SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: koan who wrote (190950)5/4/2010 6:52:05 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362293
 
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): BP spill could help Senate pass energy bill and climate bill
Joe Lieberman (I-CT): Disastrous BP oil volcano would "certainly not lead us to remove" drilling provisions
May 4, 2010
“I think it should spur it on,” Reid said. “We have to take care of this issue. I am amazed how difficult it seems to be to get people interested in alternative energy.”

Reid cited Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s decision last week to approve a long-standing permitting application for the Cape Wind project off the Massachusetts coast. “Alternative energy is what we need to do as rapidly as we can,” Reid said. “So I think rather than slow us up, I think it should expedite our doing energy legislation.”

That’s the majority leader quoted in an E&E News PM story (subs. req’d). He went on to add:

Reid said he agreed with President Obama’s decision to pause on new drilling exploration while Salazar conducts a 30-day review of the Gulf spill. “I think we’re all going to back off from offshore drilling until we get a better handle on how we can do this safely,” he said.

Ah, but then there is Joltin’ Joe from the great state of Connecticut, which is free from worries of offshore drilling thanks to Obama’s recently announced restrictions:

One of the lead sponsors of the Senate climate and energy bill, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), told reporters today that the Gulf spill would “certainly not lead us to remove” the drilling provisions from the measure.

“This terrible accident is very rare in drilling,” Lieberman said. “I mean, accidents happen, and you learn from them and you try to make sure they don’t happen again.”

Lieberman said he did not think a decision to leave the oil and gas language in the bill would change the vote count for the climate measure.

“Well I hope not,” he said. “I’m sure it will agitate some people. But the whole idea of the bill is to be less dependent on foreign fuel and to be less dependent on fossil fuel generally. And as part of that, the more we can get oil and gas from inside the United States as we transition to total alternative clean energy economy, the better off we are.”

Lieberman said that the climate bill from him and Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) would put an additional restriction on offshore drilling by allowing states to veto drilling within 75 miles of their coasts.

The Deepwater Horizon well is in the waters that would be controlled by Louisiana under this restriction. Neighboring states would not have a veto.

Precisely.

Now, in the real world, I can’t imagine any of the (lower 48) states that Obama opened for exploratory drilling (East Coast below Delaware plus Florida) would do so under the current circumstances — including Graham’s home state of South Carolina. But merely giving the home state a veto when the spill could devastate neighboring states isn’t going to fly.

So I do wonder if the authors are going to stick by their fiction that such a provision is actually crucial to passage, when the reverse is obviously true:

Earlier today, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) threatened to filibuster energy legislation if it allowed for an expansion of offshore oil drilling.

“I will make it short and to the point: The president’s proposal for offshore drilling is dead on arrival,” Nelson said. “If offshore drilling off of the coast of the continental United States is part of it, this legislation is not going anywhere.”

“If I have to do a filibuster, which I had to five years ago … I will do so again,” Nelson added.

Again, if Obama and Senate Democrats can’t get a bill to move off of fossil fuels after this fossil-fuel-driven disaster, then, well, I guess we will all just go on thinking the same things about them we do now.
climateprogress.org



To: koan who wrote (190950)5/4/2010 7:02:33 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362293
 
Paranoia & anxiety grow over Gulf Coast oil spill

By VICKI SMITH and ALLEN G. BREED
The Associated Press
Tuesday, May 4, 2010; 6:14 PM

GRAND ISLE, La. -- People along the Gulf Coast have spent weeks living with uncertainty, wondering where and when a huge slick of oil might come ashore, ruining their beaches - and their livelihoods.

The anxiety is so acute that some are seeing and smelling oil where there is none. And even though the dead turtles and jellyfish washing ashore along the Gulf of Mexico are clean, and scientists have yet to determine what killed them, many are just sure the flow of crude unleashed by the explosion at BP's Deepwater Horizon is the culprit.

Calm seas Tuesday helped cleanup crews working to fight the oil gushing from the well a mile below the surface, allowing them to put out more containment equipment and repair some booms damaged in rough weather over the weekend. They also hoped to again try to burn some of the oil on the water's surface Tuesday afternoon.

A Coast Guard official said forecasts showed the oil wasn't expected to come ashore until at least Thursday.

"It's a gift of a little bit of time. I'm not resting," U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry said.

Near Port Fourchon, southwest of New Orleans, workers for contractor Wild Well Control were busy welding and painting a massive containment device. BP spokesman John Curry said would be deployed on the seabed by Thursday.

That wasn't much comfort to the hotel owners, fishing boat captains and others who rely on the ocean to make a living.

"The waiting is the hardest part. The not knowing," said Dodie Vegas, 44, who runs the Bridge Side Cabins complex in Grand Isle, a resort and recreational fishing community that's just about as far south in Louisiana as you can go. So far, two fishing rodeos have been canceled, and 10 guests have canceled their rooms.

