Crisis in the Gulf is the fault of Environmentalists!

Not to interrupt you dickswingers, but the fact remains that Dixie is 100% full of shit.

you are one of the treehuggers who are in denial. He may not be 100% correct but he's way closer than you libtards. Billions upon billions of safe easy barrells are not in play due to liberal strongholds for political posturing and nimby and nothing else. Thats factual, go ahead and let your emotions dictate your position on this. Please ride a bike to your next protest.:clink:
 
you are one of the treehuggers who are in denial. He may not be 100% correct but he's way closer than you libtards. Billions upon billions of safe easy barrells are not in play due to liberal strongholds for political posturing and nimby and nothing else. Thats factual, go ahead and let your emotions dictate your position on this. Please ride a bike to your next protest.:clink:

It may be NIMBYism on the part of Florida (the only portion of the Gulf that has ever been under moratorium) but it isn't tree-hugging environmentalists keeping oil companies from drilling off the Florida coast, it's Florida politicians who understand that tourism dollars are better than petrodollars.

There are shitloads of shallow water leases for drilling that oil companies now own and they choose to drill where they choose to drill based on economics, period.

Here's a map of leaseholds in the Gulf:

http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/lsesale/mau_gom_pa.pdf
 
It may be NIMBYism on the part of Florida (the only portion of the Gulf that has ever been under moratorium) but it isn't tree-hugging environmentalists keeping oil companies from drilling off the Florida coast, it's Florida politicians who understand that tourism dollars are better than petrodollars.

There are shitloads of shallow water leases for drilling that oil companies now own and they choose to drill where they choose to drill based on economics, period.

Here's a map of leaseholds in the Gulf:

http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/lsesale/mau_gom_pa.pdf

thanks for making my point, 1/3 of the Gulf being off limits because of tourism. that's billions of barrells.
 
That may be your point, but it isn't Dixie's dumbassitude.

LOL'z
if you losely apply treehugger to beach lover he's 100% correct. The same billions of barrels are off virgina and Cali too.

Again, Dixie is way more correct than you libtards.:pke:
 
thanks for making my point, 1/3 of the Gulf being off limits because of tourism. that's billions of barrells.

It's just as likely that Republican politicians in FL put these restrictions in place as it is the result of turbolib treehuggers. Tourism is FL's lifeblood. Not having rigs near a beach is a common sense economic measure.

I'd love to know the history of the legislation putting the regulations in place (haven't been able to find anything detailed online).
 
It's just as likely that Republican politicians in FL put these restrictions in place as it is the result of turbolib treehuggers. Tourism is FL's lifeblood. Not having rigs near a beach is a common sense economic measure.

I'd love to know the history of the legislation putting the regulations in place (haven't been able to find anything detailed online).

Yes, I incorrectly labeled all treehuggers as libs. There are conservitard treehuggers too. Though you'd agree it's much more a dem infliction than repub.
 
Yes, I incorrectly labeled all treehuggers as libs. There are conservitard treehuggers too. Though you'd agree it's much more a dem infliction than repub.

Fiscal responsibility to your state's economy has nothing at all to do with treehugging.
 
Fiscal responsibility to your state's economy has nothing at all to do with treehugging.

one man's fiscal conservative is another's treehugger.


Newsflash: Being independent of foriegn oil is a strategic goal we are getting farther away from year by year. Ignoring billions of barrels is not a good strategy to achieve that goal. LOL
 
one man's fiscal conservative is another's treehugger.


Newsflash: Being independent of foriegn oil is a strategic goal we are getting farther away from year by year. Ignoring billions of barrels is not a good strategy to achieve that goal. LOL

Newsflash: the accident in the Gulf is unlikely to ease restrictions on offshore drilling, or renew calls of "drill, baby, drill!" I was a big supporter of offshore, and now, I am not. I doubt I'm the only one.

This accident is BS. It highlights the "drill first, ask questions later" mentality of the oil industry.
 
Newsflash: the accident in the Gulf is unlikely to ease restrictions on offshore drilling, or renew calls of "drill, baby, drill!" I was a big supporter of offshore, and now, I am not. I doubt I'm the only one.

This accident is BS. It highlights the "drill first, ask questions later" mentality of the oil industry.

what a mental midget tool. Unfortunatley there are plenty more like you.


So we should shift the risk to 3rd world countries that have next to no response capability. NICE so let change NIMBY to NIMC for country LOLZ
 
what a mental midget tool. Unfortunatley there are plenty more like you.


So we should shift the risk to 3rd world countries that have next to no response capability. NICE so let change NIMBY to NIMC for country LOLZ

I've never seen someone so blindly in love with oil & the oil industry. It's like you have a crush on oil.
 
I've never seen someone so blindly in love with oil & the oil industry. It's like you have a crush on oil.

well I've gotten rich while working in it for 25 years, we give you cheap gas and billions in royalties.

Name a great economic power that doesn't have oil?
 
LOL'z
if you losely apply treehugger to beach lover he's 100% correct. The same billions of barrels are off virgina and Cali too.

