US Energy Policy... - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

The Brandon Five · 03-23-2011, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Why be independent when you can outsource money and jobs for someone else's fuel.

Obama: Drill, Brazil, Drill! - Investors.com

Obama: Drill, Brazil, Drill!

Posted 03/21/2011 07:08 PM ET

Energy Policy: While leaving U.S. oil and jobs in the ground, our itinerant president tells a South American neighbor that we'll help it develop its offshore resources so we can one day import its oil. WHAT?!?

Can one of the Obama-soxers on here explain this? Why help Brazil to drill if it is an environmental risk?

Titus Pullo · 03-25-2011, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

Follow the money. Connect the dots.

Being the loyal Republican that you so obviously are, you'd be wise to not go there.

Following the money trail and connecting dots? Are you quite serious?

Why don't you just TELL us you're going to throw nothing but sweet 85 mph fastballs down the middle-in portion of the plate. Should go well for your ERA.

Titus Pullo · 03-25-2011, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Can one of the Obama-soxers on here explain this? Why help Brazil to drill if it is an environmental risk?

Because the global economy absolutely MUST have it? Just a wild guess. Same with Deepwater Horizon, same with occupying Iraq, same with strip mining Alberta, same with hydraulic fracking. It's interesting to me that so many people still can not get their head around this reality.

Not saying it's ethical, just stating it for what it is.

Oh, and that "environmental risk" you mentioned? That'll be coming here too, worry not. Poison water tables in middle-America be damned.

You news hounds here caught that second new spill discovered in our Gulf this week, as confirmed by the Coast Guard? I mean, if you snoozed on Fukushima and Libya all week, you may have missed it.

***reflexblue*** · 03-25-2011, 07:59 AM

Whats this policy that you speak of?

***patsfan13*** · 03-25-2011, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titus Pullo

Being the loyal Republican that you so obviously are, you'd be wise to not go there.

Following the money trail and connecting dots? Are you quite serious?

Why don't you just TELL us you're going to throw nothing but sweet 85 mph fastballs down the middle-in portion of the plate. Should go well for your ERA.

Ok genius, why are we subidizing oil driling for Brazil with borrowed money and cutting off our own supplies of fossil fuels?

The Brandon Five · 03-25-2011, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titus Pullo

Because the global economy absolutely MUST have it? Just a wild guess. Same with Deepwater Horizon, same with occupying Iraq, same with strip mining Alberta, same with hydraulic fracking. It's interesting to me that so many people still can not get their head around this reality.

So the global economy doesn't need the oil from the Gulf of Mexico?

Quote:

Not saying it's ethical, just stating it for what it is.

I'd settle for logical.

Quote:

Oh, and that "environmental risk" you mentioned? That'll be coming here too, worry not. Poison water tables in middle-America be damned.

Not sure what fracking has to do with offshore drilling, other than less drilling creates more demand for fracking.

Quote:

You news hounds here caught that second new spill discovered in our Gulf this week, as confirmed by the Coast Guard? I mean, if you snoozed on Fukushima and Libya all week, you may have missed it.

Your right. We are too easily distracted by minor events like a natural disaster of biblical proportions, a possible nuclear meltdown and our participation in another military action.

***reflexblue*** · 03-25-2011, 10:40 AM

A possibility, and we need to be up there with China exploring Thorium reactors as an alternative to Uranium based Nuclear.

Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium - Telegraph

If China’s dash for thorium power succeeds, it will vastly alter the global energy landscape and may avert a calamitous conflict over resources as Asia’s industrial revolutions clash head-on with the West’s entrenched consumption.

China’s Academy of Sciences said it had chosen a “thorium-based molten salt reactor system”. The liquid fuel idea was pioneered by US physicists at Oak Ridge National Lab in the 1960s, but the US has long since dropped the ball.

“The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert.
If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.

There is no chain reaction Fission ceases as soon as the Photon Beam is shut off.

***patsfan13*** · 03-25-2011, 01:33 PM

Meanwhile while we shut down a lot of our coal reserves and now we are shipping our resources off the India and China.

Climate Law Blog Blog Archive Carbon Offshoring: India, China buying U.S. coal mines, shale gas fields, LNG terminals

Quote:

It is not alone. Reliance Industries, also of India, bought a $3.4bn stake in three U.S. shale gas companies earlier this year. In March, India’s Essar Group acquired Trinity Coal for $600mn; the company has active mines in Kentucky and West Virginia. China’s ENN Energy Trading, a subsidiary of one of China’s largest natural gas companies, signed a preliminary purchase agreement in early November with Cheniere Energy for 20 years of processing capacity at Cheniere’s Sabine Pass LNG terminal, located on the border of Louisiana and Texas. And China National Offshore Oil Corporation Ltd. (CNOOC) agreed in October to pay up to $2.16bn for a 33.3 percent stake in Chesapeake Energy’s interest in the Eagle Ford shale play. The deal, if concluded, would represent the largest Chinese investment ever in the US energy sector.

Port plans include Wyoming's Powder River Basin coal

Quote:

Peabody Energy has completed a deal to ship Powder River Basin coal to Asia via a planned export terminal in northwest Washington.
The deal with Seattle-based SSA Marine will allow St. Louis-based Peabody to ship up to 24 million metric tons of coal per year via the Gateway Pacific Terminal near Ferndale, Wash.
The port would be Peabody’s West Coast hub for exporting Powder River Basin coal to Asian markets, Peabody said in a media release Monday.
It’s the largest West Coast export deal so far for coal mining companies with interests in Wyoming.

***reflexblue*** · 03-25-2011, 02:42 PM

I heard we're selling the Great Lakes to China too.

Titus Pullo · 03-25-2011, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

So the global economy doesn't need the oil from the Gulf of Mexico?

How in God's name do you get a conclusion that asks that question from what I typed?

It needs oil from EVERY conceivable location. That's why it's raping land and sea to get to it. When it comes to global trade and lubing the system, there are NO nations anymore. It is a fungible commodity, and it can't be horded.

(yet)