>> ^rougy:

You're still a fucking idiot.
The solar industry isn't going to spill millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
The solar industry isn't going to leave radioactive waste piling up all over the place for generations to have to deal with in the future.
Why don't you go kick a Palestinian; you know it makes you feel better.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^rougy:
The nuclear industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that nuclear power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think, for the ubiquitous public-power perspective, there are cleaner alternatives well worth exploring and developing.

The solar power industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that solar power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think... I question if you thought this post through. Unless you were trolling, in which case well done and you caught me, again.



Solar panels have more toxic materials in them than batteries, and generally include a large quantity of actual batteries as part of any installation as well. If you replace our entire grid with solar your going to have an enormous load of toxic waste to dispose of on a more regular basis than any nuclear plant(they can go decades between fuel loads depending on how you build them). Or do you somehow expect a solar mega-corp to be more responsible for some reason?

You're still a fucking idiot.

The solar industry isn't going to spill millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

The solar industry isn't going to leave radioactive waste piling up all over the place for generations to have to deal with in the future.

Why don't you go kick a Palestinian; you know it makes you feel better.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^rougy:
The nuclear industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that nuclear power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think, for the ubiquitous public-power perspective, there are cleaner alternatives well worth exploring and developing.

The solar power industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that solar power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think... I question if you thought this post through. Unless you were trolling, in which case well done and you caught me, again.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'BP, Boom, Booming' to 'BP, Boom, Booming, Gulf of Mexico, Oil Spill, Cleanup, Sloppy' - edited by littledragon_79

>> ^blankfist:

Do you mind citing?


I did some figurin' using ANWR's numbers, back when the Right was making a big stink about it, since it's the favorite one to get trotted out. At peak output (which it wouldn't reach for more than a decade if we opened it now), it would account for less than a million barrels a day -- ~0.5 to 1.0% of total global oil production (which is ~85 million barrels a day) and <5% of (current) US oil consumption (~20 million barrels a day).

If it were possible to exhume all of ANWR's estimated oil (7 billion barrels) in one go, it would last the United States one year.

So that's just ANWR--but what about all of the other off-limits places? Here's the EIA's report. In short: If the outer continental shelf were opened now, nothing much would change through 2030. There's an estimated (undiscovered) total of 50 billion barrels of oil that are currently off limits to drilling. Total US production would be 1.6% higher than the reference (no OCS drilling) projection for 2017-2030, and 3% in 2030. Finally,

Although a significant volume of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and natural gas resources is added in the OCS access case, conversion of those resources to production would require both time and money. In addition, the average field size in the Pacific and Atlantic regions tends to be smaller than the average in the Gulf of Mexico, implying that a significant portion of the additional resource would not be economically attractive to develop at the reference case prices.

More numbers: In 2008 the entire world produced ~26 billion barrels of oil and the US produced about 1.8 billion--which will stay essentially flat through 2030 even if we opened ANWR and the OCS to drilling.

The US's total proven oil reserves are about 21 billion barrels--maybe a total of ~120 if you go with estimated undiscovered oil--compared to 1200 billion (proven) for the entire world.

Sorry for some inconsistent numbers: Figures are from 2007, 2008, and 2009, so there are some inconsistencies there. I think I properly kept barrels per day lumped together and barrels per year lumped together.

But anyway: The US has a total of less than two percent of the world's proven oil reserves. We currently produce around 5-6% of oil. Oil is a commodity and gets sold on the world market; more than a fifth of US oil is exported even while we're using 4x as much as we produce. Opening protected areas to drilling would have a marginal impact on total US oil production and an even more marginal impact on world oil production.

Oil reserves.
ANWR oil reserves. Sorry for Wikipedia links--you can follow their citations.

Edit: I used this page too.

Obama halts deepwater oil drilling amid US soul-searching

By Chris Cermak May 28, 2010, 15:12 GMT

Washington - US President Barack Obama has taken a series of aggressive steps to limit drilling off coastlines as the US begins a period of deep soul-searching over the merits and risks of offshore drilling.

Obama on Thursday halted for at least six months exploratory oil drilling in deep waters off the Gulf of Mexico, the most significant long-term step yet in response to the massive oil spill off the southern US coastline.


Here's a big surprise. The media-shielded marxist orders a halt to a legal and vital capitalist enterprise.

oDumbo is a dictator already. Let's hope His Lowness doesn't put a moratorium on the November elections.

>> ^quantumushroom:

"Here's my question: Why are we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?
Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge...."
http://tinyurl.com/3afklpq
--Charles Krauthammer


I tried to rape her from the front but she said no. It's her own fault I had to rape her from behind.

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Here's my question: Why are we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?
Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge...."
http://tinyurl.com/3afklpq
--Charles Krauthammer


QM just wants the most negative votes ever on the Video Sift site. That is an accomplishment I reckon.

Why are oil thiefs out 5000 feet? For greed.

"Here's my question: Why are we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?

Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge...."

http://tinyurl.com/3afklpq

--Charles Krauthammer

Now if only we could get the gulf of mexico to fit inside that water bucket.

I agree, language ruined it.

On a related note, nobody cares about the environment so what is this even gonna do? People lost the ability to stand up for themselves a long, long time ago. "I don't live off the gulf of Mexico so I don't care"

Out of sight, out of mind...the mantra of the 21st century.

Could this be the answer to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?

VERY YES

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Fox News, British Petroleum, Oil, Gulf of Mexico, Litigious Americans, Dumbass' to 'Fox News, British Petroleum, Oil, Gulf of Mexico, Litigious Americans, Shep Smith' - edited by volumptuous

No problem

It's good to see use of the channel talks, there should be more stuff on those every day. And yeah, that Eco story is the biggest story in the world right now.

In reply to this comment by dotdude:
Thank you for the quality. 'Glad to know someone read it.

In reply to this comment by Deano:
*quality

Thank you for the quality. 'Glad to know someone read it.

In reply to this comment by Deano:
*quality

Your video, Animation Explaining The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.