount of oil estimated is so small as to have no meaningful impact. This looks like a pretty transparent effort to sooth the enraged GOP 1st graders who walked off with all their marbles when health care passed.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 01, 2010, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:30:54 PM
Right, but it just seems incredibly political. If you really think this is a guy idea and ownt' harm the environment, you should suport drilling everywhere.
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
Exactly.
In this case, drilling doesn't really make sense offshore in Virginia because the amount of oil estimated is so small as to have no meaningful impact. This looks like a pretty transparent effort to sooth the enraged GOP 1st graders who walked off with all their marbles when health care passed.
Some in the GOP are already crying foul over where this drilling is being proposed, the limited locations, and the politics of it.
The poor GOP. Politics in off shore drilling? How'd on earth did that ever happen. :lmfao:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 01, 2010, 09:46:20 AM
This looks like a pretty transparent effort to sooth the enraged GOP 1st graders who walked off with all their marbles when health care passed.
Or to buy a couple votes for Virgina Yellow Dogs in the upcoming election.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 01, 2010, 09:46:20 AM
In this case, drilling doesn't really make sense offshore in Virginia because the amount of oil estimated is so small as to have no meaningful impact. This looks like a pretty transparent effort to sooth the enraged GOP 1st graders who walked off with all their marbles when health care passed.
I think it is a
quid pro quo for the increase in mileage standards for cars. Those two issues have been linked in the Senate for years.
It is natural gas they are really looking for, BTW.
The squeals of outrage from the loony environmentalists make this policy eminently worth following. Obama needs to space the announcements of drilling sites out, though, because the wackos pretty much exhaust their squeal projectors with each announcement, and it is more fun to listen to them if they have time to recharge.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 01, 2010, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 02:35:49 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on March 31, 2010, 02:30:54 PM
Right, but it just seems incredibly political. If you really think this is a guy idea and ownt' harm the environment, you should suport drilling everywhere.
No, you shouldn't, unless you are unable to think about ideas that don't fit on bumper stickers.
Drilling make sense in some places and not others, depending on the specifics of each proposal. Blindly insisting that someone must be all-or-nothing on drilling is absurd.
In this case, drilling doesn't really make sense offshore in Virginia because the amount of oil estimated is so small as to have no meaningful impact. T.
When were the last surveys made? From what I understand, survey technology has greatly increased in the last few decades.
Quote from: grumbler on April 01, 2010, 07:06:39 PM
[It is natural gas they are really looking for, BTW.
And the estimate is 1 trillion cubic feet as compared to US reserves of 250 trillion and world reserves in excess of 6 quadrillion. This is not including the Marcellus shale deposits which are estimated to hold hundreds of trillions of cubic feet.
Natural gas is not as much a priority as oil -- it is comparatively plentiful and there have been many recent monster fields discovered recently. US production is increasing, with net imports below 15% and most of those imports are from Canada. This compares with petroleum, where the US imports 50-60% of consumption and there is a greater spread of countries of origin - with countries like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria in the top 5.
Thus, IMO Florida is a better case for offshore drilling b/c the oil reserves there may be in the billions of barrels.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2010, 10:40:12 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 01, 2010, 07:06:39 PM
[It is natural gas they are really looking for, BTW.
And the estimate is 1 trillion cubic feet as compared to US reserves of 250 trillion and world reserves in excess of 6 quadrillion. This is not including the Marcellus shale deposits which are estimated to hold hundreds of trillions of cubic feet.
Natural gas is not as much a priority as oil -- it is comparatively plentiful and there have been many recent monster fields discovered recently. US production is increasing, with net imports below 15% and most of those imports are from Canada. This compares with petroleum, where the US imports 50-60% of consumption and there is a greater spread of countries of origin - with countries like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria in the top 5.
Thus, IMO Florida is a better case for offshore drilling b/c the oil reserves there may be in the billions of barrels.
I have seen estimates like you are quoting, so I am not arguing. I am just pointing out that the "concession" here is about natural gas and has long been linked in the Senate to the increase in auto mileage.