Yesterday, President Bush lifted the moratorium on offshore drilling. This has been in effect for many years and affects offshore areas on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, as well as parts of the Gulf of Mexico.
However, the action will not lead to increased production because Congress must agree to this action before the ban is actually lifted. We should not expect quick action because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi believes this is a “hoax.”
How high does the price of gasoline have to rise before Pelosi and her friends in Congress will take action? To their credit, U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA), U.S. Congressman Charlie Melancon (D-Napoleonville) and other sensible Democrats support lifting this moratorium.
While it has been estimated that this production will not be available for our use for many years, it is essential that we take some steps now. We should drill offshore, in ANWR, utilize oil shale and pursue nuclear energy and much more. I am not opposed to conservation or alternative sources of energy, but we should be doing everything within our disposal to become more energy self sufficient. It is galling that this country is dependent on OPEC and tyrants like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
Louisiana has contributed our resources for many decades. There has been drilling all over the Louisiana coast, both onshore and offshore. Other states need to carry some of this energy burden. It is time to forgo the demands of extreme environmentalists and start putting first the interests of our economy and our national security.
Everyone likes nice beaches, but these wells will be placed well outside of view from the coastline. There are also concerns about oil spills, but most spills come from the transport of oil, not when it is produced. Our domestic oil industry has done a tremendous job improving their operations to make it safer and more environmentally friendly, so many of these concerns are overblown.
According to U.S. Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA) lifting this moratorium will also benefit Louisiana. “If we have more drilling in the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) that will directly give us hundreds, if not thousands of new jobs,” said Scalise. The Congressman also believes that opening up these areas will help Louisiana restore our coast by boosting royalty payments to the state.
Offshore drilling will not only help Louisiana, it will help our entire country. We must breakthrough the congressional logjam to lift this moratorium. This should be an issue that Republicans make a top priority in the fall election. If not, they will receive a major political defeat and they will deserve to lose.
Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA and he is the host of a Louisiana based program, “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 7:30 p.m. Fri. and 10:00 p.m. Sun. on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station, and 7 till 11 a.m. weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans and the Northshore. For more information, visit his web site at www.ringsidepolitics.com. E-mail him at jeff@ringsidepolitics.com
*****************To cut its own dependence on oil, Puerto Rico's state-owned power utility is planning to boost investment in natural gas generators, wind, wave and other kinds of alternative energy, and has earmarked millions of dollars for wind power over the next 20 years, Jorge Rodriguez, executive director of Puerto Rico's power company, has said.***************** Now if Bobby J. was smart, he would be looking into export business of wind generation towers, and even wind generation technology there.... And of course for California........ Mono-rail technology, and some other relevant technology.... For the farm regions of the United States, Grain Bin technology................................
Written by
on 7/29/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Here! Hear! An astute observation worthy of meritorious encore...... So who will stand next and tell what is correct and prudent for all to be allowed to understand??? Written by
on 7/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I truly believe that most of those who are honest going into office, do not remain that way. Unless some radical change takes place in how our laws are enacted (and probably not even then) I see nothing improving for the citizenry of this country. Just an ever more expensive government who will spend us into penury and then point to “government reforms” (more governmental control over our lives that is) as the "solution" to the problems that they themselves have caused. Written by such will be this nation's fate
on 7/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Myself included KPF, who in the world do you think they got to finance them???? Well it is the voters who like scumbags to run things of course........... Mmmmmmm, scumbags, they aren't just for lunch anymore....................... Written by
on 7/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Don't knock the Chinese. I'm sure you've heard "...it's not rocket science" and "... it's not Chinese arithmetic." Well... think about this... THE CHINESE SPACE PROGRAM! These brilliant individuals do "rocket science" with "Chinese arithmetic." I for one am very, very impressed. Written by kpf
on 7/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh, and it is a Chinese consortium..... Written by
on 7/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
In Germany, Obama urges joint fight against terror .... By DAVID ESPO and DAVID RISING,..... Associated Press Writers...... 2 minutes ago..... BERLIN - Before the largest crowd of his campaign, Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama on Thursday summoned Europeans and Americans together to "defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it" as surely as they conquered communism a generation ago........................... Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!......... Here is a perfect example of the below KPF..... Here we got Rudy-Pootie Oblah-blah wandering around the world all magnanamous like trying to impress the rest of the idiots with his 'leadership' qualities...... I like this part of a speech he made while trying to rally support as he spoke to group of bored Germans best of all...".......as surely as they conquered communism a generation ago" Last I saw, those fuggin communists appear to own a rather substantial chunk of the U.S.A.......... Don't see where they are hurting too much... In fact, did you know that Russia is putting a majority of our satellite systems into space for us??? Crazy, crazy, crazy, crazy...... Oh well, at least we stopped short of selling NASA to them like we sold Budweiser to the Belgians, and Chrysler to the Germans..... I do believe the chit is bout ta hit da fans............................... I heard we are about to get a new housing mortage industry to take over the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae boondoggle... It is going to be called Frankly Woo..................
Written by
on 7/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
In fact, if we could by them for what they are worth, sell them for what they think they are worth and split the money down the middle, we would all probably end up making money......... Written by
on 7/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
And you are absolutely correct KPF, and I among many others hold the same sentiments.... But in many instances, I think the goofies that are defining the scale of 'tax' are simply out of touch with reality, and the more they try to either 'enrichen' theirselves, or make things more even whether it is through protectionist legislations, or as a means to even things out because they truely understand who is screwing who they simply seem to screw things up even worse... I suppose it all breaks on down to values and wisdom....... And even those things have their detractors that cause them to stumble.... Oh well...... Written by
on 7/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
My problem is not so much the "vehicle" (tariffs or whatever) used to protect American jobs or protect the consumer - or any other "good and noble" deed attempted by our congressmen. Rather it is their true motivation behind their professed goals. Often times (always?) I suspect the true motivating "end in mind" is to enrich those who grease their palms in the guise of "helping U.S. trade." I do see problems with unrestricted free trade - however since I doubt the sincerity of those empowered to regulate this trade - I'd rather see true free unrestricted trade, as then consumer would decide winners and losers instead of legislators who have been bought by those who benefit from the meddling with our markets. If we applied the "K.I.S.S." principle to taxes, tariffs and trade I would be more trusting than I am with the maze of lies and deceptions (our tax and trade laws, that is) that are now in place. Perhaps I am not trusting enough? Then again.... how many two-timing scoundrels in public office need to be uncovered before one mistrusts them all. Seems I reached that point long, long ago. Written by kpf,
on 7/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No KPF, I was specifically speaking of tariffs, not taxes… And I do not know why, but under free trade, tariffs are supposedly done away with???? Or their effects are severely diminished? This can extend to areas such as sovereign protection in certain areas, and then it no longer becomes a sovereign issue… And I am not bringing import quotas into the fray, which I suppose is another sector that free trade agreements have ‘done away with’…… For instance, dumping of Chinese shrimp and Chinese crawfish, or Chinese catfish on the American market…… Tariff/”infrastructure surcharges” would not only aid in the reduction of this, but would actually compliment conservation measures, fishery measures, and productivity while at the same time reducing costs to conduct the same market tasks here in the United States and thereby raising the profitability on the part of the commercial fisherman and the aquaculture industry…….. While still passing savings off to the consumer in real term means instead of an artificial lowering or prop of American fishery endeavors in the form of Government backed subsidies… As I see it now, basically goods can be imported into the United States ‘Tax free’? as a result of import quota reductions and packaged in the U.S. Great, we become a Nation of box stuffers…….. instead of Manufacturers because our base manufacturing costs remain artificially inflated as a result of a weak dollar and high energy costs among others…….. And we still assume the burden of infrastructure costs in a variety of forms, including low employment, and high cost of living…. The two are a cocktail for failure when mixed together…. Hence, a Greenspan induced recession which will end up as a depression should Japanese and Australian production/consumption markets collapse… European concerns are secondary in this equation……. Here in the U.S. we are handling riskier regions of the world where trade/exploration/market building is concerned, while China sits around and sucks on our teat………. They for all practical purposes sort of own us…….. I mean after all, give me a break, the Guv begging for 30 years (Ha-ha-ha-ha!) instead of 3 to pay back a measly 1.8 billion (Again,, Ha-ha-ha-ha! Because it is hardly ‘measly’) dollars after we have received HOW MUCH? And are expecting to receive even how much more???? Now take into account illegal immigrants from all sources, poor manufacturing prospects, and even worse, no stable job prospects and what do we have??? One major economic indicator “the new housing market” has to change its impact, or value when calculating out GNP…. Since we took on GNP as our value system, we errantly forgot to change what value definition is…. My Gawd the problems these college trained economists have wrecked on our Nation!!!! Written by ....................STRONGCONCRETE................
