Oil and natural gas drilling in U.S. waters

yup- agreed.
Infrastructure, eh?

Yes ..In a nutshell that's our problem..I will be the first to say or maybe one of millions to say..WE NEED CLEANER, RENEWABLE ENERGY..SOON!

I think the world or at least the US is on the brink of finding new forms of eneregy..but it will take time to ween AMERICA off of fossile fuel....Like it has been said..20 gallons of a 42 gallon barrel of crude goes to gasoline..the rest of the barrel is still deeply needed for everyday life in our country..Including roads and streets.
 
Last edited:
problem is, until the price of alt. energy (unsubsidized) < price of oil, the transition will occur but too slowly, if people/companies relax and think oh, oil is still cheaper, people can still afford it, still can't afford alt. energy in lieu of.

I learned this problem-concept re transition in a graduate-level. natural resource econ course 20 years ago.
 
problem is, until the price of alt. energy (unsubsidized) < price of oil, the transition will occur but too slowly, if people/companies relax and think oh, oil is still cheaper, people can still afford it, still can't afford alt. energy in lieu of.

I learned this problem-concept re transition in a graduate-level. natural resource econ course 20 years ago.
I'm no economy major or anything close..just a knuckle dragging worker bee all my life...What is the answer then or how can we transition to the ALT forms without financial crASH AND BURN TO THE ECONOMY?..i PERSONALLY THINK WE WILL NEVER SEE A SMOOTH SEAMLESS TRANSITION..

Sorry punched cap-lock:embarrest:
 
We gotta use what got us here for the time being and continue to develop alternative fuels. Think how many decades it took to build the infrastructure to get here for one thing. Not to mention the millions of homes that would not be able to modified to accept, solar, geothermal, whatever, just based on cost alone. And having moratoriums isn't going to solve the problem either, it'll just hurt the American people.

I looked 2 or 3 years ago, what it would cost to put solar on my home and try to get off the grid so to speak. It cost $30K, that's a major percentage of my home value (depending on what the value is today) and I'd still have to maintain my current heat/AC for backup. Newly constructed homes, the cost would be less.

Our Pols dropped the ball back when Carter was Pres and the oil embargo and we did the same thing just this past year or so. When oil gets to expensive, OPEC just turns on the tap.

We need an Manhatten or Apollo type effort, but we haven't had a pres with any foresight since Kennedy.

As alevin said, it's price driven.
 
After reading the Tesla article I got to thinking. The sedan not the roadster is 50K. It is doable but lets be honest that is still a luxury item for those with mucho disposable income for a vehicle that has limitation. If I travel more than 300 miles I will need to get a hotel room (with plug in for car) after 5 hours of driving. Add that to the price per mile you are getting.
Also an F250 XLT diesel is 50K but I can pull my boat, camper and limited size equipment with it. When I go to the lumber yard there is a place to put it.
So many industries are affected by this. People may not like the pace of alt. energy improvement but it has to be done slowly and deliberately.
Make me an alternative energy car to do all of my monday through friday driving and lets keep the price under 25K and have an infrastructure that supports what ever it is. Without an infrastructure no one is paying 50K for something to go back and forth to work only because home is the only place to fuel it up.
 
I read this morning how neighboring state is investing in plug-in infrastructure for EVs/hybrids in public places-with stimulus money. Metro area. About time. step in the right direction at least.

We need it for the low-population density places just as much-due to the range issue with long-distance open spaces. Right now I couldn't do a round trip to a specialist doctor (80 miles one way) on battery power alone with a hybrid.
 
In Alaska, 120Vac plug-ins are everywhere and have been for years (I'm told) not for hybrids or electric cars, but for engine block heaters..I wonder how these new electric cars and their fan-dangled Batteries would fair in sub-zero weather all winter up there?
 
Comparative on the Ford Connect.
UK vs US note vastly superior fuel efficiency in UK models.
UK
http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/ford-transit-connect-van-range-1004353.html

That brings us on to the contents of the Transit Connect engine bay. Not too much change here. As before, the range is based around Ford's trusty Duratorq 1.8 TDCI diesel. With 220Nm of torque on offer at just 1,750rpm the mid-range 89bhp powerplant pulls strongly and rarely feels overworked. The excellent TDCI configuration with its high-pressure common-rail fuel injection technology has gone down a storm in Ford passenger cars and van drivers have been similarly taken with it. As well as useful low-end performance, this TDCI manages to return 37mpg on the combined cycle. A figure that's only marginally inferior to the entry-level diesel option - a 74bhp 1.8-litre TDCI engine that produces the Connect's best combined economy.

