Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Destinations
USA and CanadaEuropeAustralia and NZAsiaLatin AmericaCaribbean IslandsAfrica
Travel Types
Air TravelCruisesRV Travel

Travel Forum / Travel Types / RV Travel / July 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Stupid Republicans

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
John A. Weeks III - 18 Jul 2008 00:48 GMT
President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
in those regions under the small chance that they find anything
that can be recovered within 10 years.  As we know, all oil drilling
project have blow-outs and spills, so if this drilling goes forward,
it is just a matter of time before Florida or California is rendered
into a goopy tar mess, killing millions of birds and wildlife, and
ending the tourism business for decades.  Why would our President
want to risk our way of life just for a few barrels of oil?

-john-

Signature

======================================================================
John A. Weeks III           612-720-2854            john@johnweeks.com
Newave Communications                         http://www.johnweeks.com 
======================================================================

Bruce S - 18 Jul 2008 04:37 GMT
> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> -john-

I understand that you are too stupid or too lazy to actually do some
research before posting nonsense, but if you hade bothered to look it up,
you might have seen the following as reasons for oil "spills":

63% Natural Seepage
32% Consumers (Boats, cities, etc.)
4% Transportation... (Tankers)
1% Offshore Drilling

Spills....
1970 - 1980 3.6 Million barrels
1990 - 2000 440,000 barrels
2000 - 2004 1000 barrels.

I realize that you won't follow it, but here is a link to a news story on
the topic.

<http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=2339434&maven_re
ferralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/specialreport/index.html
>

Bruce
Frank Howell - 18 Jul 2008 16:43 GMT
>> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
>> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> Bruce

Don't forget that there are 27 platforms off California right now, with 20
of them in the Santa Barbara channel. These have been there for a least 30
years and with the exception of one major oil spill, all they do is provide
oil for refineries to make into gasoline. Without it, it's back to horse and
buggy or pogo sticks.

Signature

Frank Howell

John A. Weeks III - 18 Jul 2008 20:07 GMT
> >> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
> >> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> --
> Frank Howell

So you are saying that the mean time between spill is about 20 years.
We are
8 years into the 2nd 20 year period, so we have an almost certain
likelilhood
of a massive oil disaster in the Santa Barbara between now and 2020.
Are
you really in favor of risking the entire Pacific Coast region from
Malibu to
Monterrey just for a few gallons of gasoline that we can easily buy on
the
open market from any number of suppliers?

-john-
John A. Weeks III - 18 Jul 2008 20:20 GMT
> > President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
> > the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> 1990 - 2000 440,000 barrels
> 2000 - 2004 1000 barrels.

I don't trust your data.  According to the NRDC web site, there are an
average
of 650 oil spills in San Francisco bay alone each year.  In fact, it
made big news
a while back when a ship hit the bay bridge and spilled untold
thousands of
gallons of oil into the bay.

Spills are an every day happening, and the transportation of oil is by
far the most
dangerous part of the chain.  The BP web site says that they have made
progress
on reducing these ecological disasters, but they still had a 4800
barrel spill on the
north slope last year, as well as a 199 barrel spill into Prudhoe
bay.  This 4999
barrels from one oil company and one site is far more the 1000 barrels
a year
that you quoted (or, since there is no attribution, maybe you just
made it up).

Oil exploration is also not without risk.  Note that 25 workers were
killed and
thousands of barrels of oil were spilled when a drilling rig struck an
oil platform
in the Gulf of Mexico last year.  Pemex took days to get the leak
turned off.

Even more spectacular is what might happen if a category 5 hurricane
ripped
though these oil platforms.  In fact, something like that happened.
In 2005, a
storm called Katrina blew through the gulf of Mexico.  While we were
focused on
the tradegy in New Orleans, 7 to 9-million gallons of oil spilled
including 113 platforms
totally destroyed, 457 pipelines damaged, 101 of those 10 inch or
larger in diameter.
The US Coast Guard took an inventory of 124 spills totalling 741,000
gallons.

The only conclusion that one can draw is if oil drilling is expanded
off of Florida
or California, then an ecological disaster caused by spilled oil is
only a matter
of time.  Why spoil a place that millions live and millions more flock
to for vacation
just for some black goo?

-john- (Posting From Google)
Propwash - 18 Jul 2008 21:23 GMT
> I don't trust your data.  According to the NRDC web site, there are an
> average of 650 oil spills in San Francisco bay alone each year.  
>
> -john

....undoubtably by the USN.     [:0)

Mabe SF should join the rest of the country and treat the military
more honorably!

Paul
JD - 19 Jul 2008 03:03 GMT
>I don't trust your data.  According to the NRDC web site, there are an
>average
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>thousands of
>gallons of oil into the bay.

Spills average less than 1 gallon.

>Spills are an every day happening, and the transportation of oil is by
>far the most
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>that you quoted (or, since there is no attribution, maybe you just
>made it up).

Cite please?

>Oil exploration is also not without risk.  Note that 25 workers were
>killed and
>thousands of barrels of oil were spilled when a drilling rig struck an
>oil platform
>in the Gulf of Mexico last year.  Pemex took days to get the leak
>turned off.

Mexico has totally different standards.

>Even more spectacular is what might happen if a category 5 hurricane
>ripped
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>The US Coast Guard took an inventory of 124 spills totalling 741,000
>gallons.

That is pure bullshit.  Post any authority for this absurd comment.
Totally untrue.

>The only conclusion that one can draw is if oil drilling is expanded
>off of Florida
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>-john- (Posting From Google)

You are a certified liar.  The Harry Harris of oil.

