I have a simple question — What do you think these environmental Marxists mean when they say we are going to reduce CO2 emissions by 50% below 1990 levels?
…
President Bush has lifted the Presidential Offshore Restriction, placed on offshore exploration and production in 1990, by President Bush.
President George W. Bush said today he’s lifting a presidential ban on drilling for oil and natural gas on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, setting up a showdown with Congress over a separate ban it put in place in the 1980s.
“Today I’ve taken every step within my power to allow offshore exploration of the OCS,” Bush said in a statement at the White House. “This means the only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action by the U.S. Congress.”
Democratic leaders in both houses of Congress rejected the president’s call, saying the move to end the moratorium would have no effect on prices and better options are available.
And that is the problem, isn’t it? The Democrat Marxists don’t want you to have the energy you need for your growth, the economy’s growth, and America’s growth. I never thought I would see the day that Americans stood in the way of their country, but we are there now. Environmental Marxism, it’s full impact is being felt and that is not a good plan for America.
The Institute For Energy Research has the Details.
IER president Thomas Pyle issued the following statement:
“The president is eliminating one of the largest barriers standing in the way of new energy supplies, but the biggest one still remains, and it lies in the hands of the Congress,” Pyle said. “Fortunately, we appear to be nearing the end of nearly three decades of short-sighted, one-size-fits-all policies that restrict access to domestic supplies despite explosive global demand. The lack of a commonsense offshore energy policy has placed this country in economic and strategic peril. Ending these bans will send a strong signal to the rest of the world that America is finally getting serious about producing more of its own energy.”
Federal law has prohibited American energy production on most of the OCS since 1982. With President Bush’s rescinding of the executive moratorium today, the only ban that remains is known as the Congressional Moratorium. It comes in the form of an annual appropriations rider in Congress, which expires – and must be renewed – every year. Congress has enacted OCS energy bans every year since 1981.
Now if we will only get moving and start building nuclear power plants and revitalizing our power grid, we would be in fine shape in 5 years. We need a Manhattan project to get more supply of American energy. That’s the one good thing that McCain has said, build nuclear power plants, he just didn’t go far enough — We should build 100s and we should get the regulation and environmental whacko path cleared for safe nuclear power. One act of Congress would do that, you think for a minute Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid would do that?
Vote Democrats out of office, for America’s future. The current economic problems have one cause, Democrats.
July 14, 2008 at 4:46 pm |
how about one of those Nuclear Plants goes in your backyard? I didn’t think so!
Oh by the way where do you intend to put all these Nuclear plants as they need enormous amounts of water to cool (and keep them safe) yet where there is water, there are people, hence back to my first point, are they going in your backyard.
Drought threatens safety of Nuclear Plant operations
Apparently, there is an infinite supply of uranium out there to supply these 100s of nuclear plants you want to build?
I guess wind & solar are not options for you for what reason exactly? Building wind turbines does not provide jobs? Solar powered electricity doesn’t provide electricity efficiently enough, while paying people to install them? Only oil that needs to be drilled, uranium mined, or coal burnt provides jobs?
So if Democrats are providing options and you want to label them Marxists, what does that make Republicans who only want one solution, Authoritarian Dictators?
Also, I fail to see the connection between oil drilling and nuclear plant construction. Are you advocating for hybrid electric cars or what exactly is all this nuclear generated electricity going to power, 15 widescreen TVs in every house?
July 14, 2008 at 6:58 pm |
Sorry you don’t know me, you can’t speak for me. — There are a few megawatt nuclear power reactors right down the road, less than 70 miles as the crow flies. They supply the base load for our area. There should be more, but they have been forced to build natural gas power gen-units since the anti-nuclear nuts have been blocking new nuclear power reactors. There are millions of people who live within 100 miles of this nuclear power station.
Nuclear fuel reprocessing solves lots of problems, the French have been doing it for decades. There is no world shortage of Uranium, and supply is adequate for future uses. Reprocessing extends that.
It’s the Congressional Democrat Marxists who have caused the crisis, been working on it for over 30 years, blocking the USA energy supply with the help of their environmental Marxists filing the lawsuits. I call them Marxists, because that’s what they are.
July 14, 2008 at 8:45 pm |
I am not fully against Nuclear, but it is not the full answer. It is federally subsidized as there is no Insurance company that will insure a Nuclear plant so the government has to do it. So are you all for private profit with socialized risk, as that is how it currently stands.
If we can subsidize (SOCIALISM) Oil, Natural Gas, Coal & Nuclear which do have inherent risks involved,(policing the world to ensure supply & transport of fuel, Nuclear waste & proliferation, pollution, etc.) why can we not subsidize an energy source that does not have risks involved?
As for democrats causing all these problems, why did Bush & the Republican controlled Congress in 2001 through 2006 NOT authorize offshore drilling when they controlled everything? Answer me this, otherwise you cannot lay blame completely on the Dems without taking some of the risk as well. Maybe it was because there was not enough profit to be taken by the corporations from the taxpayers?
So can we then call Republicans the corporate welfare specialists?
If reprocessing was a real solution, and yes it might extend useful life of fuel stocks, then why is Hanford Nuclear Reservation not a “gold mine” of reactor fuel?
From a purely neutral perspective, electricity can not be stored while Nuclear plants cannot “depower” at night when demand falls. What do you propose all this wasted energy goes to? Are you for or against the idea of electric cars hooked up to the grid to store up this energy during the night which is what some of these “Socialist” European countries are proposing to do. At present we do not have a hydrogen storage & delivery system, which would cost 100s of billions to implement, so hydrogen is not a fiscally viable option for this “wasted” nuclear output.