Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Oil Rigs off the Leucadia Coast?









On U.S. coasts, a rethink on oil drilling?
Editorial: Offshore drilling opens oil pipeline to nowhere
McCain Defends His Support for Offshore Oil Drilling
Schwarzenegger remains opposed to offshore oil drilling
California oil production hits 66-year low
House fails to move gas pump price gouging bill
Schwarzenegger's oil spill plan under attack
FORUM: Bilbray no ocean champion

43 comments:

  1. Liberals are really Dipshits...June 25, 2008 9:44 AM

    Your post is a little extreme. Just what I'd expect from a mentally challenged Liberal.

    I guess you like energy dependency?

    You better be prepared for expansion of San Onofre to be tripled in size in the next 10 years.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've been a registered republican since I was 18. I am 38. Obviously you are offended by the last 3 photos. I used them to demonstrate the real world risk for our beaches and tourism driven economy. We have to decide if drilling off the coast is worth it, especially since the oil will be sold on a world market (the oil pumped off California could easily end up filling gas tanks in the UK and not here).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whether we drill or not, we'll run out of oil eventually.

    http://www.completeinvestor.com/index.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you JP for this post. Thank you. And I would think protecting the california coast line from further extraction related impacts to the environment, is actually the conservative approach. The current handwringing over the price of gas and the cost of polluting the atmosphere seems to be just an excuse for the oil industry to access to California coast and Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWAR).

    ReplyDelete
  5. A billion barrels of oil may sound like a lot. Problem is, the U.S. burns 20.73 million barrels every day.

    The oil deposits off North County will sustain U.S. consumption for a total of 48 days, unfortunately.

    To quote Stephen Leeb: ". . . unless we can figure out how to power our economy with non-fossil fuels, looming energy shortages will wreak major havoc to our way of life."

    ReplyDelete
  6. On one hand, it is my understanding that offshore rigs are much safer than the one that failed off Santa Barbara 40 years ago. No oil was spilled during Katrina. We need to do something quickly to stop energy prices from continuing to spiral upwards. The working poor are the ones who are truly hurting commuting at $5 / gal.

    Conversely, I recall getting home from work one evening this time last year and smelling what I thought was kerosene. I wondered why someone would be running a kerosene heater in June in Southern California. It turned out, of course, to be the fuel oil spill at Beacon’s. What a sad sight to see.

    No easy answer here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why utilize alternate forms of energy when you can spend billions on off shore oil rigs; endanger the environment and uglify everyone's ocean view?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fuel for thought.....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGaesE0kUDw

    ReplyDelete
  9. What an idiot!!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Your US congress plans on working only 6 weeks after the 4th of July. 6 weeks out of 6 months. They will be paid for 6 months work but only work 6 weeks.

    No wonder so many want into the US congress.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gosh we love to bash those on the other side. Careful because the other side is all of us.

    Truth is we have had an equal dose of Rep’s and Dem’s the past 100 years guiding our energy policy. The real story is us, and how we consume as individuals and households. We consume at a household rate of twice the average of the rest of the western world (900kwhs per household per month vs. 450kwhs for others) not to mention our cars are among the least efficient and heaviest in the world. We do this because it’s cheap and we’re cheap, not because its right or wrong, and therein lies the problem.

    We chose to ignore the oil crisis brought on by the Arab Israeli war in the 70s and actually became more energy dependent during the past three decades as we increased our consumption and imports to provide for our power hunger lifestyles.

    Goal number one should be energy independence for both our country and our person.

    Goal number two should be reducing the amount of fossil fuel and increasing the amount of renewables until fossil fuel is eliminated. If anything goes offshore it should be windmills or solar platforms not oil rigs.

    Lest you think this is a pipe dream, this is exactly what the Danes did in a much harsher climate. They were 95% imported energy dependent in 1973. They are now 100% energy independent with over 30% coming from wind. Their 25 year goal is to increase the renewables to 75% and reduce fossil fual to 25%. Here is a video link that describes their version of an off shore rig.

    http://ms.arkena.com/launch/?k=12070516022888d706b8605df274f3ba929bd52e57aaa41050&e=false

    Bob used the word conservative and that root word is conserve. More of the solution lies in all of conserving rather than increased production . We simply have to make a choice to do so as individuals.

    Can you have your cake and eat it too? Perhaps, but conserving is not as hard as you think and does not mean a diminution of lifestyle.

    There is something rotten in the U.S. and that something is oil.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bilbray supports offshore drilling. Most people along the coast, don't.

    Dan Dalager wrote two or three letters to the editor supporting Bilbray. I wish we could vote Dalager out this coming November. We're stuck with him for two more years, but we can get Bilbray out.

    Comment number one, to which JP responded, sounds like Jerome Stocks and Bilbray supporters wrote it.

    The biggest user of oil in the U.S. is the military. Cut back on the war and our "occupation" or "engagement" in Iraq, and we could cut way down on demand for oil.

    Also, the price is being driven up by speculators, in the commodities market. I feel our natural resources should be regulated, like our utilities, and the head of the oil corporations should not be making obscene profits, as they are, now.

    ReplyDelete
  13. A report just out this morning forecasts oil demand will INCREASE by 50 % by 2015.

    GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    The DEMAND INCREASE will come from other nations NOT THE USA. WE CAN NOT CONSERVE ENOUGH TO COUNTER THE INCREASE IN WORLD DEMAND.

    FOR YOU ENVIRFREAKS, DEMAND MEANS BURNT OIL. Time to come up with a different approach to global change. Think global, ACT GLOBAL.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The USA has the most efficient economy in the world.

    China and India will dwarf the USA very soon in terms of fossil fuel consumption. I forgot, China already exceeds the USA!

    Just wait until China's people start to build wealth and want to become consumers. China is the worlds biggest fossil fuel monster.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I am an Old School GOP and I am absolutely against any off shore oil drilling along CA coast line.

    I despise Bush, McCain, Bilbray and Stocks. They are not true GOP. They are the only thing worse than a insurance salesman or Realtor, they are pure turncoat politicians.


    Thanks JP. Great post.

    ReplyDelete
  16. A bunch of fools...June 25, 2008 9:36 PM

    I am watching the CC meeting on Cox and this lunatic Maggie Houlihan is making a total fool of herself. She is trying to find a reason to disapprove the Walgreens pharmacy so she goes on and on about drive thru traffic and idling cars... What a moron, no one idles their cars anymore, too expensive. I do drive thru banking and while it tkes less than a minute, I kill my motor to save gas. The people using the drive thru at Walgreens will do the same. Also, many elderly use drive thru because it is simpler than finding a parking place and then using a walker or wheel chair.
    What an idiot!!! I'm embarrassed to have her as a council person representing this city.

    Now Bonds is making a total fool of himself telling stories out his wife sending him to Henry's and he got lost. What idiots we have on the CC. God help this city!!

    This is too much for me to take, I'm going to bed, what a bunch of fools.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The ECC is against the Walgreens and they are never against anything so it must really really really suck.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I love Maggie.

    I think you better go to bed and hopefully wake up with a more open mind.

    The old folks need to get out and walk more to regain some health. Drive thrus are sooooo stinkin

    Sitting on your ass all day makes you fat, lazy and more likely to act like a grumpy sick old person.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am so glad gas prices are going up. It has resulted in several terrific things.

    1, No more gridlock on I5.

    2. Much less people joyriding in the ultra wasteful bigtire 4 wheel drives.

    Good times are coming and Americans are finally starting to change their habits for the better.

    Let the Chinese and Indians do as they may. We will continue to adapt and use less oil.

    Finally we are starting to realize that bigger does not mean better. Tomorrow is a brighter day for America!

    I love you all,

    Z

    ReplyDelete
  20. With Barth and Houlihan in opposition Stocks, Bond and Dalager have decided to put the 2% sand tax on the ballot with Steve Aceti tasked to lead the iniative. Writing the ballot argument will be Dalager, Bond, Aceti and Doug Long in his role as Parks and Recreation Commission Chair.

    I guess I'm going to help Joe Sheffo craft the statement in opposition.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Joe Sheffo looked good tonight. And Bob Nanninga and Rachelle Collier.

    Maggie voted right on not doing another ballot proposition for TOT sand taxes for short term rentals under three units.

    She voted unwisely on the Walgreens issue, despite stating good arguments against it in terms of parking, and what has been recommended by other cities and environmental agencies.

    Jerome was rude and patronizing, smug, as usual. He was also dictatorial, putting something on the agenda, the TOT ballot issue, trying to claim that staff was "directed by Council," to bring it back, when it was only Sneaky Stocks.

    Jerome lets the sunshine law, the administrative policy manual languish, only to be addressed when he's good and ready.

    Also, I didn't hear any report out of either closed session. And why were the TWO closed sessions begun at 2:30, SDWD, and 3:00, Council? When did they report back on the SDWD closed session, just before 3:00? No one can attend that early.

    We all know, Council is not REQUIRED to have a closed session to discuss anticipated litigation, but it may; this is allowed, by the Brown Act. So, when two different lawsuits are being considered, there is no reason that the public cannot weigh in before using taxpayer money to initiate expensive lawsuits become a "done deal."

    ReplyDelete
  22. conservatives today,are oxyMORONS, they conserve nothing for the future generations but our trash, debt and bankrupt culture. thx you A-hole republicans, like jerome stocks and maggie houlihan(oh yes she voted for the walgreens) and on all issues concerning business she seems to be on the side of big business not the voters of encinitas

    ReplyDelete
  23. DRILL, DRILL, DRILL. Drill everywhere we can. Build refineries. Build nuclear power plants. This all helps.

    Change the law and require SDG&E to buy from homeowners excess energy they produce. This would encourage many people to put solar on their roofs.