Again, Dixie is way more correct than you libtards.:pke:


Let's visit what that jackass Dixie said:

But it's important to remember the reason this catastrophe is so impossible to deal with. The rig was located some 50 miles offshore, in water a mile deep. Why do we have oil rigs 50 miles out into the ocean? Well, because, when people go visit the lovely beaches of Mississippi and Louisiana, they certainly don't want to see those eyesore rigs on the horizon! Environmentalists insisted that if we drill in the Gulf, it has to be far enough out that no one can visually see them from the coast. It is because we allowed this regulated restriction, that we have an impossible problem on our hands now.

If the rig explosion happened on dry land, it could have been capped almost immediately, with very minimal ecological damage. If the rig had been located on the northern slope of Alaska, it could have been capped by the end of the day, and again, with very little (if any) ecological damage. Even in the worst case scenario, in Alaska, the damage would have been to a few seals and otters, not the entire economic livelihood of thousands of fishermen and shrimpers, and not to our pristine wetlands in the bayou. We also look to the fact that other forms of energy production have been hindered by these same environmentalists. We haven't built a nuclear power plant in 30 years.

So when we are all running around pointing the fingers of blame at BP, Big Oil, or even the Federal Government for failing to have a plan to deal with this, we must remember that at least a portion of the blame goes to the environmentalists, who refuse to allow much safer drilling elsewhere. If not for their activism, we probably wouldn't ever have an oil rig 50 miles out at sea in the Gulf of Mexico in the first place.


All that claptrap there is bullshit.

There are few restrictions on drilling off the shores of Mississippi and Louisiana. Check out the lease map that I posted. So, Dixie is full of shit and has no idea what he is talking about.

There are leased areas in close proximity to the shores of Mississippi and Louisiana and the oil companies, not the government or environmentalists, decide which leased areas they want to drill in. The site of the catastrophe was selected for drilling because it has a lot of oil and for no other reason.

Dixie was 100% wrong.
 
Let's visit what that jackass Dixie said:




All that claptrap there is bullshit.

There are few restrictions on drilling off the shores of Mississippi and Louisiana. Check out the lease map that I posted. So, Dixie is full of shit and has no idea what he is talking about.

There are leased areas in close proximity to the shores of Mississippi and Louisiana and the oil companies, not the government or environmentalists, decide which leased areas they want to drill in. The site of the catastrophe was selected for drilling because it has a lot of oil and for no other reason.

Dixie was 100% wrong.


your a stubborn retard, 1/3 of the are is Offshore florida. That's been totally closed for 30 years = billions of barrells and trillions of dollars sent to your buddies in the middle east ya freaking terrorist supporter.
 
your a stubborn retard, 1/3 of the are is Offshore florida. That's been totally closed for 30 years = billions of barrells and trillions of dollars sent to your buddies in the middle east ya freaking terrorist supporter.


I'm not arguing with you, cochese. Relax. Dixie is a dumbass and has no clue what he's talking about. You may be raising legitimate issues, but that doesn't make Dixie right.
 
No worries I just try to bring some reasonableness to my democratic brothers when it comes to oil. It's 100% very legitimate to say we'd drill less deep if we had access to the billions of barrells in the Fl, Ca, and east coast shelf areas.
 
That's because we're addicted to oil. You going to be the one brave enough to tell all those rednecks out there their going to either pay $5/gallon gas or give up their F150's? Not me brother! I aint that brave! LOL

Yeah.

I drive a big gas guzzler. It seemed reasonable out in Cali, where I rode BART and my motorcycle most places. I wanted the truck for the occasional trip into the mountains. Also, because women kept kicking me out and I wanted to be able to pack my shit up and move, if necessary. I moved on the motorcycle one time. That was a bitch and I probably used as much gas (due to having to take multiple trips) as I would have in the truck. Now, there is not much use for it, but since I work from home I drive a lot less than most. Still, I am hoping to get rid of it. I'd get another motorcycle, but it is just too damn hot and too many violent rainstorms here, to make it practical.

Some people have better reasons for a big vehicle and if they want to pay for it, fine.

I wish you guys would not use that "addicted" stuff. It's not an addiction, it's currently the best, almost only, choice (due partly to pushing the real cost onto others). When another viable option comes along the only people who are going to miss oil will be a few statists who will promptly demand subsidies for historical preservation. :)
 
Yeah.

I drive a big gas guzzler. It seemed reasonable out in Cali, where I rode BART and my motorcycle most places. I wanted the truck for the occasional trip into the mountains. Also, because women kept kicking me out and I wanted to be able to pack my shit up and move, if necessary. I moved on the motorcycle one time. That was a bitch and I probably used as much gas (due to having to take multiple trips) as I would have in the truck. Now, there is not much use for it, but since I work from home I drive a lot less than most. Still, I am hoping to get rid of it. I'd get another motorcycle, but it is just too damn hot and too many violent rainstorms here, to make it practical.

Some people have better reasons for a big vehicle and if they want to pay for it, fine.

I wish you guys would not use that "addicted" stuff. It's not an addiction, it's currently the best, almost only, choice (due partly to pushing the real cost onto others). When another viable option comes along the only people who are going to miss oil will be a few statists who will promptly demand subsidies for historical preservation. :)
You're in denial my addict friend. We might have to do an oil intervention and send you to gasoline rehab!! :eek:
 
Back
Top