Offshore Drilling
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-04-01/offshore-drilling
President Obama proposes an end to a long-standing ban on drilling off the Atlantic coast, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska: What's behind the decision and how economic benefits compare with environmental risks.
Guests
David Hayes
deputy secretary, Department of the Interior.
Stephen Power
reporter, Wall Street Journal
Rayola Dougher
senior economic adviser, American Petroleum Institute
Athan Manuel
director, Lands Protection Program, Sierra Club
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I found it interesting that Obama spoke in front of an F-18. Considering that the the military consumes more petrolium than any other sector of our economy and could not exhist without ever expanding quantities of the stuff Obama seems to be saying that we are willing to suck the planet dry and use what ever force it takes to fuel the largest military machine the world has ever seen. If we shrunk our military we wouldn't be so desperate for ever more petrolium.
Obama said in his speech: “But what I want to emphasize is that this announcement is part of a broader strategy that will move us from an economy that runs on fossil fuels and foreign oil to one that relies more on homegrown fuels and clean energy.”
Obama seems to be saying fossil fuels are bad, and "homegrown" fuels are good, so he is pushing for the expansion of "homegrown" fossil fuels by allowing for offshore drilling. Meanwhile, while foreign oil is bad, we'll be depending on foreign clean energy, because manufacturers of solar energy and wind energy components are moving their jobs from the U.S. to Asia. A case in point is U.S. Suntech Power Holdings Co., which wants to hire 70 workers in Arizona, using federal funding, but 11,000 workers in China. Or, closer to home for me, BP Solar is firing 320 workers at its plant in Frederick, MD, and moving the jobs to Asia.
In the 80's the beaches in South Texas had so much oil in the sand that hotels had special foot baths set up specifically for washing oil, not just sand off your feet before re-entering. This oil was from normal drilling, not accidental spills.
Has the technology improved so that this is no longer routine or will we see our beautiful beaches in North Carolina fouled by oil?
Did you guys just hear that?
Diane was complaining about how upset (she) the left was with this decision. And the Administration guy told her how wrong she was to be upset. That she didn't understand what the decision meant. Misinformation, etc..
Wow that sounds familiar.
Dear Lefties, how does it feel the effects of this administration's arrogance?
No mention of the cleanest most efficient alternative form of energy production - Thorium. Clean / safe atomic energy production with no by product that can be used to create atomic weapons.
This game is all about money - and oil has it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU3cUssuz-U
Get involved.
Beyond good-stewardship they make it sound as if this will benefit American citizen, but I do not see that. I see the oil going to the highest-bidder, most possibly non-Americans. WHY allow that?!
It breaks my heart that so many people still think that the earth is the only place to collect energy. For decades, many scientists have proposed collecting solar power in space. They have spent years researching and developing the technology.
The sun always shines in space. Power can be collected 24 hours a day, and beamed to the earth.
The earth is an island, surrounded by the vast resources in space. Let's quit behaving like islanders unwilling to fish.
While I agree that due vigilance is demanded of the current administration to environmental impacts of further offshore drilling development; I can see the current economic necessity of such a move. Where were all the "righties" during the Bush administration's strip mining excesses in the Appalachians? The generations old residents of that once pristine area of the country have been left with the devastation of mountain top mining...and not even compensated for the destruction to their way of life, let alone real estate values. I don't recall hearing any pronouncements from the right concerning that administration's lack of concern for the environment. If you don't know about it, get familiar with it. Do a web search.
While the EPA has not given a report documenting contamination from Hydrofracking their reason has been that they did not have analysis prior to the drilling. Case reports of gas coming out of pipes, creeks that have methane bubling out do not count. The county of Garfield, CO has multiple examples. Again however the excuse that there are no preexisiting data is used. How long are we going to wait and allow the destruction of the environment in the areas where hydro fracking has been used. Pennsylvania alos has this problem. Before new wells are put down we need to led the EPA do a real study in areas where there is already contamination, creation of air pollution, see Garfield CO. The gas industry must be accountable to the clean air and clean water act, not exempted and all chemicals used in the process must be available so that water and air can be properly tested for contamination.
thank you
How will this encourage Americans to conserve? And if new offshore drilling is being proposed to try and initiate a bipartisan climate bill, what are Republicans offering in return?
Your guest Rayola Dougher noted that fracing has been happening for many years with not a single "documented" case of contamination by a driller. This is not due to the lack of contamination but rather to the secrecy of the energy companies. In Colorado we have many examples of contaminated wells, springs, seeps and groundwater. The problem is that the industry will not let anyone, including the Federal Government whose minerals are being extracted in our name, what is in the fluids they inject to fracture the rock. Without that information there is no way that any single driller can be linked to a contaminated well, hence no "documentation". There are plenty of cases where an energy company has paid a landowner whose well or spring has been poisoned without admitting any responsibility. The industry continues to be a significant threat to public health all the while hiding behind a fig leaf of "propriety". Ms Dougher's comment may be factually true on a technicality, but is utterly deceptive and untrue in reality.
One thing is certain about the way many "Americans" view the exploitation of oil,the answer; fear of pollution. Have they ever considered how other nations deal with pollution and other environmental problems? Probably no. I am happy about Obama's decision. Americans should take time to consider what it means to other nations when American companies exploite natural resources overseas.
Remember that each time you enjoy gasoline it affects the planet somewhere else.
