Note: remember that offshore oil rigs transport oil to the shore via underwater pipelines, not oil tankers

http://www.lewrockwell.com/fontova/fontova68.html

Florida's tourism industry wouldn't do very well if one had to dive amongst oil rigs.

If you want to see the cost of off-shore drilling to the state of LA, look no further than New Orleans, a city that was destroyed because of oil interests.

LOL. It was destroyed because it sits UNDER the sea level in an area that is renowned for HURRICANES. The swamps are vanishing not because of Oil but because of controlling the Mississippi river.

Learn some facts dear.

__________________
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd. Indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.

-Bertrand Russell

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable

-Laurence J. Peters

I never said that you had no right to have an opinion. I just said that it was, in fact, worth nothing.

-Maineman ( on 12 June 2007)

Use a few brain cells. Why do you think they rerouted the Mississippi?

Ohh I see, the ONLY traffic on the Mississippi is Oil traffic, you really are a PEA BRAIN. They also rerouted and leveed it all along its length to prevent FLOODING, which has ZERO to do with OIL.

__________________
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd. Indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.

-Bertrand Russell

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable

-Laurence J. Peters

I never said that you had no right to have an opinion. I just said that it was, in fact, worth nothing.

-Maineman ( on 12 June 2007)

The problems with the flooding of New Orleans can be laid at the feet of the federal government, namely the army corps of engineers. They defied common sense and well-understood water management practices, and went with a "levees only" approach. Thus, they built up the mississippi artifically high, so when it finally spilled over, it was spectacular.

Seriously, if you go back and look at the records before the army corps of engineers started building levees, there were no catastrophic floods. Floods, yes--but megafloods, no. The first big project during the Hoover administration was soon followed by the first killer flood during the 1930's.

Also, if oil platforms cause an explosion of marine life, then I would expect Florida's tourism industry to flourish.

Katrina was so devasting, in part, because of the loss of costal wetlands that previously acted as a storm buffer. City elevation became a factor when the levees broke, but the intensity of the unbuffered storm was a significant cause for that failure.

Ravir should not have singled out oil interests, but RSG was wrong (as usual) to deny that factor and to blame elevation alone. The U.S. Geological Survey blamed several factors for degradation and loss of wetlands, including natural processes, massive levees that channel the river, and drainage to accommodate development and agriculture. "In addition, . . . an extensive system of dredged canals and flood-control structures, constructed to facilitate hydrocarbon exploration [that includes oil and gas] and production as well as commercial and recreational boat traffic, has enabled salt water from the Gulf of Mexico to intrude brackish and freshwater wetlands."

Much of the development for which wetlands were drained included facilities for oil and gas production, and housing to accomodate employees in that industry.

__________________
No one ever asks whether the glass is too big!

I did not claim oil had nothing to do with it. Again try some reading comprehension. For a lawyer you sure can't read well or understand the written word. And as you have just posted it did not have as much to do with as Ravir claimed. Which was my point. The river has been leveed since the 30's, getting more and more controlled as the years passed and not just because of oil.

__________________
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd. Indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.

-Bertrand Russell

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable

-Laurence J. Peters

I never said that you had no right to have an opinion. I just said that it was, in fact, worth nothing.

-Maineman ( on 12 June 2007)

Not really. Proximity to shore is a factor. And I would expect that boat traffic near the rigs would be limited to prevent accidents and possible spills.

__________________
No one ever asks whether the glass is too big!

True, I shouldn't have singled out oil, must have been my knee-jerk liberal reaction.

Another problem is that the state of LA doesn't get to share in any of the tax revenue from the drilling off of their coast even though the industry puts a huge strain on their infrastructure.

I was responding to the post were you wrote, "LOL. It was destroyed because it sits UNDER the sea level in an area that is renowned for HURRICANES. The swamps are vanishing not because of Oil but because of controlling the Mississippi river."

You subsequently wrote, "Ohh I see, the ONLY traffic on the Mississippi is Oil traffic, you really are a PEA BRAIN. They also rerouted and leveed it all along its length to prevent FLOODING, which has ZERO to do with OIL."

So I said you blamed elevation alone, because I was responding to your first quote and did not consider your second comment about levees. Sorry for the oversight.

But you did deny that oil had anything to do with the loss of swamp land, and blamed the levees alone, which is contradicted by the USGS. If you had written "The swamps are vanishing not [just] because of Oil but [also] because of controlling the Mississippi river", my comments would have been off the mark. But you didn't, so STFU about my ability to read when it is your ability to write that's deficient.

__________________
No one ever asks whether the glass is too big!

Shall we review your inability to comprehend the written word in several other threads? One where I was clear that gang members did in fact have rights like everyone else? How about the one where you were and are still to stupid to admit you could not grasp satire?

I swear , we have 3 admitted lawyers on this board and 2 of you need proof readers and cliff notes to understand anything said here.

__________________
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd. Indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.

-Bertrand Russell

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable

-Laurence J. Peters

I never said that you had no right to have an opinion. I just said that it was, in fact, worth nothing.

-Maineman ( on 12 June 2007)

I understand you are on disability. What is the DSM-IV classification for your impairment?

Take your meds, please. You'll feel better.

Indeed, take the whole bottle. I'll feel better.

__________________
No one ever asks whether the glass is too big!

That's debatable. I've been on several offshore fishing trips in which we tie off to oil rigs and pull up snapper, ling, mahi mahi, and grouper. Guides make a living doing this and tourists pay good money and have no complaints with the rigs. We really do need to drill more in the gulf and off the coast of Florida while we're on our way to electric and other technologies.

__________________
Learn to labour and to wait -- Longfellow

Rigs create artificial structures that baitfish live around for protection. The rigs will have an effect on the biodiversity of marine life, but I don't know what marine ecologists think the outcome will be.

__________________
Nomdeplume-"you are just upset because I fuck all you lefties up the ass without lube."