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I have no problem with the costs caused by imported goods being taxed - what I have a problem with is tariffs existing and changing solely due to the seniority level of someone in congress as opposed to "let's do what's best." Also I dislike the inconsistency of protecting some industries (for an unspecified time period) and not others. Consistency would say we either protect ALL American industries thru tariffs - all the time - or none, ever. Perhaps I am being unrealistic to think this would ever work - I am however realistic enough to know it would never be tried as "uncertainty" in governmental market controls is the raison d'être for much of the fawning lobbying that so enriches our legislators' pocketbooks and egos. Written by kpf
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, you have sort of lost me there.............. Price - cost - expenses - revenue - profit - value.................. I am not sure if you are applying the proper effects that each one of those headings evoke........... Doesn't really matter, I suppose that is a new Millennium approach to accounting.... Anyways, I will agree with you on the need of wind power....... Not going to get into value, profit, cost, expense...... But I will further the reason why I am in favor of wind power....... It is amazing the impact natural gas consumption has on our industry, on our economy, on our sale-ability.............. (Or in rough seas, ‘Sail-ability’..... Nayuck-nuck-nuck-nuck). But looking at it from a practical aspect... Once used, it is gone......... So the question is, would you rather use it to produce power to run an air conditioner in your home that gives no practical return above and beyond its initial consumptive means, or would you rather use it to produce a product that has "marketable value" thereby generating not only profit (hopefully) but additional jobs as well that generate more dollars that can be used in the market (No matter what its form) time and time again? Everything from plastics to fertilizer depends on natural gas………… And that is a big slice of the American economy…. And there you can haggle over the concepts of price, cost, and value………. After the smoke clears on those issues, you can then begin to consider profit……………… Wind power on the other hand are renewable resources that can compliment our current electrical generating and utilization needs and still accomplish the bonus effect of redirecting segments of current natural gas consumption reasoning’s and means into more positive, productive, and viable areas of use. Written by ....................STRONGCONCRETE................
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
KPF, your first post was 'right on spot' to a greater extent aside from the umbrella effects exerted by the USDA........... Next to the Treasury, and the DoD, it is probably one of the federal agencies that has the greatest effect on American policy both foreign and domestic in at least where total funding and practices can be concerned………… not going to nitpick on it but it does merit a rather large amount of scrutiny and evaluation on many courses it pursues…, However, your second observation…. “Tariffs and subsidies simply means that not only will you not have a job with high wages and good benefits but - in addition to that - prices are artificially inflated for the benefit of the few while being borne on the backs of the many??? A little iffy there.... Reasonable in theory, but in practical application......... not sound practice........ One hidden yet direct cost involved with importing goods and/or traffic from outside our borders is Homeland Security........ If ignored, there is still a reasonable expectation that the Cost, if ignored in one aspect will show its head in another, with a potentially higher Price than if it had been initially addressed............ It is in this realm that rather than a moniker of ‘Tariff’ that an “inspection or handling fee” be assessed to cover the costs involved with inspections and handling…….. Instead of the U.S. taxpayer paying for these costs….. We are already maintaining pretty much the most sophisticated defense system on the globe, as well as maintaining deployment infrastructure necessary to rapidly respond in aid to our allies defense whoever they may be around the clock, and around the globe……. And grey areas like China? I loosely call them an ally (choke, gaggggg, gasp), but they are a trading partner of sorts that is contributing to the forging of the world economy…….. Ahhhh, but then there is the bothersome problem of Taiwan……….. Anyways……… Secondly there are transportation values associated with these goods and the wear and tear on our infrastructure system involved in making it possible for those commodities to make it to their destinations (Rail that is generally tax subsidized, roads, waterways, ports, airports, traffic control, the associated Coast Guard…. Why are we covering the associated taxes involved with this segment of commerce??? The foreign utilization factor should come into play…… For instance…….. I am tired of seeing and hearing of highways, and toll highways that were built and maintained with American dollars here in the United States being turned over to foreign nationals to manage…… Much in the same effect as the port management contemplations for the Port of N.O. and the Arabs were conducted some months back…….. So, in effect, Tarrifs? Ehhhhhhh, how about a different shade of grey and simply call it infrastructure surcharges???????? Written by ..........................STRONGCONCRETE..........
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh yeah... get rid of all subsidies and tariffs... they are counter productive to providing the lowest price to U.S. consumers. Don't say "but our jobs will be shipped overseas" - duh - that's already happened. Tariffs and subsidies simply means that not only will you not have a job with high wages and good benefits but - in addition to that - prices are artificially inflated for the benefit of the few while being borne on the backs of the many. Written by kpf
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I believe in the free market - not government dictates. Let there be more expensive ethanol available at the pump along with less expensive non-ethanol gasoline. Allow the consumer determine which product will be used more. I believe this is always better in the long run. It also makes things more difficult for lobbyists who profit from phony "save the environment" (a.k.a. "make Archer-Daniels Midland even more wealthy") B.S. like the ethanol subsidy charade. Written by kpf
on 7/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
On Ethanol, remove the sugar subsidy and the price of producing ethanol drops immediately. It is insane to artificially prop up the price of sugar when the difference between the cost of producing ethanol and its value at sale is so meager, as you point out. On the methane clathrates, I'm all for encouraging their production. But there are billions to be made in wind power and it's not about semantics, because the meaning of "costs" and "revenues" are quite distinct. Costs are more or less constant, revenues are variant and can be increased with infrastructural development. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
(The current federal subsidy for ethanol amounts to about 51 cents per gallon: Crenson, 2007.) In the United States, it requires almost a gallon of gasoline (or roughly equivalent fossil fuel) to produce and transport a gallon of corn-derived ethanol.