US
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/transitconnect/specifications/engine/

  • Engine type 2.0L Duratec® DOHC I-4
  • Displacement (cu. in./cc) 122/1999
  • Horsepower (SAE net@rpm) 136@6300 rpm
  • Torque (lb.-ft.@rpm) 128@4750 rpm
  • Compression ratio 10.0:1 Bore x stroke (in.) 3.44 x 3.27
  • Fuel Injection Sequential Multiport Electronic
  • Recommended fuel 87 Octane
  • Fuel economy EPA-Estimated 22 City/ 25 Highway/ 23 Combined
and EV on the way-
http://green.autoblog.com/tag/ford+transit+connect+ev/

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/06/0...omb-technologies-to-provide-5-000-in-home-ev/


Ford has teamed up with California-based Coulomb Technologies to give away free charging stations to early customers of its electric vehicles,
starting with the Transit Connect Electric.

Coulomb is spending $37 million to install 5,000 of its Chargepoint stations in nine markets including
Austin, Texas, Detroit, Los Angeles, New York, Orlando, FL., Sacramento, CA, the San Jose/San Francisco Bay Area,
Redmond, WA, and Washington, D.C.
Transit Connect Electric customers will be able to get one of those charging stations installed at their home or business free of charge
if they are in the designated markets.
 
BP Texas Refinery Had Huge Toxic Release Just Before Gulf Blowout

TEXAS CITY, TEXAS -- Two weeks before the blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, the huge, trouble-plagued BP refinery [1] in this coastal town spewed tens of thousands of pounds of toxic chemicals into the skies.

The release from the BP facility here began April 6 and lasted 40 days [2]. It stemmed from the company's decision to keep producing and selling gasoline while it attempted repairs on a key piece of equipment, according to BP officials and Texas regulators.

BP says it failed to detect the extent of the emissions for several weeks. It discovered the scope of the problem only after analyzing data from a monitor that measures emissions from a flare 300 feet above the ground that was supposed to incinerate the toxic chemicals.

The company now estimates that 538,000 pounds of chemicals escaped from the refinery while it was replacing the equipment. These included 17,000 pounds of benzene, a known carcinogen; 37,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides, which contribute to respiratory problems; and 186,000 pounds of carbon monoxide.

It is unclear whether the pollutants harmed the health of Texas City residents, but the amount of chemicals far exceeds the limits set by Texas and other states.

For years, the BP refinery in this town of 44,000 has been among the company's most dangerous and pollution-prone operations. A 2005 explosion killed 15 workers [1]; four more workers have died in accidents since then.

Last year, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined the company $87 million for failing to address safety problems that caused the 2005 blast.

In the weeks since the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank in the Gulf, BP has insisted that the incident, the nation's worst environmental disaster, was a disastrous but unusual misstep for a company that has done much in recent years to change its ways.

But a look at BP's record in running the Texas City refinery adds to the mounting evidence that the company's corporate culture favors production and profit margins over safety and the environment.

The 40-day release echoes in several notable ways the runaway spill in the Gulf. BP officials initially underestimated the problem and took steps in the days leading up to the incident to reduce costs and keep the refinery online.


More: http://www.propublica.org/article/bp-texas-refinery-had-huge-toxic-release-just-before-gulf-blowout
 
One of my son's good friends had called in sick the 2nd of two days when this explosion happpened in Anacortes, Wa. on his unit.
All his co-workers died or were badly burned.
He told our kid he's in shock, and the $30/hr he makes wouldn't replace him being there for his family, so he is considering a minimum wage job
("even if it's f'in 7-11" so I was told) to not worry about staying alive.
Nothing like survivor's guilt to bring it home.....
Here's the article- I know him pretty well...
http://www.nwcn.com/news/washington/four-dead-in-explosion-at-Anacortes-refinery-89759407.html
 
crws, glad to know that your son's friend is okay! The latest BP news:



For BP, post-spill advertising comes at an unknown cost

By Shelley DuBois, reporterAugust 31, 2010: 12:01 PM ET


FORTUNE -- The coverage of BP's Deepwater Horizon spill is teaching the typically secretive oil industry something about life in the limelight. Now, the company has to account for every cent it spends.

