the energy compromise

[busara]

so here is the compromise developed by the "gang of 10"

A group of Republican and Democratic senators dubbed the "Gang of 10" has put forth a compromise to break the stalemate on energy legislation.

The major components of the proposal include:

# Expanding drilling opportunities off the East coast and Gulf of Mexico, which pleases Republicans

# Keeping a ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, a concession to Democrats

# Repealing a tax break for oil companies that Democrats have long called for

# Putting billions toward producing more alternative-fuel vehicles, in part paid for by the oil and gas industry

Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

thoughts?

 

[DiamondDave]

Except for the ANWR ban, and excluding the West Coast from offshore drilling... I like it... it is about what I have been calling for... though I would want more in there about expanding wind, natural gas, nuke, solar, etc... and I would like to see something calling for more refineries, since ours are now running in the 90+% capacity area

 

[dilloduck]

# Putting billions toward producing more alternative-fuel vehicles, in part paid for by the oil and gas industry

I wanna know who gets THAT money and who is going to oversee it.

 

[busara]

Except for the ANWR ban, and excluding the West Coast from offshore drilling... I like it... it is about what I have been calling for... though I would want more in there about expanding wind, natural gas, nuke, solar, etc... and I would like to see something calling for more refineries, since ours are now running in the 90+% capacity area

agree with most of this. but i would rather the state decide whether to drill off their cost or in ANWR as it effects their beaches, etc.

 

[Ravi]

I don't like it because Florida doesn't get a say and it brings drilling to 50 miles off the coast.

 

[DiamondDave]

agree with most of this. but i would rather the state decide whether to drill off their cost or in ANWR as it effects their beaches, etc.

I agree with that.. I am saying lifting the federal 'ban' and allowing it that way... then going down to the states for their final decision



Also.. after looking again... I am not really into this thing of handing out 'billions' from the government as 'incentive' towards research.... there is enough incentive to sell/produce energy and efficient vehicles, etc... the promise of profit is going to be there

 

[busara]

I agree with that.. I am saying lifting the federal 'ban' and allowing it that way... then going down to the states for their final decision



Also.. after looking again... I am not really into this thing of handing out 'billions' from the government as 'incentive' towards research.... there is enough incentive to sell/produce energy and efficient vehicles, etc... the promise of profit is going to be there

so long as oil prices stay high. there was a similar push toward alternatives in the 70's, but then the price came down and nearly all research ceased.

 

[Charles_Main]

agree with most of this. but i would rather the state decide whether to drill off their cost or in ANWR as it effects their beaches, etc.

Beaches? do you know anything about the area they want to drill in in ANWR. Beaches will not even be effected. ANWR is close to the already existing Alaska pipe line. Any oil drilled there will be piped down to the coast along already existing pipe line.

I would also point out ANWR is 19 million acres and they only want to drill on 2000 acres of it. Imagine a postage stamp sitting on a tennis court. That is the area of ANWR they are talking about drilling on.

 

[Lode]

I think, as it stands, it's a good starting point.

We need heavy investment in nuclear power, and political will to put economic pressure on shifting away from oil in the transportation sector.

The market will not take care of this by itself. That's because the markets only concerned with finding the cheapest resource to continue our energy needs. Since the oil infrastructures so developed, that's the cheapest.

But that ignores the real costs of oil. Environmental and especially political. We need heavy investments in alternative fuel sources. Billions of dollars is right. My concern is when it actually goes to comittee those "billions of dollars for alternative fuel vehicles" will just be shifted into some tax breaks for automobile manufacturers making hybrids, which is completely the wrong direction.

 

[editec]

so here is the compromise developed by the "gang of 10"



Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

thoughts?

Works for me.

Seems sensible, but of course it's really about about details, isn't it?

We allow drilling but the, when it comes time to find the money to invest in GREEN TECH, it won't be there.

I want guarantees built in.

 

[Lode]

Works for me.

Seems sensible, but of course it's really about about details, isn't it?

We allow drilling but the, when it comes time to find the money to invest in GREEN TECH, it won't be there.

I want guarantees built in.

That's pretty much exactly what I was saying. It's all about the details here, and I'm not remotely convinced either that the right kinds of incentives in alternative technologies will be there.

 

[busara]

Beaches? do you know anything about the area they want to drill in in ANWR. Beaches will not even be effected. ANWR is close to the already existing Alaska pipe line. Any oil drilled there will be piped down to the coast along already existing pipe line.

I would also point out ANWR is 19 million acres and they only want to drill on 2000 acres of it. Imagine a postage stamp sitting on a tennis court. That is the area of ANWR they are talking about drilling on.

but i would rather the state decide whether to drill off their cost or in ANWR as it effects their beaches, etc

apparently reading isnt your friend
off the coast would be beaches (where is the oil in the gulf located? in the gulf. in water. off beaches)
anwr would be the 'etc' i put. etc being national parks/reserves/etc.

they want to drill in places other than anwr

 

[dilloduck]

apparently reading isnt your friend
off the coast would be beaches (where is the oil in the gulf located? in the gulf. in water. off beaches)
anwr would be the 'etc' i put. etc being national parks/reserves/etc.

they want to drill in places other than anwr

Oil has washed up on beaches before anyone even thought of drilling there.

Natural Oil and Gas Seepage in the Coastal Areas of California -- MMS Pacific Region

 

[busara]

Oil has washed up on beaches before anyone even thought of drilling there.

Natural Oil and Gas Seepage in the Coastal Areas of California -- MMS Pacific Region

does that mean that if drilling starts there will be no spills or leaks of oil?

 

[dilloduck]

does that mean that if drilling starts there will be no spills or leaks of oil?

no---it means that oil is ALREADY leaking and has been for centuries. Just a favorite tactic for enviros to scare people with. A pitiful excuse not to drill offshore.

 

[busara]

no---it means that oil is ALREADY leaking and has been for centuries. Just a favorite tactic for enviros to scare people with. A pitiful excuse not to drill offshore.

so what? some oil leaks naturally. a lot more will leak if drilling is started.

some trees fall naturally. therefore there will be no harm if we cut down a bunch of trees.
stupid argument

 

[dilloduck]

so what? some oil leaks naturally. a lot more will leak if drilling is started.

some trees fall naturally. therefore there will be no harm if we cut down a bunch of trees.
stupid argument

garbage--technology has ways of dealing with that

 

[sealybobo]

so here is the compromise developed by the "gang of 10"



Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

thoughts?

Take the deal! TAKE THE DEAL!!! Howie? Yes? DEAL!

 

[busara]

garbage--technology has ways of dealing with that

yeah, drilling for oil is totally clean. absolutely no harm is done to the environment

 

[Zoomie1980]

so here is the compromise developed by the "gang of 10"



Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

thoughts?

Mostly good, but left out relaxed standards and fast track certification for expanded nuclear power.