Written by
on 7/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
In other words, or more specifically: These hydrates exist at temperatures around 0°C (32°F) -- freezing -- and up to about 15°C (27°F) higher. Depending upon pressure exhertion on the solidified substance........ At 14.7 pounds per square inch, the stability temperature in 'solid' format drops accordingly..... and it turns to gas more readily........... Oh thundering tundras!!!!! But then again, Obama or no Obama, it is probably all over in 80 or 90 years anyways, so what's the use??????? Written by ...............STRONGCONCRETE.....................
on 7/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Now if you want to think about something that is immediately do-able Jacob, consider Methane clathrates......... This is sitting around, and ready for harvesting, and it can be done within a matter of a year... Very easily, with current technology that is upgraded only slightly............ A potentially economic reserve in the Gulf of Mexico may contain ~1010 m3 of gas,,,, But it is also present in great abundance offshore on the east coast, west coast, and Alaska...... If global temps on the oceans are a true factor, then we are idiots not to start harvesting this source immediately... Methane clathrates are stable at (−20°C vs −162°C required for LNG storage and transportation purposes...... In fact, we have suitable 'harvesting' equipment right here in Louisiana to do this type of thing... It has been guestimated that global inventory lies between 1×1015 and 5×1015 m³ (1 quadrillion to 5 quadrillion cubic meters). Written by ...............STRONGCONCRETE.....................
on 7/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, now it is simply a case of semantics........ And discussion becomes fruitless, as it was in the beginning, because really and truely, although I enjoy 'blogging' on the subject, it is all really just talk..... Because someone else already has a master plan, and what we have to say about it doesn't really matter..... I saw a push boat on the Atchafalya yesterday.... Two complete sets of 90+ foot long blades for wind generators loaded on the deck.... I have no idea why it was going north. I am assuming it came from the west along the Intracoastal Waterway....... So, I suppose some one already is making the rules... No need for any input on this subject from me....... Written by ..............STRONGCONCRETE......................
on 7/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No SC, and with all due respect because I recognize you are trying to see my side of it, the costs for building and bringing wind farm generating plants online are more or less fixed. It is sales that are limited by the inability of the power grid to reach an expansive market. If you modernize the grid, sales will grow in step with the expansion of the market for the power produced. As sales grow, so do profits. When the expectation of profits are made real, investment capital will flow in to make money in wind farms. That is the experience of Texas. It can be ours too. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/21/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, captial interest can take many, many, many different forms........ Again... Cost is the defining factor, and the only defining factor when considering what is prudent or profitable.......... I don't care how you slice it or dice it.... We are probably talking the same thing, only in a different language, or focused on alternate portions of the tangents involved....... Anyways....... It is meaningless to talk about it, because no one, and I mean no one has the balz necessary to help manifest it into fruition, any meaningful advancement that is... They are all too too busy arguing over the color of the icing on top of the cupcake..... Written by ..............STRONGCONCRETE......................
on 7/21/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
It's not about agreeing or disagreeing SC. It's about the productivity of capital when it is invested, which is where I'm coming from to be honest about myself. I tire of watching the way Louisiana continues to spend money wastefully, on budget item after budget item, that returns no capital interest to the state and its people. If we were to spend more money on improving or creating capital assets -- the grid and other infrastructure fall within these categories -- rather than doling it out for pet projects of local interest, a bloated health care system, and so much more, we would see investment capital start rolling into the state and jobs coming with it. The investment and jobs and all that comes with them represent the "capital interest" we would receive for investing in our capital assets. That is what capital assets do, they create interest. That is what we must do to turn our woeful economic situation around in this state. We've got to stop throwing our money away, pouring it down the drain on budgetary line items that return little or nothing of value to the state and which make next year's budgetary process even more difficult because once these projects get on the public teat, they tend to stay on it. If we invest in improving our electrical grid we're going to see an entire new industry develop to take advantage of it. That is how we must start thinking if we want policies that create jobs and keep our people here. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/21/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Don't want you to think I am snubbing you Jacob, it is simply that further discussion on this subject winds up with a bunch of people that only want to agree to disagree instead of doing something............ I tire of lukewarm or insipid circumstances......... Written by
on 7/21/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Not even going to bother reading the rest of your post Jacob............ But I will comment................. SALES????????????? Well Sunshine, everybody needs electricity unless they want to sit around in the dark.......................... Sales indeed........... Do you also sit around wondering if a hungry man will ever buy a loaf of bread?????? Written by .................STRONGCONCRETE...................
