Oil Slick Stuff

Sort by newest Sort by date
...
Marine energy projects get water leases

The Minerals Management Service, part of the U.S. Department of Interior, just issued 11 five-year leases to offshore wind and marine energy projects. This is part of the department’s goal to accelerate the development of water-based energy harvesting on the Outer Continental Shelf, and it includes ocean current technologies, wave energy harvesting, and offshore wind farms, and eventually aims to cover solar energy and hydrogen production, as well. Sixteen sites were chosen this past April, and the remaining five leases will be awarded by the end of the year. (The 11 proposals granted leases were for sites that only received one bid.)
The purpose of these leases is to allow companies to install data collection and technology testing facilities in federal waters, and they will not immediately lead to commercial development. The sites lie off the coasts of New Jersey, Delaware, and Georgia on the eastern seaboard, and in Florida and northern California waters. The Minerals Management Service is also the one to turn to for your offshore drilling and marine mining permissions, so the service eventually intends to allow commercial development – much like how the Bureau of Land Management controls the installation of solar and wind projects on public lands through developer leases. However, marine energy lags at least a decade behind these other, more entrenched alternative energy technologies. Just as wind studies conducted on land help remove the financial risk of building wind turbines on a new property for wind energy developers, these initial technology assessments are intended to help nascent marine energy companies gather the data they need to make a business case for themselves.
Most of the projects awarded will be exploring offshore wind potential. Thankfully, at least one technology company chosen is not as prosaic – Aquantis will be collecting ocean current data and hopes to deploy its funky "c-planes" off the coast of Florida. Details are sketchy, but a c-plane appears to produce hydroelectric power without relying on the usual river + dam concept. Instead, two drivetrains (powered by a submarine electric power cable connected to a land-based substation) in each c-plane send high-pressure, high-volume ocean water to shore through aqueducts, where it is used to turn a turbine. And in California, Pacific Gas & Electric is another exception – it will be monitoring wave resources.
The five sites that received more than one bid will be interesting to watch – several of the proposals are also for ocean current data collection activities, so Aquantis may not be alone for long.
Click to expand...
 
Buster said:
Shear arrogance...:laugh::laugh::laugh:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080729/pl_politico/12130
Click to expand...

fedgolfer said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_go_co/stevens_indictment
Click to expand...
Arrogant? I'd say Stevens "I've done nothing wrong" is far more arrogant. I'm sick of these elitist fat cats and their "it doesn't apply to me" status when it comes to the law. And if you think you're getting tax cuts and no new taxes with 8 more years of GOP, think again. Remember Daddy Bush and "read my lips."
ap_logo_106.png

McCain backs off his no-new-tax pledge

By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press WriterTue Jul 29, 10:29 AM ET


Republican presidential candidate John McCain's signal that he may be open to a higher payroll tax for Social Security, despite previous vows not to raise taxes of any kind, is drawing sharp rebukes from conservatives.
McCain's shift has come in stages, catching some Republicans by surprise. Speaking with reporters on his campaign bus on July 9, he cited a need to shore up Social Security. "I cannot tell you what I would do, except to put everything on the table," he said.
He went a step farther Sunday on ABC's "This Week," in response to a question about payroll tax increases.
"There is nothing that's off the table. I have my positions, and I'll articulate them. But nothing's off the table," McCain said. "I don't want tax increases. But that doesn't mean that anything is off the table."
That comment drew a strong response this week from the Club for Growth, a Washington anti-tax group. McCain's comments, the group said in a letter to the Arizona senator, are "shocking because you have been adamant in your opposition to raising taxes under any circumstances."
Indeed, McCain frequently has promised not to raise taxes.
At a July 7 town-hall meeting in Denver, he said voters faced a stark choice between him and Democrat Barack Obama.
"Sen. Obama will raise your taxes," McCain said. "I won't."
In a March 16 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, McCain said he would cut taxes where possible, and not raise them.
"Do you mean none?" Hannity asked.
"None," McCain replied.
Both candidates have said Social Security's funding formula needs to be changed to ensure the program's long-term viability. Obama has called for imposing a new payroll tax on incomes above $250,000. Currently, only incomes up to $102,000 are subject to the 12.4 percent payroll tax, which employers and employees split evenly.
When Obama announced his plan June 13, McCain's top economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, told reporters that as president McCain would not consider a payroll tax increase "under any imagineable circumstance."
McCain has made no specific proposals for Social Security, refusing to rule in or out anything to strengthen the benefit program for retirees and the disabled. Both candidates have said that, if elected, they would try to work out details with Republican and Democratic lawmakers.
Asked for an explanation of McCain's latest comments, campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said the Arizona senator "has a clear and demonstrated record of opposing tax increases. John McCain is going to cut taxes" and improve government discipline, he said.
Promises never to raise taxes have bedeviled past Republican officeholders. Before being elected president in 1988, George H.W. Bush said, "Read my lips, no new taxes." But facing severe budget problems, he reneged on the promise. Some conservative groups never forgave him.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.
Click to expand...
 
Silverbird said:
Iran's President Says Oil Prices Are 'Not Realistic'
By Reuters | 28 Jul 2008 | 10:28 AM ET
World oil prices are overvalued and "not realistic" because the market is being manipulated, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in an exclusive interview with NBC News...
Click to expand...


Part of me likes this guy because he's willing to bring out a lot of facts - the larger powers try so hard to suppress or cover up.

Unfortunately he's identical to many other Leaders (lately noted in Africian countries) - convinced his way is the only way and more over ultimately represents the worst of Leaders by oppressing the overall population, isolating his country from harmony with the global community, and creating increasing greater tensions.

