Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (71805)	4/1/2010 12:17:23 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

edit for a graph search Here's political reality from my viewpoint. I'm probably the biggest Peak Oil activist on SI. It's a bigger immediate deal than climate change, but shares many of the same solutions. I feel the fierce urgency of now. We're gonna hit the wall really soon, and it's a cliff on the other side. Last Nov, I was still hoping we could party thru the end of '12, based on Ace's work, Message 26153584 cuz he mentioned a '12 crunch. I'm finally admitting to mice elf that I deliberately misread his graph, and we are already off the cliff by '12. His most recent stuff suggests it could come this summer, and this week the feds said we could have a shortfall in 2011. That is pretty close, and if 2011 happens in Sept instead of Jan, the election will be a lot of fun... "The peak year was 2005. The production in 2009 was 72.26 mbd according to EIA. The production in 2010 should be about the same as 2009. 2011 production is estimated to be 70 mbd." Ace Message 26408758 OK, so I'm frantic...so frantic that, if I wrote a bill, the 25 most liberal senators might vote for it. If Obama had said "Senate, pass the (too weak) House bill by reconciliation, I don't think he could even get the 50 votes which allows Biden to break the tie. Dems ain't gonna go lockstep; Health Care was a miracle. Protect coal, give me nukes, blah, blah; it will not happen. As long as Senate rules involve bogus 60-40 majority votes, Obama needs Rs. Especially when there are only 59 so-called Dems to start with. If so-called progressives want their way, go out and elect about 80 Democratic Senators, and it will happen. Drilling is a carrot and a stick. If it gets him 60 votes, give it. If it doesn't help the vote total, take it away and try something else next Congress. In the meantime, from the Kos, here's some other stuff... dailykos.com 1)And, in The Most Important Part of All, he'll announce an agreement between the Pentagon and the Agriculture Department to use more biofuels in military vehicles and to purchase thousands of hybrid vehicles for the federal motor pool. (Biofuels is still a loser, but Chu is a big fan) 2) opening up the Beaufort and Chukchi seas north of Alaska. (Right..they are lining up to drill in a place that is dark for 6 months a year and still covered with ice for 6 months. It'll be a long time B4 the Arctic is ice-free in the winter. This is a money loser) 3) It's mostly a long way off, and is with oil money they otherwise wouldn't spend; they pay us to lease, they pay us to drill..I don't own oil, but I am part of us. Pay, baby, pay... Will the proposal actually reduce dependence on oil imports? The new areas are said to contain two years' worth of recoverable oil, based on data that is 30 years old in some cases. (Recoverable oil is sketchier than proven oil.) Leases off the Virginia coast could begin as early as next year, but elsewhere "drilling would begin only after the completion of geologic studies, environmental impact statements, court challenges and public lease sales." Will the proposal actually generate revenue from the sale of offshore leases? Again, the NYT responds: "Much of the oil and gas may not be recoverable at current prices and may be prohibitively expensive even if oil prices spike as they did in the summer of 2008."