on 7/21/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Without understanding cost one cannot begin to contemplate profit? True. But the same applies to sales as well. And the point about the modernization of the grid has to do with sales. As I have pointed out, costs for creating a wind farm and hooking it up to the grid are more or less fixed. But we haven't seen widespread expansion of wind farm energy production have we? No we haven't; but there are isolated exceptions, Texas being the best example. And you must explain WHY Texas has seen such dramatic growth in wind farm energy production since 1999. As the State of Texas itself makes clear, there is only ONE explanation, which is the modernization of the power grid there. If you have another explanation StrongConcrete, I'm willing to listen to it. And the USA Today article whose link I posted also presents a good case that the inability of delivering power where it is needed is hindering the development of wind farm production because the current grid cannot connect those areas of the country where wind energy can be produced with those areas where it is needed for consumption. That is why sales are the issue, not costs, you simply cannot sell wind energy where it is needed for consumption. The costs are only rising in step with the normal processes of price inflation. But sales can grow at a much faster rate if what is produced is delivered to a market where it can be consumed, a situation that does not exist at present. That is what has happened in Texas. Now; a couple of other points I would like to make. First; Nebraska, South Dakota, Oklahoma, and Kansas are not the Midwest, they are the Great Plains. The Midwest includes Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. And there are plenty of people who live there. And Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and the New England states also have large populations as well. They need the power. We can produce it. If we produce wind energy offshore to merely replace electrical power we now generate from other sources, and I'm really mentioning natural gas here, all we do is raise the value of one resource -- wind -- while simultaneously diminishing the value of another -- natural gas. That is not worth it in my opinion because of the issue you raise, costs. But think about this if you will. Louisiana currently ranks 2nd in the nation among states in production of natural gas ( see "Natural Gas" section in http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/state/state_energy_profiles.cfm?sid=LA ) and our reserves are huge. Modernizing the grid will almost certainly make that natural gas more productive, since most of our state's electricity is produced from natural gas right now, which means more could be produced and sold where it is needed. But that could only happen if the power grid is upgraded. Modernizing the grid is a must. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/19/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Profit? Well without understanding cost one cannot even begin to contemplate profit…. You keep going on about the grid as if we were still stuck in T.V.A. days….. Give it a rest….. If it costs too much to build it is not a competitive resource, plain and simple…… You probably don’t realize it, but the Volkswagen is the great-great-great-grandfather of our interstate system………. Not the Cadillac, not the Duisenberg…. (Read about Eisenhower, you will understand where I am coming from)….. You bring Texas versus California into the discussion…. Sort of irrelevant… But I will add to that…. I have been to every dam in California during construction phase from Bakersfield to Northern California since 1963…. I have toured every nuclear plant from San Onofre to Rancho Seco, I used to wander around Lawrence Livermore Laboratories in Livermore Ca watching everything being built, even watched the Super conducting Super Collider being ramped up before it was discontinued….. I do not know how many miles upon miles upon miles of High Power Lines/Transmission systems I watched installed… The wind farms at the Altamont Pass??? Watched the first ones being put up (obsolete now) when I was a kid… I have been to every dam in the T.V.A. system…. (Which incidentally some are owned by ALCOA, Aluminum Company of America) and they were built to produce aluminum for the 2nd world war as well as to power the Manhattan Project…….. But they were built under the premise of providing electricity to the impoverished mountain folk…….. Whatever……. Anyways, one of them is a favorite hangout of mine, outside the Smokies… Beautiful area….. I go there each year to meditate, and exercise…..didn’t make it there this year, G.D. expensive gasoline……. Grrrrrrrrrrr……… Anyways, I have been to Three mile Island, as well as several other Nuke sites as well….. I have wandered around various Universities and seen many marvels, and I watched them in practical applications….. I was sort of a twisted kid I suppose, watching things being built and learning how they worked was sort of a past time of mine….. As well as surfing, skiing, motocross, etc., etc. That California….. Louisiana bested it when it comes to offshore technology though………. Anyways Jacob, Cost……. If you build something too expensive, it may not pay off, if you build something that is so cheap that it breaks down every 1000 hours it becomes too expensive in terms of maintenance as well as lost revenues………… Loss during transmission which equates to cost………………… I do not know, but I think somewhere around 600 miles is the farthest power can be transmitted before it starts to become cost prohibitive….. There are over 8 million people and businesses within 300 miles of offshore Grand Isle,,,,, 14 million within 500 miles….. Or would you like to move it 200 miles to the west, around Lake Charles offshore? There are around 6 million plus people within a 250 mile radius of that……… You mention the Midwest…….. NO BODY LIVES UP THERE!!! That is if you are calling Nebraska, South Dakota, major portions of Kansas and Oklahoma the Midwest… Out produce Texas? Sure, why not????? But the key is to have an inexpensive unit capable of producing generous amounts of power in train with other units that have a high degree of reliability….. And a full 1/3 of that cost (probably if not more) is directed towards the installation of the pylon offshore…….. Offshore costs offshore money…………… Unless an alternate set of approaches are taken…. The Grid? Let Entergy, SLECA, CLECO worry about the grids, they ARE the market……. The city of Morgan City has a gas fired power plant, the town of Alexandria Louisiana has a power plant, there are lots of towns that have gas fired power plants….. Why use wind? To reduce the use of fossil fuels…….. period……… And where fossil fuels are not the cost, there is an attempt made to cause the construction and technology take a bite………………………….. It was good ranting for a few minutes Jacob, you have the right ideas, and priorities, and as you said, you deal with program writing, so it is easy sometimes to be distracted by associated abstracts on the subject that really are not the main line of concern, valid, but not the mainline of concern….. Great writing with you on this, I agree, wind would increase jobs, lower costs, and be a true ‘Image’ enhancer for Louisiana…… Now all you have to do is deal with the bone head legislatures (thank god you ain’t proposing nukes though ohmahgawd!!!!!!!!!!! Talk about red tape!!!!) Written by ....................STRONGCONCRETE................
on 7/19/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
StrongConcrete, what "greed" do I have that precedes me? I am not in the electrical power business in any way. I develop internet software applications for a living. My interest is in helping a growing industry get off the ground in Louisiana because I know that three things will follow from it; jobs, tax revenues for the state, and cheaper electrical power from renewable energy sources. (I'm skipping the "reduced carbon footprint" argument the global warming cultists make.) I like all three. Now; you keep writing that "it's all about cost." Actually, it's all about profits, and especially "profits at the margin," meaning the profit on the last unit sold, because profits are what drive investment. Since base operating costs for opening a wind farm and hooking it up to the power grid are more or less fixed, the question then arises "what price are you receiving for the electrical power you sell?" Well; if the power grid cannot reach any more than a small number of customers, you will not receive as good a price as you will if you can reach a larger number, because there is greater competitive bidding for the product. To put that differently, price is determined by demand -- not cost -- and the demand for electrical power here in the South-Central U.S. is not nearly as high as it is in the upper Midwest and the Northeast, which was made clear in that USA Today article whose link I posted. We can produce wind power efficiently in one area of the country, the south and west, but we need to sell it in another area, the upper Midwest and the Northeast. The current state of development of the power grid does not permit us to do that, as the USA Today article also shows. Finally; you do have a legitimate point to make that the owners of the power lines should bear the greatest responsibility for improving their capital equipment, which is what modernizing the grid entails. But there is a problem with that, because it takes longer to improve power line transmission than it does to bring a wind farm, or any other generating plant, online and ready to deliver its electrical power for consumption. I suggest you read the first four paragraphs of the article at this link ( http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_wind-transmission.htm ) to see what the State of Texas has done to guarantee the modernization of the power grid within its state which has resulted in the dramatic increase in wind energy production there in recent years. From 1999 to 2007 Texas has gone from producing 180 megawatts of wind power annually to 4,296 while "green" California has only increased its production from 1,646 to 2,439 megawatts ( see http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_wind.htm ). That means that Texas has grown its production by a factor of 23.87x in 8 years while California has only grown its capacity by 1.48x during the same period. The key difference, as the last two articles make clear, is that the State of Texas is taking the lead in encouraging the modernization of its power grid. Since Louisiana has even stronger wind speeds with which to develop wind power than does Texas, and I might add "shorter distances across which it will need to erect new power grid capacity," it seems to me that it would make great sense to take the lead and encourage the modernization of the grid along the lines of which Texas is doing. We could be outproducing Texas in wind power generation within 10 years. Am I the only one who wants to see jobs in Louisiana? Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/18/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, your greed precedes you……………. And you are focused on a problem that is only that if you make it into one….. It does not matter of it is CLECO, SLECA, PG&E, CON-EDISON, OTTER, etc., etc., etc…. Those are infrastructure entities…. The place and maintain the power poles, the power lines, the transformers, they read the meters, they send the bills, and they collect the money…… In some instances where they own the power generation equipment, well, let me simply say that their role in this arena can be limited or reduced………. The second part of your problem is a misunderstanding of bivouac, and logistics…….. And thirdly it is focused on cost which is scalable… and adjustable…. Energy is what makes America happen, it is what makes America possible in whatever format it is presented in… Be it human, or mechanical……….. I come from the land of wind power…….. Watched it born, watched it mature, and have subsequently been to every ‘wind farm’ region in the United States……… And studied their approaches in an offhand fashion…….. Back to CLECO – etc., they are already in place……. Now to focus on offshore wind energy…… If energy can be produced at $1.00 because the cost of the power plant is X….. and it can be transmitted 600 miles for Y before the total amount of energy starts to decline as a result of friction in the transmission medium…. Then it is reasonable to construe that if the power plants cost X is halved or quartered, and longevity of the power production unit is extended before becoming obsolete due to wear, or replacement costs are lessened etc.,,, then the Y factor can be extended exponentially….. Or, if that factor is construed as being desirable to remain the same so there is little waste of generated power (as in loss after production instead of consumption after production), then run that transmission to the set upon limits, and if another wind farm can not be viably established at that outer fringe turn to established alternatives such as gas, coal, or nuclear…….. But to take this a bit farther…… Oil and gas production requires private investment capitol.. Why? Because it is a risk…. There are no guarantees of a return of risk capitol when exploring for and hopefully producing an energy generating medium whatever its form may be….. But wind, that is always around…. So, if the cost of a power producing unit sponsored with tax payer funds is economically viable, then the taxpayer should realize a return on that generating medium in the form of lower costs…. How? Taxes…………… In other words, if the cost of generating power can come down ½ or whatever, and that power is calculated out on government consumption levels be it schools, fire stations, police stations, government office buildings etc,,,, then it would be reasonable to assume that those cost savings can be passed onto the taxpayer and redirected towards other applications if a rebate in comparable cost is not afforded for such consumption……. Yes, it sounds like socialism, but in light of Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, the S&L of the 80’s? IndyMac, etc., etc., etc., it is obvious that the taxpayers end up holding the bag when failure sets in………… And when considering that the government through regulation sets the prices on rail transportation, trucking, pipeline transmission of fluid means, airline, mail, etc., etc., etc. It is saying that the government sets the cost of consumption on the end value raising the consumer cost indexes…. Take corn, wheat, etc. etc.,,, No it is not the commodities market that sets the price, they only have their turn after the initial ‘protection prices’ are set by the feds via the Department of Agriculture……. Ehhhhh,,,, I don’t feel like writing a book on it, but I can discuss it at length…… Just remember, the cost of production =’s? and the cost of consumption =’s? And in the gray area in between who is the beneficiary?????? And who are the losers??????? Written by ..................STRONGCONCRETE..................
on 7/18/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
First; let me respond to kpf. Thank you for the link, I have visited it and read its information. On the issue of cost-effectiveness of wind power, it is primarily related to the speed of the winds, because the higher the wind speed the greater the output of electricity. I'm going to re-post this link ( http://www.enrg.lsu.edu/conferences/altenergy2005/Herman_Schellstede.ppt ) which you can visit to see that offshore Louisiana has the most-highly rated wind speed classification, see page 4. Now; for a comparison, visit this link ( http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_wind.htm ) and scroll down to "Texas Wind Power Classification" and look at the map, which uses the same classification for wind speeds as the first source on Louisiana offshore winds and under "Installed Wind Capacity" you can see the table which shows that in 2007 Texas was producing 4,296 megawatts of wind power per year, first in the nation. Now; going back to the classification section and above the map, you can read that most of the newly-installed wind farms are in the Abilene-Sweetwater area, which is west of Dallas. That puts those farms in the "Class 2+" to "Class 3" wind speed classification and they are very profitable right now. Louisiana's offshore wind speed, from the PowerPoint presentation link above, is "Class 7," which means that its profitability will be much higher. And I appreciate that you mention something about rust on offshore platforms, because I do know something about cleaning rust offshore. Not long after I graduated from high school I worked as a deckhand on a workboat and I know what it means to take ChemPrime or Carbon Tetrachloride to rusty metal, then wait for it to become active after which I had to remove it with an air compressor gun. Uggghhhh! But I must point out that this kind of activity falls under the accounting heading of "capital equipment maintenance" which means it is a legitimate operating expense that is deductible from taxable income. But even I will admit that I wonder just how viable the older platforms will be since they have likely gone without maintenance for years. But with increased power generation the expenses should be covered. Now for the second poster, who I again take to be StrongConcrete, the electrical grid is an extremely important issue to the growth of the industry. Take a look at your suggestion to let "CLECO or someone else" worry about the development of the power grid because "they are the marketers." What you have actually done here is to offer an explanation of why wind energy is not taking off, even though it is economical to produce. CLECO's market is really restricted to its local customers, they do not "think nationally." If you can improve the power grid to transmit electricity more efficiently over greater distances, producers will be able to sell their product, i.e. "electrical power," to a larger number of customers and with larger-scale markets in play we will see larger-scale business investment to spur production ahead. See this USA Today article "Lines lacking to transmit wind energy" for more ( http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20080226/1b_wind26.art.htm ). In the final analysis, the amount of wind energy you can produce is of far less importance than the amount you can sell. If we improve the electrical grid, more can be sold and when sales are ready to be made, production will follow. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/17/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Now to take the below from numbers forget investors, and sweep aside the notion of Pork, install those units offshore, use the power derived from those power units to power our schools, police departments, court houses, capitol, etc., ctc., etc…………… In other words power the Government needs, all of sudden there is a 15.5 million dollar a month ‘surplus’ that can give Riz Up its precious little funding, and of course the YMCA can get their little funding as well as a whole host of other things whether they are pork or not………………. Done with the argument…………. P.S. I already presented for viewing a schematic of my technology serving as ‘Pylon” off shore to one of Walter Boasso’s aids……………… But I do need a machine shop as well, so, may as well turn out a couple of generating units while I am at it as well…………………… Written by .....................STRONGCONCRETE...............