On August 16, the Congressional Committee on Energy and Commerce sent a letter to BP demanding that the company report how much money it had spent on advertising since the spill on April 20. Florida Representative Kathy Castor prompted the letter -- she's been lobbying hard for BP to pay the difference for any spill-related decline in Florida tourism. Monday was the deadline for BP to come back with the numbers. So far, the committee hasn't heard from the oil giant.

"The British newspaper Telegraph reported that BP has spent at least $1 million per week on advertising....[more]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/31/news/companies/BP_spill_advertising_campaign.fortune/index.htm

Maggie
 
When I saw the title 'Oil and Natural Gas Drilling'..

How eagar we yearn to point fingers at others and how enormously comforting it 'feels' to blame someone else. Thus ranting and raving seems to hold some therapeutic benefit.

But it's a lot harder to look within - and honestly admit how we ourselves live and the impact it has on everyone.

For Oil and Natural Gas Drilling - I'm especially amazed with the recent past.

A recent VP was in that business - and had his own company - Halliburton

Books from individuals working closely in the White House gave account of how a War with Iraq was 'desired' - very much so - even before 9/11.

The war created a huge opportunity for Halliburton and was actively in operation from that War.

More importantly how do 'WE' regard the Laws that were established for the safety and welfare of the population at large?

In 2005 Congress inserted the 'Halliburton Loophole' which allowed the Energy Companies to be totally exempt from provisions of the 'Safe Water Act'.

The energy companies (Natural Gas drilling) faced enormous difficulties when having to deal with the Legal mandated provisions of keeping water 'safe'.

The same year an 'Energy Bill' was added so 'drillers' would be exempt from provisions of the Clean Water Act.

Then Congress provided exemptions from provisions of the Clean Air Act and the National Environmental Policy Act -- which gave Energy Companies essentially unlimited freedom.

Lastly Congress provided 'exemptions' to the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act - which 'legally' allows the companies to avoid reporting their toxic emissions to the EPA.

I'd say 'Twisting Facts' is always more fun when we allow ourselves to put all the 'Blame' on someone else. If FACTS are REAL - then there is no way we can deny them.
 
BP is looking strong a year later

BP is looking strong a year later

"NEW ORLEANS – It's hard to tell that just a year ago BP was reeling from financial havoc and an American public out for blood. The oil giant at the center of one of the world's biggest environmental crises is making strong profits again, its stock has largely rebounded, and it is paying dividends to shareholders once more.
cryingwlaughter-1.gif
It is also pursuing new ventures from the Arctic to India. It is even angling to explore again in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, where it holds more leases than any competitor."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110419/ap_on_re_us/us_gulf_oil_spill_bp_moving_on
 
To create jobs in the USA, are you kidding me? We haven't build a refinery in over 30 years I believe the thing should be built RIGHT HERE, DUMMIES!:nuts:

April 19, 2011 · 6:30 AM
Obama Administration to give $2.84 Billion Loan for an Oil Refinery…in Columbia


How many oil refineries could be built right here in America with a $2.84 Billion dollar loan? We will never know because Obama is anti-American oil and pro-foreign oil. Just last month he told Brazil he wanted the U.S. to be a major importer of their oil and now he is loaning Columbia $2.84 Billion taxpayer dollars. Those newly created jobs and oil-based products should be happening here, not in Columbia.
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/...billion-loan-for-an-oil-refinery-in-columbia/
 
Complain to Ex-Im, some of the projects they take on I think are rather silly. Decision is not made at the Presidential level. The justification for an ExIm loan is the loan must be used to buy US equipment for the project, though if there are other concerns other Agencies working on the issue are supposed to get a chance to weigh in.
 
Last edited:
See, here's the problem.

The "Export - Import Bank" was set up to help finance deals that conventional U.S. Banks won't. It's mission is to facilitate loans to other entities OUTSIDE the US, in order to promote U.S. jobs. The loans pay for things that U.S. industry makes.

They don't finance things WITHIN the U.S. because...are you ready for this..because conservatives reject the idea of government loaning money to U.S. businesses, if it competes with the private sector. So they don't.

Then, "CNS News" (*which likes to generate controversy more than report news) reports it as how the Obama administration gives money to other countries and won't promote it at home.

You can't win for helping American business, can you?

Ok, fine. Let's just do away with the Import-Export bank, and the jobs that it creates and supports.

http://beltwaytalk.com
 
Back
Top