One thing is certain about the way many "Americans" view the exploitation of oil,the answer; fear of pollution. Have they ever considered how other nations deal with pollution and other environmental problems? Probably no. I am happy about Obama's decision. Americans should take time to consider what it means to other nations when American companies exploite natural resources overseas.
Remember that each time you enjoy gasoline it affects the planet somewhere else.
Steven Power told an outright lie and no one on your show called him on it. He said the refineries were running at capacity because environmentalists would not approve new ones. The truth is that the oil companies in this country are closing refineries, saying there is too much capacity. This was their claim the last time oil prices surged. Environmentalists pointed out that there were several refineries that could be reopened, they just kept blaming environmentalists. Can't you find anyone on the right who is not Murdock's employee to put on your show. I used to read WSJ regularly, but now, all they seem to print is propoganda.
"Shameful" completely encapsulates Ms. Rehm's behavior during the first hour of her program today (Offshore Drilling: 4/1/10). While I understand that her obvious bias is a "character" of the show, and that she makes little attempt to present herself as an neutral arbitrator when hosting forums, this morning she went far beyohd the pale.
Upon hearing the guest list, I was pleased that Ms. Dougher was included, assuming that she would be asked to provide counterpoint and explanation of the petroleum industry's views. Unfortunately, when Diane did let her speak, it was only to respond to snarling charges of impropriety, subject to Ms. Rehm talking over her, questioning her credibility, and often shouting her down. Further, Ms. Rehm injected her own condemnation of Shale-Fracturing for Natural Gas production, supporting her denunciation of the practice with a single piece of unverifiable, anecdotal evidence (a conversation with a farmer in a neighboring county?!?!?). Diane's treatment of Ms. Dougher was a pure journalistic bushwhacking.
For their parts, Messrs. Powers (WSJ) and Manuel (Sierra Club) seemed almost embarrassed by Ms. Rehm's rampage. Several times during the roundtable, each man interjected to urge fairness upon Diane in her rebuke of the oil industry. Mr. Manuel responded to her condemnation of Shale-Fract by explaining why more study is needed before such charges can be leveled, although he did question the "need to squeeze out every drop of fossil fuel" and the externalizing of costs by the petroleum industry. Mr. Powers went so far to chastise Ms. Rehm as "uninformed" and correcting her characterizations and "facts" often throughout the show.
Unfortunately, Diane appears to be "uninformed" and even "lost" more and more often. Normally, I would put much of this blame on producers failing to adequately prepare Ms. Rehm for her daily program. However, producers are also responsible for arranging for topics and guests, and on these scores, "The D.R. Show" is top notch! I find it highly improbable that producers amoung the best in all other areas are absolute failures in pre-show talent-prep.
The dark conclusion is that the problem is Diane Rehm, herself. My friend recently joked that what he liked best about the show is Diane's habit of asking follow-up questions that completely disregard the answer she received to the opening question. To me, it makes what should be a fascinating show almost unlistenable. I audibly groan when I discover that there is not a guest host for a day's program. The host is ruining what in all other respects could be the best current events program on radio.
I get it. Diane Rehm has the name, the history, and the clout necessary to make her program work. I just wish there was some way for the producers to capitalize on her credibility without having to put her on the air.
Dr D.E.M.,
You may want to read a book titled “How the Economy Was Lost,” by Paul Craig Roberts, an economics PhD and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan. He does an excellent job of discussing how outsourcing is destroying America, and he blames both Republican and Democratic leaders, among others, for dropping the ball. I don’t agree with Dr Roberts on everything, but on the topic of outsourcing, he is right on the money. Economists generally base their support of outsourcing on the theory of comparative advantage, which was put forward by David Ricardo in the early 20th century. Dr Roberts cites multiple research articles that are challenging the validity of the theory of comparative advantage.
We should all start pressuring our government leaders to do something with teeth about this outsourcing scourge—so many of them give us lip-service only when they say they are against outsourcing. We should also start holding companies accountable for shipping manufacturing and service jobs overseas. We can vote with our wallets, and though, in some industries, it’s virtually impossible to even find a non-outsourcing company, in some industries, they can still be found. For example, I’ve found two small companies (Biokleen; Sun and Earth) that manufacture eco-friendly products that don’t outsource. Lou Dobbs published a list of firms that outsource a few years ago—I know it’s not exhaustive or up-to-date, but we need to start somewhere.
Here’s an article you may want to read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thom-hartmann/globalization-is-killing_b_4...
Silly me, I thought this was an April Fool's Joke.
Maybe offshore drilling is another form of fracking. They use the same chemical regemine. See "Gasland" (the documentary) on HBO
9/11 Truth has been occurring without credible response for years now too. We understand how polarized power and wealth can be when we accept how groundwater contamination is covered up like the inside job that took many of our human rights.
Ross: Obama is a well meaning guy, but he remains pretty ignorant of science and technology. Constitutional law itself is not useful in solving energy and wealth polarization problems.
Justin GR suggests Diane Rehm is "emotional" about the destruction of the environment by oil and gas drilling, and that she may even be senile. I believe Diane is scattered in her attention as any talkshow host might be, but represents a mild level of the outrage informed Americans feel about fracking and oil spills as well as delays in sustainable energy.
It is the calm deniers of the obvious, the hired petroleum experts, who exhibit abnormal behavior in their willingness to trade an irredeemable ecology for a quick and profitable (for a tiny minority) carbon energy fix. Justin GR must be a myopic oil investor. In any case he can be counted among Rehm's abnormal adversaries.