on 7/17/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Denmark – approximately 17,000 sq. miles,,, Population approx. 5.5 million…. @ 19% 0f 5.5 million = approx 1 million, divided by 3.5 (average people per household, I simply grabbed that as a good number.) = 298,571 households, divided by 400, (I had heard that one of the bigger wind generators can power around 400 houses, again, just a guess, I am not writing a book here) = 746 wind generating units needed or built… X 1.5 million each approx to build = investment of 1.1 billion dollars here or there, divided by 72 months…. For the units payoff = approx 15.5 million per month divided by 746 units = approx $2,000 per month divided by 400 houses = Approximately $52.00 per month for electricity…………………………. Louisiana, approx 43,000 sq. miles…. Pop. Approx. 4.25 million……………….. So I don't really think it is so much a case of exporting electrical power to other states, but producing what we need instead, and opting to trade our other energy stocks to neighboring states instead... Again, installation time, not infrastructure.... 2 years and I am sure 19% to 25% of LOUISIANA'S electrical needs can be met through wind energy.... Written by
on 7/17/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The word to focus on is COST..... Cost starts from cradle to grave.... Reduce the cost of the electrical producing units, and the cost of electricity is lower... Power lines is merely a transportation or delivery issue.... If there is a market, and electricity can be generated for lower cost, it is then that the delivery or transmission costs can be calculated.... The more they buy, the less it costs depending on, and on, and on, and on, and on........ So square one, a well lain out 'wind farm', towers that are inexpensive, and inexpensive to install, low maintenance, the blades, the houseing, the gearbox, the armature, offshore cable laying, (Or other alternate electricy carrying medium) and on, and on, and on. If 35% - 75% can some how be knocked off this cost, don't worry about the electrical grid on land, CLECO or someone else has that worry, they are the marketers..... It is really an unimportant subject......................... Written by
on 7/17/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Mr. Sulzbach your use of terms such as "make investment in its production on a large scale profitable right now" demonstrates that you understand reality in a way that many whose narrow views will not allow them to take "cost" into account would benefit from. I also am not an electrical engineer but cannot help but wonder if wind power would be cost effective or provide any sufficiently useful amount of power. Although Denmark has a large percentage (19%) of their electricity provided by wind power - the actual amount is rather insignificant compared to what large countrys consume (see link below). I am not saying we should not pursue this - but I do not know how "cheap" this will be - particularly with metal structures imbedded in the salt water of the GoM. I have spent 30 year on GoM platforms - it is windy, more often than not but rust - rust - rust and more rust. I do not see placing wind turbines on 20 to 30 year old platforms as being a wise investment decision, long term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power Written by kpf
on 7/17/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Let me follow up my own post with this last comment. When electrical power can be generated from wind farms in offshore Louisiana waters and sold in the upper Midwestern and Northeastern United States, investment dollars will roll in to create an offshore Louisiana wind farm industry. Right now, the power cannot be transferred nearly far enough to make that happen. The power grid, i.e. "infrastructure," must be modernized first. We in Louisiana should be moving heaven and earth to at least get the grid modernized within our state's borders, since we will get the jobs and the tax dollars that come with the construction of the wind farms. We'll probably get some cheaper electrical power and cleaner air too, but those are minor points compared to jobs and tax revenues, though I expect the global warming cultists will come and blast me for that comment. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
First of all; I'm guessing that I'm responding to StrongConcrete. It might be worthwhile to define the term "infrastructure" here, because what I am referring to is the basic "capital equipment overhead" that is provided by electrical power utility companies, the individual states, and in rare instances the federal government which enables the transferrence of electrical power from a generating source to the point at which it is consumed. That is what is referred to as the "power grid," which is a very complex network of electrical transmission lines, generating plants, transformers that keep the current boosted, and switching stations that redirect the flow current across the network. This grid makes it possible for a generating plant, such as a wind farm in this instance, to produce electrical power in one place and sell it at some geographical distance removed from its point of origin. The distance traversed between the point of origin and the point of sale constitutes a "market area" within which the producer can sell the electrical power it generates. This "market area" is something the producer uses to its own advantage, since it provides access to customers who can consume the electrical power it produces. And the greater size of the market, the more potential customers are available to a producer. Thus the "power grid" is a form of basic "overhead capital" that is in place which opens up a market to an electrical power producer, in the same way that highways and railways open up markets to farmers or industrial manufacturing plants everywhere. The power grid, the highways, and the railways are all basic infrastructure that is in place which creates national markets for goods and services. But the power grid that exists in much of the U.S., including Louisiana, is not modern enough at this point to permit electrical power generated in offshore Louisiana to be sold over a wide enough area to make investment in its production on a large scale profitable right now. There are already firms producing such power now -- go back to my original post for the link to that PowerPoint presentation for an example -- but they are small and sell their electrical power locally. If we expand the capability of the grid to transfer the power across significant distances we can enlarge the available market for offshore wind farms and THAT will attract investment in its development. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I disagree with you Jacob when you write; lack of current infrastructure, not to the economic viability are the problems….. In other words, if you could buy land for $1,000 an acre in downtown New Orleans infrastructure or not, you would find a way to obtain 200 acres within a week…. That is smart money… I state that costs can be cut perhaps up to 75% on this subject….. So, with economic viability comes investment… There is your infrastructure……. Or are you saying that saving 40 – 74% on something that costs 1.5 to 2+ million per unit is nothing to contemplate when considering that the there is a maximum power generation value that can be derived from each unit and that cost + maintenance needs to be retired within a 5 10 year period all tax credits involved?????? And as I said, it is all in the equation of how much energy is to be harvested on a ‘wind farm’ in relationship to the total acerage involved…. 1 platform does not a windfarm make, and the cost of transmission of power to the shore would make this cost prohibitive even the oil company paid you to take over the abandoned rig… Whatever… Efficiency in design, deployment, cost, etc. I would love to talk about this subject….. As far as marketing of the energy with anticipated ‘conductivity’ losses due to the distance electricity has to move… Well, cost involved with Big Cajun I and II operations, market centers, 4,000,000 in Louisiana, Dallas/Houston/Galveston complex, Birmingham, etc…… More than enough market there. I believe power can be economically transmitted for up to 600 miles or more, then efficiency drops in contrast to the cost to produce… But take 100% and reduce that cost to 30% or more and it means power generation costs less, and therefore any losses become less negligable….. Sort of like chicken feathers falling off a truck…….. Now if the chicken feathers were worth $100 a pound, well then they wouldn’t be allowed to fall off a truck… Or the instance of the cost involved with flying a can of coca cola on an aircraft time and time again…. Yeah, I have some answers….. Infrastucture???? It’s called investment capitol…. Written by
