I just read that Congress will not allow drilling off the coast of Florida .There is already drilling off of the coast of Florida but Americans are not doing it. How will they stop the Cubans who are drilling 90 miles off of the coast? Let's
Not drilling off of the coast of Florida or in Alaska without an alternative energy policy is short-sighted. Drilling off the coast of Louisiana is ok, an oil spill will not go east and pollute Florida or any other state. DUH?
All sources of oil need to be found and used. That policy along with a plan to be like Iceland and no longer be dependent on oil for heating or driving around should be part of our overall energy policy.
Instead of no drilling because of environmental concerns, how about responsible drilling that takes into account environmental concerns. Intelligent compromise.
Do what is best for the country not what gets you elected. That debate is not heard.
Democrats for the environment, Republicans for big oil. There is never any compromise.
8 comments:
Hi there. Hate to break it to you, but there is no oil drilling being done off the shores of Cuba. From a recent AP article:
"Vice President Dick Cheney's office acknowledged on Thursday that he was mistaken when he asserted that China, at Cuba's behest, is drilling for oil in waters 60 miles from the Florida coast.
Cheney's office said in a statement to The Associated Press that the vice president had erred.
“It is our understanding that, although Cuba has leased out exploration blocks 60 miles off the coast of southern Florida, which is closer than American firms are allowed to operate in that area, no Chinese firm is drilling there,” according to the statement.
Cuba clearly is interested in developing its deep-water oil resources, estimated at more than 5 billion barrel, including areas within 60 miles of Key West, Fla., energy experts said.
Jorge Pinon, a senior energy fellow at the University of Miami specializing in Latin America, said Cuba has awarded offshore oil leases, or concessionary blocs, in its offshore waters to six oil companies – none of them Chinese – and soon may announce an agreement with Brazil's state oil company, Petrobras.
“But no one is currently drilling in any of those concessions,” said Pinon in a telephone interview. Pinon, who supports drilling in the eastern Gulf and believes it can be done without hurting the environment, said China is being raised as an unnecessary “boogeyman” by drilling proponents.
“There is no actual drilling yet. ... There is exploration,” said Johanna Mendelson-Forman, a senior fellow on energy and Latin America at the Center for Strategic and International Studies."
Tommy:
When the drilling starts where do we come in?
My point is that it will come and we will be left behind.
A clearly defined energy policy that will bring us off of oil and make us energy independent is a change that is needed.
When the drilling starts where do we come in?
My point is that it will come and we will be left behind.
I'm confused. How do you balance environment with more drilling for oil? And how does that make us less dependent on oil if we are drilling for more oil?
Basically, if we don't drill, someone else will. And if it's outside the 12-mile limit, someone will.
So we're left with NUMBY.
As we progress to an oil-less future, we must mandate that NO ONE drills offshore. Of any country. Worldwide.
Oops! I must be an idealist...thinking that we can get the global community to agree with THAT. As you said, "Duh".
"I must be an idealist"
Yes you are-- an idealist believes in pursuing a heavenly vision, no matter how impractical.
In contrast, I'm a materialist. For *all* practical purposes, there is only one world.
This is my biggest hangup with conversing with progressives from foreign policy to economics. They think the real world doesn't matter-- as long we have a very very very pure vision of the blessed utopia, we can magically get there by legislation, litigation, and regulation. Unfortunately words, said or written, do not have any magic power over physical objects.
Free countries outperform the centralized countries because they do not subordinate everyone to universal comprehensive plans. Markets decentralize power and allow fluidity, variety, adaptation, and improvement. Technological progress occurs by the accumulation of chance events where environment and genius combine, and a free society maximizes the opportunities for events to occur.
This is why capitalism will always outperform Kings and Commissars. American capitalism has accomplished more in the last 200 years than humankind in the last 200,000 years. Why would we want to compromise this?
We will always need some oil. We can become less dependent on oil by switching many processes to solar electricity.
No oil at all would require recycling everything and never needing anything from pure oil.
Not realistic.
Jason:
Your view of American history is distorted. Without the government acting in the best interests of most of the people our progress would not have happened.
If George Washington did not put down the whiskey rebellion, which under your capitalism should not have happened, our country would not have survived this long.
"Without the government acting in the best interests of most of the people our progress would not have happened."
Misery, poverty, and despair have been the lot of humankind for centuries. People used to be ruled by kings, who ruled with large bureaucracies, barriers to trade, and heavy taxation. Thomas Jefferson has more in common with Julius Caesar than he does with Ronald Reagan. What *changed* during the last 200 years?
Industrial progress has always meant little to the affluent and powerful. Consider the wealthy in ancient Greece-- they didn't need radio and television, for they had in-house domestic retainers for their entertainment. Supermarkets and ready-to-wear clothing would have added little to their lives. Even plumbing would not have mattered-- they had running servants instead of running water. In contrast, capitalism is the system of the common Joe.
In addition, only a capitalist society can be a progressive society. Consider Japan -- for centuries it was a self-reliant and isolated feudal society consisting of daimyos and serfs. A laissez-faire policy after the Meiji restoration in 1869 turned Japan into technological powerhouse overnight; a few decades later it defeated Tsarist Russia in a war in 1905. The same pattern can be seen today in India, in China, and in Eastern Europe where markets have replaced centralized control.
That people can pursue socialism, anarchism, or any other crackpot creed under capitalism testifies to the goodness of capitalism. A socialist regime doesn't tolerate a marketplace of ideas, or any marketplace for that matter.
Jason:
It would be nice for all to live the grand life that America has done. For that to happen America would have to lower its standard of living.
I learned in Physics class many years ago that there is not enough resources to go around for everyone.
Capitalism does not work without resources.
Using the resources that are available wisely, even if mandated to do so allows Capitalism to prosper. That is what you will not accept.
If there is not any oil you will not drive to work and our economy will stop. How does having a Capitalistic society work without any resources?
Post a Comment