The Deepwater Horizon exploded April 20, killing 11 workers and sending hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil a day gushing into the Gulf. While a rainbow sheen of oil has reached land in parts of Louisiana, the gooey rafts of coagulated crude have yet to come ashore in most places.

Officials couldn't confirm reports that some of it reached the delicate Chandeleur Islands off the coast of Louisiana on Tuesday. The Associated Press reported oil had come ashore at the mouth of the Mississippi last week.

While officials worked on cleanup, the long wait took its toll - on nerves and wallets.

"It's aggravating, to a point," said Frank Besson, 61, owner of Nez Coupe Souvenir & Tackle. "You got people canceling out, thinking we've got oil on the beaches, and it's not even at the mouth of the Mississippi."

Over the weekend, residents on Florida's Navarre Beach thought they saw an oily sheen in the surf. When a dead bird washed up, that only reinforced their fears.

Reporters, lifeguards and the Navarre Fire Department descended on the beach. Community officials eventually declared what washed ashore was just "a natural occurrence."

The Environmental Protection Agency stepped up air quality monitoring on the Gulf Coast after people in New Orleans and elsewhere reported a strong odor of petroleum. A throng standing on the beach in Gulfport, Miss., Saturday were convinced they could smell the slick - until someone pointed out a big diesel truck idling just 50 feet away.

When the truck left, so did the smell.

Dr. Timothy F. Jones, deputy state epidemiologist with the Tennessee Department of Health, witnessed a similar phenomenon in his own state.

In 1998, Jones investigated a case in which reports of a funny smell at a high school blossomed into a wave of nausea, dizziness, headaches and drowsiness that sent 170 people to area hospitals, shut down the school for more than two weeks and eventually cost nearly $100,000 in emergency medical care. Officials never were able to identify a physical source, viral or chemical, leading to the conclusion that the cause was most likely psychological.

"They're often associated with lots of media and lots of attention," Jones said of these events. "They often occur in populations under stress."

That certainly describes the current spill and the perennially beleaguered communities along the Gulf Coast.

Fishermen have complained bitterly about the federal decision to close a large swathe of the Gulf to commercial and sport fishing, saying it was an overreaction. Some even vowed to keep catching fish until someone arrested them.

But U.S. Sen. David Vitter said it was necessary to reassure the American public that the seafood on restaurant menus and store shelves is safe.

"We don't want hysteria to take over and hysteria to hurt the industry even more than the oil is," said Vitter, R-La.

Daryl Carpenter, president of the Louisiana Charter Boat Association, is struggling to get people to understand that three-quarters of the Gulf is still clean and open to fishing.

In Gulf Shores, Ala., the real estate firm Brett/Robinson Vacations, sent a note to those renting vacation properties that they would not be penalized for any spill-related cancellations, but urged them not to jump the gun.

"There are many questions and many `what ifs' regarding this event," the message read. "Because changes come about hourly and 30 days is a long way away, we are asking you to wait before canceling your vacation, especially those of you who are scheduled to arrive more than 30 days from today."

The missive concluded with the words: "Thank you for staying with us and enjoying our beautiful Beaches."

There are legitimate concerns, experts say. A second bird found in the slick, a brown pelican, is recovering at a bird rescue center in Louisiana. National Wildlife Federation president and CEO Larry Schweiger says there's no way to know how many birds have been oiled because the slick is so big and so far offshore.

A decade ago when Jan Grant and her husband bought their little piece of paradise on St. George Island, Fla., bound by Apalachicola Bay on one side and the Gulf on the other, they never worried that the white sand 200 yards in front of the hotel could be covered in oil. Their St. George Inn is booked full the next two weekends, and Grant is taking reservations into the summer, but travelers are already calling about the spill.

"You mentally want to push it back to the west, and then you feel guilty for doing so," Jan Grant said.

"All we're doing is holding our collective breath," echoed Stella Banta, who was taking similar calls at Coombs Inn in Apalachicola's brick-lined historic district.

Idling his 28-foot charter boat in the lee of Louisiana's pristine Chandeleur Islands, Bob Kenney looked over the gunwales to see dozens of dead baby jellyfish floating along the hull. Off in the distance, the collections of thick, reddish-brown goo looked for all the world like little islands - except that they were moving.

"There's no sense in telling me the impact until you get the oil shut off," said the 41-year-old boat captain, who has already lost a half-dozen charters from people worried about fishing in the tainted Gulf.

Amid all the speculation surrounding the spill, the one thing that seemed certain was that life would never be the same.

"You know change is a-comin' after this, bro," he said, shaking his head ruefully. "You can't keep doing this kind of stuff to Mother Ocean."