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
StrongConcrete, in reference to the questions you raise about the economic feasibility of promoting wind-driven electrical power generation in Louisiana waters offshore let me just say that you are not mistaken that there are problems, but they are related to the lack of current infrastructure, not to the economic viability of the operation itself. To put this in more simple terms, the problem is not in producing the electrical power profitably, but rather selling all the power you generate at an optimum price, because the available market for this electrical power is constrained geographically by the limits of an underdeveloped electrical power grid that can only transfer the power a limited distance from its point of generation. Now; I'm not an electrical engineer and I cannot give a fully-informed explanation of all the technical aspects of electrical power line type and gauge and/or the need for periodic installation of transformers to prevent the loss of electrical current as it is transferred, but I do understand the basic point that older electrical power line circuits cannot maintain the level of electrical current as it is moved over great distances without a significant power loss. Ever since that big blackout in the upper Midwest, Northeast, and Canada in 2003 the federal government has been trying to encourage power companies to modernize their electrical power line systems so as to make it possible to move electrical power generated in one area of the country to another economically. But progress has been limited, and I'll skip an examination of why that is so, the point being that modern lines and transfer stations, transformers, and more are needed to make it possible. With reference to the development of an offshore wind energy industry in Louisiana the problem is that whatever electrical power is generated can only be sold locally or nearby -- I don't know all the specifics of where modern power lines may exist -- which means that there is a limited market where the power can be sold, which also means that those companies who produce it may not be able to sell it to the highest bidder. But if we modernize the electrical power grid with state-of-the-art technology to permit the transfer of electrical power generated offshore across significant distances, then the market for that power increases in turn. And as the market increases, which means there will be a higher likelihood that what is produced will be sold at an agreeable price, so will investment capital be attracted to fund the development of wind-driven power in Louisiana's offshore areas. The offshore platforms are ready to be used, in many instances they are abandoned, which makes their conversion into wind energy stations a win-win situation for the platform owners and those enterprises who have the technology to generate the power. That part of it has already been proven to work. But what is needed to grow the industry is a larger market for what is produced, and that is why the state needs to step up and take a hand in encouraging, yes "investing in," the modernization of the electrical power grid so that the industry can grow. It will mean jobs here in Louisiana; though not a lot I think because it is not a labor-intensive industry, but more importantly tax revenues for the state, because this is manufacturing. And it may even lead to the development of an ocean wave energy industry here as well. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No T-Dubb, that was not me, you must be experiencing an episode or perhaps a minor ellipsis in reasoning…. Take a couple Zanex, and have a warm cup of cocoa…. However, Jacob, you do stir the neurons………. Wind energy, economy, feasibility, time frames, scale of production, circumstances, available resources, and of course not to forget need………………………… Wind energy, ‘abandoned’ offshore platforms….. Good for a test model, but why bother, it is a given they would work… and aside from a hit and miss approach in utilization not very practical from a profit generation standpoint…. Unless it happens to be handy in a selected amount of acreage designated as a ‘wind farm’ offshore……… Costs from scratch per generating unit to perform offshore? I don’t know, 1.5 million each? (Offshore perhaps/probably even 2+ million each, depending on Kw or Mw generation capacity per unit) Cost……? Two fold, the platform to affix the generator to, and the power transmission medium……. (Not including initial production cost and delivery/installation cost) Copper? Aluminum? Very expensive and limits the effectiveness of practicality in energy generation/harvesting..,……. Ahhhhh, tubes, with salt water, - and + poles, conducting the electricity from the power unit to a shore based transformer…. Cost? Less than conventional power line construction. Feasibility? Saltwater is an excellent conductor of electricity…….. Interesting theory….. Could hydrogen be a possible by product of this process, and thirdly, fresh water? (For applications in arid environments that frequently border coastlines around the world)……. Feasibility, ahhh,,, very much so if the above group of hypothesis can be tested. In theory it sounds do-able…… On the subject of conductivity, should a Salt water solution not have the exact level of conductivity desired to reduce over all metal costs involved, powdered copper, or powdered aluminum, in solution, agitated through mechanical means complemented with magnetic action…….. (This will work, I designed a prototype to keep atmosphere samples mixed for retrieval and analysis in the future for atmospheric studies, I used to love those DARPA/NOAA/DoD/DoE. etc. projects, sort of allowed me to free up my reserve capacities and deploy them towards useful processes)…. But those kind of dalliances were sort of removed from reach because I never graduated high school and surely possessed no Ph.D, so therefore I was merely a moron that couldn’t possibly have any significant thoughts or ideas………. I wonder if that could be an argument used to strip me of my patents in a court of law when greed rears its ugly little perverse head? So I suppose T-Dub, when you asked the question; “in what universe do "academic elitists" hold any sway or power?” you already knew the answer, and it isn’t a universe, merely a little box of certain elitists on this planet that label their selves ‘Academia’ and put the bad little boys in the back of the classroom for speaking without raising their hands first……. But then, instead of being academic, I suppose that observation would merely be elementary at this juncture in time my dear wutson………. So anyways Jacob, power transmission would appear to be scalable where economics is concerned via a variety of approaches….. or application of varied techniques… It is all engineering but I am too stupid to be able to spell that word let alone understand how it works and what it is good for let alone even consider deploying it in a meaningful fashion….. Time frames? Scale of Production? Economy? Need? Those questions are self answering to a certain extent…. I can see a program though where overall ‘establishment-production’ costs can be reduced by up to a possible 75%.... And one unit per day can be online after a 6 month to 1 year time frame…. If the proper oversight is in place pursuing the proper program……. Oh, and T-Dubb…… Wut’s your hangup? “the guy who came up with the idea of strengthening concrete with metal!” Thomas Edison came up with that idea, and held the first patents on it, I merely improved on one of his thoughts…… And was subsequently issued a patent for having done so………. He was quite the pioneer…………………… I like improving things, it is easy…. Gawd school was boring after the 3rd grade……… And KPF, I enjoy your thoughts, you are a sound thinking person with good contemplations and postings… Keep it up…. On the subject of the 90 degree change in direction…. Manned or Unmanned is the defining criteria, and G-forces can be a killer, however, this is can be a fairly easy problem to work around also…….. It all has to do with inertia…. And the application of anti-matter…… I have some interesting thoughts on it, unfortunately it would be cost prohibitive to turn into a working model………. A little bottle of that anti-matter stuff is really-really-really expensive……… Written by ...................STRONGCONCRETE.................