    Build more desal plants. We have more water than we could drink but a few pinheads are stopping us from using the ocean to sustain our communities.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I will be voting yes on the short term sand tax. I hope they make it 5%. We would have more money to maintain our Ciyt from the people exploiting Encinita's character for personal profit.

    Bobs statements make it a strike against him and Sheffo. It shows they look at the big picture well.

    I find it hilarious that the Republicans are voting for the tax and the Demos are voting against it. It shows how unique our community really is.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Bob, Thanks for volunteering to do the statement against the TOT. As you know, there were volumes written against the tax leading up to the last election. Mike Andreen's comments to NCT regarding the necessity of another 2% are also pertinent.

    Do you know the deadline for opposition statement submission?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Of course everyone should pay thier fair share, My argument is not against the 2% Tax. My opposion is about procedure and policy.

    Sand Replentishment is an anti-environment boondoggle.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Walker- The deadline for the opposition statement is technially July 30th. The city will have it's pro tax argument to the city Clerk of July 3rd. We will look at it, and craft a response within the week.

    Walker if you would like to be a part of the discussion you are of course welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think it's funny how the right wing am radio screamers have convinced people that drilling in Anwar and off the coast will make us energy independent. Achieving independence would require major conservation and investment in nuclear, coal, wind and solar power.

    Nuclear power: what to do with that nasty waste?

    Coal: major air pollution.

    Wind: works on small regional levels. Kills raptors and other birds.

    Solar: Excellent except for one thing, you can't store it so you have to switch to another energy source at night.

    The USA imports oil from:

    #1 Canada
    #2 Mexico
    #3 Saudi Arabia

    2 out of 3 of those countries are fellow north American scum! ha.

    ReplyDelete
  29. just wondering??June 26, 2008 11:07 AM

    Bob, if everyone should pay their fair share is it safe to ask if you support a flat tax??

    ReplyDelete
  30. Just Wondering - I totally support a flat tax. Fair and equal right? What do you think is a "fair" flat tax?

    ReplyDelete
  31. thats simple

    Flat tax on sales tax....

    On everything the same.

    Food, cars, airplanes, boats, cigs, booze.......


    the spenders pay more....

    reward those that save

    everyone pays the same tax when they spend.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oil rigs -- if they ever are built you can bet they won't be visible from the politicos and developer's ocean front homes.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I am very open to a greatly simplified tax system. My problem with flat sales (or value added) tax is that is regressive by nature. Poor people generally spend almost all their income on consumer goods. Many spend more than their income by increasing debt. More well-off people save and invest. Therefore, the poor are taxed on ~100% of their income while well-off folks are not. I am against punishing the rich, but punishing the poor is certainly not right either. I would like to see tax system that could be explained on a one-page document.

    ReplyDelete
  34. A flat sales tax is the most fair for poor people.

    Rich people don't have a income they report. Only poor working people do.

    Rich people currently pay anywhere between 1% to 5% per year of their true income per year. While some middle class renters pay 28%.

    Poor people can survive on a lot less. The "poor" in America live like movie stars compared to the common folk in 90% of the world.

    More people need to travel to understand how things truly are around the world.

    the saddest thing that I see time and time again is Americas misreading on happiness……money and material things have nothing to do with happiness. Freedom and self respect make people happy. I see folks that don't have shoes and work 12 hours per day smiling 90% of the day.

    In America, I also see fat people sitting on their butt, expecting others to care for them and tree them like snoop dog.

    Welfare kills. Stop the hand outs including rent control, food stamps, and rent subsidies and give people back their dignity and the ability to be happy.

    This is why the entire democratic platform is broken. The "Donkeys" expect the government to take care of everything. The Donkeys need to read Animal Farm.

    ReplyDelete
  35. PS-

    the republicans are worse. The just spend all of Americas future on bombing and occupying other nations.

    ReplyDelete
  36. A flat tax is too simple, too realistic and harmful to existing businesses. As this country has become a corporation for the corporation and by the corporation, a tax on use will gouge into the luxury item market -- which after all is most of what Americans buy -- TVs, booze, cigs, Ipods, cell phones, etc. And, these commodities cost the most to produce -- fiscal sense does not the Congress wield.

    ReplyDelete
  37. It is undisputed that bush was "elected" by all the blue religiously repressed and ideologically constipated states --and they just happen to be the states that receive the most federal funds -- now who is promoting a welfare state?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Old School GOPJune 28, 2008 8:19 PM

    Bush is the Devil.

    No human could be so bad on every level.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Flat tax. What?

    Think of all that senseless paper work that wouldn't need to be filled out.

    Think about all those hours spent each year by every citizen making a meager living.

    Think about all those CPA and sucklets and Lawyers who make their living on income tax laws.

    Think of all those workfare federal employees at the IRS that would no longer have a job.

    I agree. Flat tax make to much sense. It could never happen in America. The land of the fat backward ass lazy fool.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on our blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.