---

Associated Press writer Kevin McGill in New Orleans contributed to this story.



To: koan who wrote (190950)5/4/2010 7:06:10 PM
From: Travis_Bickle  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 362293
 
Oysters are filter feeders, they depend on water quality to survive. They also play a role in keeping the water clean.

There are two questions, (1) can the oysters survive? and (2) are they safe to eat?

I think the Gulf of America oyster market is pretty much done for. Nobody wants to eat tainted oysters.



To: koan who wrote (190950)5/4/2010 7:36:10 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362293
 
Don't-Drill-Baby-Don't-Drill...

Schwarzenegger Abandons Offshore Plan; So Should Obama
by John Nichols
Published on Tuesday, May 4, 2010 by The Nation

It is not often that a politician is confronted by reality and does the right thing.

Indeed, if there is a pattern of late it has been that, when confronted with evidence that they are wrong, most elected officials claim that they are victims of partisan attacks on their integrity or, in the case of Sarah Palin, simply quit.

But the scope of the environmental, economic and social catastrophe caused by the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is proving to be so immense that some politicians are breaking pattern.

While President Obama has yet to do the right thing and admit that he was wrong to buy into Palin’s “drill-baby-drill” fantasy and bend on the question of whether to permit more offshore drilling, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is going green on this one.

The Republican governor abruptly abandoned his support for the controversial Tranquillon Ridge drilling project off the coast of California’s Santa Barbara County Monday.

Schwarzenegger says he was convinced to do so by the images of the disaster off Louisiana.

"All of you have seen, when you turn on the television, the devastation in the Gulf, and I'm sure that they also were assured that it was safe to drill," he explained at a press conference. "I see on TV the birds drenched in oil, the fisherman out of work, the massive oil spill and oil slick destroying our precious ecosystem. That will not happen here in California, and this is why I am withdrawing my support for the T-Ridge project."

The truly remarkable thing about Schwarzenegger’s response – which effectively kills the California project he had championed – is that he acted as a human being, not a political machine repeating talking points even after they have been disproven.

No rational human being could consider the nightmare scenario that is playing out in the Gulf and not be moved to assure that it will not be repeated.

Yet, most politicians who depend for the livelihoods on campaign contributions from big oil – and friendly coverage from media outlets that preach the energy-corporation mantra – are still waiting to see whether the latest coastal crisis will shift public sentiment so firmly against dangerous drilling that they must finally abandon what was always a fool’s mission.

Schwarzenegger said he had been convinced of the safety of the California drilling initiative when he championed it. That was always a dubious claim. Even if the governor has established a reasonable record on environmental issues, at least as compared to other prominent Republicans in recent years, the arguments against the T-Ridge project were always strong.

This led Schwarzenegger critics to suggest that he was influenced less by safety studies than by the prospect that the project would pump as much as $100 million a year in new revenue into the coffers of his cash-strapped state.

The images of environmental devastation along the coast of Louisiana tipped the scales toward realism, however.

"If I have a choice between $100 million and what you area see in the Gulf of Mexico, I'd rather just find out a way to make up for that $100 million," said Schwarzenegger. "(When) you turn on television and see the enormous disaster, you say to yourself, why would we want to take that risk? The risk is just much greater than the money is worth, and so we will figure out how to deal with the extra $100 million problem."

It is not necessary to make a hero of Schwarzenegger.

Indeed, as Congressman John Garamendi, D-California, says: “It’s unfortunate it took one of the worst ecological disasters in U.S. history for Governor Schwarzenegger to come to his senses, but today, friends of California’s coastline can breathe a sigh of relief. There will be no more new leases for oil drilling from platforms off the coast of Santa Barbara.”

When Garamendi, a former California lieutenant governor, chaired the State Lands Commission -- the independent commission responsible for approving oil leases in California – he aggressively opposed permitting new drilling from platforms off the California coast, arguing tha such projects raised the risk of ecological and economic disaster.

“The Gulf Coast oil spill – which threatens 40 percent of U.S. wetlands and will cost fishing and tourism industries billions of dollars – proves my point,” said Garamendi, who noted that the point was proven not just for one state or region.

Echoing a call from MoveOn for Obama to go all the way and reinstate the historic ban on new offshore drilling projects, the congressman concluded: “President Obama has proposed a temporary presidential moratorium on new offshore oil drilling, and that’s a good start, but Congress plays an important role as well. Our coast is best protected when both the President and Congress make it clear that new offshore drilling is not an option."

Garamendi is right.

But he could say it another way.

Governor Schwarzenegger responded in the appropriate way to the evidence that he was wrong about offshore drilling.

President Obama should do the same.

© 2010 The Nation

*John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. A co-founder of the media reform organization Free Press, Nichols is is co-author with Robert W. McChesney of The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again and Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy.