• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn

Anomalism

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
2,159
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."
 
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."

Once again, in the end there's a dimes thickness of difference between the two parties.
 
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."

I have it on good authority that Obama has drawn a red line against this and other catastrophic event.
 
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."

Interesting that it is a European company awarded the deal.
 
More evidence of the anti-science, anti-progress, anti-man, extremist left. (If anyone still doubted their existence)
 
More evidence of the anti-science, anti-progress, anti-man, extremist left. (If anyone still doubted their existence)

You got everything correct except the extremist left.
How's it feel to already know that when YER posting this lie ?
 
Any individual point on the list you wanted special attention given to?

Moratorium on drilling for oil off shore.

Cutting gas and oil subsidies

No new refineries

No drilling in ANWR

Set goal of 25% renewables by 2025

There's a few.
 
You got everything correct except the extremist left.
How's it feel to already know that when YER posting this lie ?

Huh?? Perhaps you are just to far out on the left to recognize the Chicken Little extremist wackos around you.
 
Moratorium on drilling for oil off shore.

Cutting gas and oil subsidies

No new refineries

No drilling in ANWR

Set goal of 25% renewables by 2025

There's a few.

I will read those. Thx
 
Focus on the environmental effects of extracting shale oil in your own backyard first.
 
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."

HOLY ****!!!! DANGER in real life? Ya know, you shouldn't take showers, falling in the shower is a leading cause of injury in home.
 
Moratorium on drilling for oil off shore.

Cutting gas and oil subsidies

No new refineries

No drilling in ANWR

Set goal of 25% renewables by 2025

There's a few.
Hammering the poor into even further poverty by making life cost more to assuage your green guilt... Wow, why you hate the poor?
 
Oil wins every time.

Letting Shell drill in Arctic could lead to catastrophic oil spill, experts warn | Environment | The Guardian

"Environmental groups and experts hit out at the US government on Tuesday following its announcement that the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell would be allowed to resume offshore exploration and drilling in the Arctic’s American waters. Unforgiving conditions in the Arctic’s icy waters not only make the chances of a spill likely, the complete lack of infrastructure in place to deal with a potential disaster means the consequences of the move could be calamitous, environmental activists and experts say.

According to a study published in February by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the same regulatory governmental agency that yesterday issued its approval of Shell’s Chukchi Sea exploration plan, the chances of one or more oil spills occurring as a result of drilling in the Arctic over the next 77 years are 75%. In open water or broken ice, the same study says that between 44% and 62% of crude oil resulting from a spill would stay put – neither dispersing nor evaporating – after 30 days. “Yesterday’s announcement is inconsistent with the federal government’s commitment for stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, it is inconsistent with President Obama’s commitment to combat climate change, and it is a clear prioritization of Shell’s needs ahead of the protection of one of our most important natural resources,” said Michael LeVine, Oceana’s Pacific senior counsel."
Of course it could, of course drilling could lead to a spill. Having sex can lead to pregnancy, too.
 
Hammering the poor into even further poverty by making life cost more to assuage your green guilt... Wow, why you hate the poor?

It's fossil fuels that are the scourge, we should have been on renewables long ago. 35 wrecking years of Reaganomics is what's been hurting the poor, and declining the middle class. That's where the contempt is.
 
Of course it could, of course drilling could lead to a spill. Having sex can lead to pregnancy, too.

Because oil spills and pregnancy are equal catastrophes.
 
It's fossil fuels that are the scourge, we should have been on renewables long ago. 35 wrecking years of Reaganomics is what's been hurting the poor, and declining the middle class. That's where the contempt is.

Seeing how the middle class flourished under Reagan along with the poorer classes history revisionism won't help you.
the utter decline on the middle class has come at the hands of liberals and their anti-prosperity mantra.

as liberals continue to push regulations after regulation and the cost to do business goes up the middle class will continue to hurt.
the problem isn't so much the middle class as it is the lower incomes moving up into the middle class.

that is what you saw in the 80's a huge movement from the lower levels to the middle. since then those in the middle class have moved up.
Yes, the middle class has been disappearing, but they haven't fallen into the lower class, they've risen into the upper class - AEI | Carpe Diem Blog » AEIdeas

however the lower incomes won't move upward till they get the job skills and knowledge to move into the middle class.
high school diploma's and working at mcdonald's won't do it and never will.
 
It's fossil fuels that are the scourge, we should have been on renewables long ago. 35 wrecking years of Reaganomics is what's been hurting the poor, and declining the middle class. That's where the contempt is.

Problem there is they sound great but in the real world they represent the economics of the mad house
 
Open up ANWR to drilling.
 
Problem there is they sound great but in the real world they represent the economics of the mad house

Yes, that was my point, and those Reagan economics are still hurting us.
 
Back
Top Bottom