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey "no-name" (although it's probably StrongConcrete - you know, the guy who came up with the idea of strengthening concrete with metal!) in what universe do "academic elitists" hold any sway or power? Certainly not this one - the most perverse thing to happen to political discourse in this country is that the ultra-rich corporate Republicans (the true elite) have taken on the populist mantle (what a joke), but we academics, who make little money and have even less power, are mislabeled "elites" - intellectually elite, yes - I'm certainly much more intelligent than most of the blathering idiots who pollute this site, but that and $1.50 will buy me a cup of coffee. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Sharon, the problem with those elections is that the liberal, academic elitists have to rely on the ignorant, dependent, minority dupes to vote their candidates into office. It's a real dilemma, they have to keep them dependent and "victimized", but nothing threatens the liberal power base more than effective education and real opportunity for advancement. Written by
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Most of Florida is for drilling off our coast. The Govenor has signed on as did Jeb Bush at the end of his term. The latest proposals with today's technology is safe enough. Besides China is going to drill closer off our coast than what is proposed now. They don't have our expertise and if there is a spill, we are going to have to clean it up anyway. We have a long way to go to convince those in South Florida though. You know those liberals from the north who ruin our elections with their stupidity. You can always recognize them by the way there is always a problem 'with the ballot" designed and approved by their overwhelming majority Democrat counties. The latest "test" showed that many had trouble connecting the line between the parts of the arrow to vote on the optical scanner. Lord spare us. Written by Sharon
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
If we adopt western european socialism that Tee Dub promotes, everyone in the cities can flit around on cute little scooters. Maybe we can adapt them with inflatable raft parts so they can keep moving when thunderstorms flood the streets. -- And he must have a brand new energy alternative, because we all know the terrors of nuclear power, wind power kills migrating birdies, ethanol production grows the gulf dead zone, hydroelectric power kills the snails. Not sure abut solar power, but those large mirrors that concentrate the sun's beams on collectors must be hell on the eyeballs of gnats and dragnonflies.--- And I'll be looking for McCain stickers on those big SUVs with the tinted windows and 24 inch spinning rims down in the hood. The ones with the dark tinted windows and gun ports. Wonder how Tee justifies $4 (or $15) gas for those minimum wage victims of corporate greed. I guess it's my schadenfreude when I think about high gas prices making it harder for the thugs to drive to my neighborhood to rob and burglarize. Written by
on 7/16/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
swampwiz, regarding your comment that ". . . the amount of oil that could be recovered outside of CA & FL is quite small . . ." I would say that if you were to qualify that statement by making clear that you are referring to oil deposits that may be opened up for exploitation by the legislation, as opposed to other sources on the Outer Continental Shelf that are now accessible, I would agree. But the Walker Ridge find in the Lower Tertiary 175 mi. off the Louisiana coast is the major exception here, because its potential reserves are calculated in the billions -- yes with a "b" -- of barrels. See: http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2008/05may/gom.cfm for more. And at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14678206/ MSNBC reported that Walker Ridge could be "the biggest new domestic oil discovery since Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay a generation ago," and raised the possibility that the Walker Ridge field, which is only one of several that could develop the reserves of the Lower Tertiary rock formation, may have reserves of up to 15 billion barrels. We are talking HUGE tax revenues for this state, 37.5% for about the first five or six years, $500 million cap afterwards. There is a LOT of oil in the Gulf off the coasts of Louisiana and Texas that has yet to be developed. However; I also agree with your statement that we should pursue renewable alternative energy sources and Louisiana is in a more advantageous position on this than many people realize. Check out the various search returns from Google at this link: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Louisiana+offshore+wind+power It's amazing! We've got an entirely new industry ready to take off in Louisiana converting abandoned offshore oil platforms into wind farms. But we lack the electrical power transmission lines and other facilities (infrastructure) onshore, to really attract significant investor capital right now. Among those search returns, check out this one, a PowerPoint presentation: http://www.enrg.lsu.edu/conferences/altenergy2005/Herman_Schellstede.ppt Louisiana has what are known as "Class 7 winds" (9.5 meters per second) offshore, which gives it (quote from page 4): "The highest wind capacities in United States waters." We need to move this industry along. It will never play out. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/15/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Pelosi is wrong on this issue, but really the amount of oil that could be recovered outside of CA & FL is quite small. There is no way that states would NOT have a say in this matter, and those two states would not agree to drilling (as many other coastal states such as OR, WA, MA, ME.)
And in any case, fossil fuels are merely a temporary solution. The long term energy problem must be solved through renewables (solar, wind, biofuel.) If we would embark on a long, massive investment of $1T over the next 50 years, we'll be in good shape. (The automobile situation will work itself out as folks start driving electric cars.) We can afford it since we just pissed away that much in Iraq. We should introduce a tax on all energy consumed to raise the $20G/yr for this program. Written by swampwiz
on 7/15/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
There is very little sub-surface ocean area available for development in the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana that is now closed to offshore drilling after enactment of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA) of 2006 ( See: http://www.mms.gov/ooc/press/2008/FactSheet-MMSGOMSecurityActMARCH202008.htm -- read the "Extended Moratoria" section does not apply to Louisiana offshore ). There is really only a small area in the true central Gulf of Mexico that is not now open for development that would benefit Louisiana -- it is south-southeast of N.O. -- that would have been classified under Outer Continental Shelf provisions in the current congressional legislation without GOMESA. And all we have to do at this moment is await the environmental studies due to be released later this year that will open these areas to drilling, they have nothing to do with the present legislation. Most of the current concerns addressed within the congressional legislative initiative you discussed Jeff have to do with the Outer Continental Shelf in the Pacific, because no one expects to find much oil in the Atlantic where there are little or no remnants of ancient prehistoric carboniferous ecosystems upon which oil development depends. And the Pacific is actually a very testy situation because of tectonic instability off the coast of California, and even though I support expanding offshore drilling, I hesitate to encourage it there. Of far greater concern to American energy independence is the attitude of Florida at the state level, because it is very clear that there are rich finds off its coast which could be developed and brought online to the benefit of everyone in this country. Florida needs to wake up. And it has been so long since the jury was in that drilling in ANWR was a good idea that it is not even worth the effort to discuss it further. I don't expect any action on that front because the environmental lobby holds it up as their holy grail of political accomplishment.
Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 7/15/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Who cares? Save your farts in a jar and walk more.... Everything will work out fine............... Oh, and vote for OBama........ Written by
on 7/15/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
With all due respect to Rep. Scalise (and I admire him for his actions in the House so far), he needs to listen to the Democratic Leaderships Press conference yesterday after the President lifted the ban on offshore drilling in the OCS. Reid and Senator Bingaman (sp) said that it made no sense to share the revenue from this area. Louisiana needs to pay attention to this matter. Will Landrieu be allowed to vote her constituency if the vote is close? And I do mean allowed. Will Melancon and the Blue Dogs vote against Pelosi in the House if the vote is close? If it isn't close they will be unleashed to vote their constituency and claim they voted in the best interests of Louisiana. Drilling isn't all we have to do to gain energy independence though. We have to conserve, develop wind, clean coal, and nuclear. We must not go for the short fix like using a food crop like corn to fuel our vehicles. And as far as for the Republican-mobiles or whatever. I just watched a clip of Mary Landrieu leaving the Cajun Dome riding in a Navigator. I am sure that her campaign is paying for her gasoline so she can speed too. Not only Republicans drive gas guzzlers. This is America. We should be able to drive whatever we want. As long as we can pay for it, it is nobody's business. Written by Sharon
on 7/15/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Consider these "sensible" alternatives: 1) the supply of oil is finite, and therefore the price will only go up, now matter how much we drill (TRUE BUT MORE DRILLING EQUALS MORE SUPPLY, as Martha would say "a good thing") 2) demand will continue to rise as the economies of China and India improve (NUKE 'EM. THIS WILL REDUCE DEMAND -okay fine - this is a bit extreme I admit) and 3) the burning of fossil fuels contributes to greenhouse gases which will cause severe ecological and economic problems (so why don't you stop contributing then? do you WANT to keep harming the planet? YOU BEAST!!!!). It is crazy to look around and see all these Suburba
Yesterday, President Bush lifted the moratorium on offshore drilling. This has been in effect for many years and affects offshore areas on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, as well as parts of the 