His comments here are probably solely meant to aggravate the USA. But then again - Iran has the largest Oil reserves on the globe except for Saudi Arabia - so their prices could easily be a small fraction of what the rest of the world pays. Friends of mine in South American could easily fill an empty tank for $5.00 or less.
 
He's merely mimicing what the Algerian guy said earlier, and what OPEC has said for the last 8 months.
 
luv2read said:
Arrogant? I'd say Stevens "I've done nothing wrong" is far more arrogant. I'm sick of these elitist fat cats and their "it doesn't apply to me" status when it comes to the law. And if you think you're getting tax cuts and no new taxes with 8 more years of GOP, think again. Remember Daddy Bush and "read my lips."
Click to expand...
Let's not always counter with something that is irrelevant to the topic I posted just to argue...Stevens got help from VECO to remodel his house true..But has nothing to do with Nancy standing in the way of Offshore drilling...jeezzz:blink:
 
Buster said:
Let's not always counter with something that is irrelevant to the topic I posted just to argue...Stevens got help from VECO to remodel his house true..But has nothing to do with Nancy standing in the way of Offshore drilling...jeezzz:blink:
Click to expand...
Buster I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts. If you read the article you know VECO is an oilfield service company. It's all about OIL, Buster - and the fact that the fat cats think it's ok to cut whatever deals they want to feather their personal nests as long as they steer money to their districts in the process. You call her arrogant for exercising the authority of her position, I think he's arrogant for using his position for personal gain and to cut deals with his oilfield buddies outside the Federal Acquisition Regulations.

Don't make an argument where there isn't one, hunny.;)
 
luv2read said:
Buster I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts. If you read the article you know VECO is an oilfield service company. It's all about OIL, Buster - and the fact that the fat cats think it's ok to cut whatever deals they want to feather their personal nests as long as they steer money to their districts in the process. You call her arrogant for exercising the authority of her position, I think he's arrogant for using his position for personal gain and to cut deals with his oilfield buddies outside the Federal Acquisition Regulations.

Don't make an argument where there isn't one, hunny.;)
Click to expand...
I read the article way before now, this morning...True Stevens is a Dik...but Again, I'll ask as sweetly as I possibly can...WHAT TO HELL DOES STEVENS GOT TO DO WITH PELOSI BEING AN ALMIGHTY BEOTCH THAT THINKS SHE'S GONNA SAVE THE PLANET? Darling
 
Buster said:
I read the article way before now, this morning...True Stevens is a Dik...but Again, I'll ask as sweetly as I possibly can...WHAT TO HELL DOES STEVENS GOT TO DO WITH PELOSI BEING AN ALMIGHTY BEOTCH THAT THINKS SHE'S GONNA SAVE THE PLANET? Darling
Click to expand...
It's all about oil. Stevens. Alaska. Pelosi. Oil. Alaska. :nuts:
 
I just stopped into the MB to see if I could find a much-needed smile this afternoon. And on this one thread alone I find Steady giving his marvelous zen comments, Birch back to his normal statesman-like self, and L2R cutting to the heart of the matter with her truly insightful thoughts - - and then getting into a family squabble with Buster.

{Quit touching me! You touched me first! Because you were in my space! :toung:}

Ah, I love it! I agree with Norman; this MB is the best!

Lady
 
luv2read said:
Buster I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts.
Click to expand...

Humm...under Article 147 - Section 2004B

"I'm not arguing, I'm stating the facts" is in itself a form of arguing.

Sorry L2R - but your omission of "the" word - still puts you in an argumentative state.

And here I have to feel for Buster - who continues to droop his head and wonder "Why me". ;):p
 
Buster said:
I read the article way before now, this morning...True Stevens is a Dik...but Again, I'll ask as sweetly as I possibly can...WHAT TO HELL DOES STEVENS GOT TO DO WITH PELOSI BEING AN ALMIGHTY BEOTCH THAT THINKS SHE'S GONNA SAVE THE PLANET? Darling
Click to expand...

Sorry Buster- I have to agree with LUV2 today.

I don't want to see more drilling in areas that are currently off limits to drilling. We don't need the oil. There are other alternatives.

Personally I have used only E85 since last fall. My car gets about 120 miles per gallon of gasoline (and 4.5 gallons of 200 proof).

I think we really need to put about a two dollar per gallon tax on gasoline, and use the income to develop cellulosic ethanol, CNG refilling stations, and other alternative energy programs.

Save the new drilling in new areas for a few decades ahead, in case we need it then. As for now, what we need to do is to start breaking the oil habit. Drilling more today does nothing to get us further along the path of switching to alternatives for the time when oil will eventually run out. And it WILL eventually run out. So the sooner we get going in the direction to find replacements, the better.

Despite our economy's additiction to foreign oil, we still pay relatively LOW prices compared to the rest of the world. France? I paid $5 a gallon when it was just $2 a gallon here. Today in the UK it's a LOT more expensive than here. Likewise in Germany.

But those countries are all far ahead of us in finding alternatives. Germany is building 8 times faster the solar electric capabilty that we are with measly 2K 20% tax credits. If we had 50% tax credits, limited to 10K instead of 2K, we'd build much more, much faster, and would make a serious dent in our electric grid needs.

I'm looking forward to a better future for our kids.

And THIS is the better future.....

Ethanol..made from...BEER.

​
 
And, If anybody wants to contribute to putting a new roof on my house..Hey, I'll take all the donations you got..I ain't proud that way..But I will be honest about it and show it on my taxes....same as the Earth quake in LA today...same thing..a 5.4 or $20,000, no difference..surely you Libs can see that similarity..:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top