---

$$$$$$$$$%%
Yours truly, Johnny Dollar!
John A. Weeks III - 19 Jul 2008 03:28 GMT
> >I don't trust your data.  According to the NRDC web site, there are an
> >average
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Spills average less than 1 gallon.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the Nov 7 spill from the
Cosco Busan ship was 53,000 gallons of bunker oil.  Looks like that
was just a bit more than average, and it looks like your numbers
are total BS.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/30/BAH3UOCC6.DTL

> >Spills are an every day happening, and the transportation of oil is by
> >far the most
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Cite please?

At the BP web site:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9023667&contentId=7
043741

Looks like you are 0 for 2.

> >Oil exploration is also not without risk.  Note that 25 workers were
> >killed and
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Mexico has totally different standards.

Last time I checked a map, Mexico was located right exactly next
to Texas, and shares the Gulf of Mexico with the US and many other
smaller nations.  You can see that at Google Maps if you need an
update in North American geography.

http://maps.google.com

> >Even more spectacular is what might happen if a category 5 hurricane
> >ripped
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> That is pure bullshit.  Post any authority for this absurd comment.
> Totally untrue.

I told you it was the NRDC web site.  Here is a link:
http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/050915.asp

You can look up the other web sites as needed:

US Coast Guard (I quote): At least 741,000 gallons were spilled from 124
reported sources

US Minerals Management Service (I quote): Yet in May 2006, the U.S.
Minerals Management Service published their offshore damage assessment:
113 platforms totally destroyed, and - more importantly - 457 pipelines
damaged, 101 of those major lines with 10" or larger diameter.

> >The only conclusion that one can draw is if oil drilling is expanded
> >off of Florida
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> You are a certified liar.  The Harry Harris of oil.

You mean Harry Harris, the highly decorated Vice Admiral from
the US Navy?  Gee, that is quite a compliment.  As far as telling
lies, I have defended and supported each point I made, so I win
this one point, set, and match.  Thanks for playing.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/bios/bio.asp?bioID=136

-john-

Signature

======================================================================
John A. Weeks III           612-720-2854            john@johnweeks.com
Newave Communications                         http://www.johnweeks.com 
======================================================================

RAM³ - 19 Jul 2008 03:44 GMT
> You are a certified liar

And you're just now figuring that out???
Brad Naylor - 18 Jul 2008 21:53 GMT
> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> -john-

How many offshore rigs are there off the Louisiana coast?  How many had
problems as a result of Katrina and Rita?
William Boyd - 18 Jul 2008 23:03 GMT
>> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
>> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> How many offshore rigs are there off the Louisiana coast?  How many had
> problems as a result of Katrina and Rita?

You could have looked that up your self, but glad to be of assistance.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DC1F3DF932A15753C1A96495826
0&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


Signature

BILL P.
  &
 DOG

William Boyd - 18 Jul 2008 23:08 GMT
>>> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
>>> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DC1F3DF932A15753C1A96495826
0&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
 

Just in case you wonder what I posted, here is the first part.

 Business Technology; How the Offshore Rigs Rode Out Gulf's Storm

    *

By THOMAS C. HAYES,
Published: October 21, 1992

It was two days after the most savage hurricane of the century ripped
through the Louisiana gulf waters and Scott Sewell, the chief Federal
regulator of offshore oil production, was touring the region by
helicopter, dreading the worst. He was amazed by what he could not find.

"The massive oil slicks that we didn't want to see weren't there," Mr.
Sewell recalled recently. "There was very little environmental damage
and, frankly, the losses were minimal given the ferocity of the storm."

Twenty years ago, a hurricane with 160-mile-an-hour winds and 71-foot
waves might have turned Louisiana's southern shores into a catastrophe
not only for thousands of birds, fish and other wildlife poisoned by oil
slicks but also for the oil industry, which could have faced a financial
and public-relations disaster like the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in
Alaska. But on Aug. 25, when Hurricane Andrew whipped up the water
surrounding hundreds of offshore rigs, modern drilling-platform
architecture stood up to nature's fury.

Although daily output of as much as 800 million cubic feet of natural
gas and maybe 90,000 barrels of oil remain out of production while
repairs continue on pipelines, older platforms and other storm-damaged
gulf machinery, even some environmentalists are giving the oil industry
credit for being technologically prepared. Little Oil Is Spilled

By the Government's count, 249 of 3,800 offshore platforms in Federal
gulf waters were damaged by Hurricane Andrew, but spilled oil amounted
to less than 500 barrels. Nearly half of that was skimmed up by recovery
crews, and no slicks were found along the shoreline. By contrast, the
Exxon Valdez wreck spilled 250,000 barrels into Prince William Sound,
and the cleanup is still not finished.

A Texaco platform apparently caused the worst environmental damage after
Hurricane Andrew ripped a rig called the Treasure 75 from its moorings.
The wind and waves sent the platform sailing more than four and a half
miles before one of its 30,000-pound anchors tore through a
concrete-sheathed oil pipeline, spilling 300 barrels. The platform then
ran aground in 35 feet of water.

Industry officials and structural engineers say that improvements in
standards and techniques in platform design and construction over the
last 20 years passed an important test by taking blows from Hurricane
Andrew without fouling Louisiana's coastal waters or beaches.

Signature

BILL P.
  &
 DOG

William Boyd - 18 Jul 2008 23:27 GMT
http://g2.palmbeachpost.com/storm/content/nation/epaper/2005/09/17/m1a_oilrig_09
17.html


This is Katrina.

Signature

BILL P.
  &
 DOG

Brad Naylor - 19 Jul 2008 16:38 GMT
>>> President Bush announced that he wants to risk the beauty of
>>> the coastlines along Florida and California by drilling for oil
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>> problems as a result of Katrina and Rita?
> You could have looked that up your self,

Of course.  The point of the questions was to point out the weakness of the
original post.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.