Opening up the waters off the coast of Florida to oil and gas drilling

[Meredith Poor + 883]

Great idea. Put the first rig within sight of Mar-a-Lago.

"...some Republicans told Politico that losing Florida with the approval of the drilling plan could cost Trump a second term in office." Trump is already toast, so this would simply be a cherry on top. What the tone-deaf bureaucrats in Washington don't realize is that Florida is already having severe water quality problems with red tide algae. This is already affecting election outcomes in the state, both at federal and state level. The Florida perspective on this has less to do with 'oil contamination' than it has to do with 'contamination' in general - algae from fertilizers, plastics, and sewage.

And pythons.

[John Foote + 1,135]

Florida's economy is heavily dependent on tourism. Love those Gulf coast beaches. Floridians, economically, would be crazy to embrace drilling. 

You go to the Texas gulf coast, and there are places as you leave the beach to scrub the oil off. Globs of oil is a thing. Most of the Texas Gulf isn't tourist oriented, and Texas tolerate it. Besides, the oil was there as an industry before there were many people.

Florida is a great example of human engineering, we can make it work, even if perhaps we shouldn't. Without A/C the population would be much smaller. Half the state should be swamp, but they've set up remarkable drainage systems to support cattle, and suburbs. It has effected weather patterns, no doubt species died, but it doesn't mean the planet is ending, we just are changing it. Rarely are the results exactly as intended, but ask the Dutch, it's not that hard to live below sea level.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

5 hours ago, John Foote said:

Florida's economy is heavily dependent on tourism. Love those Gulf coast beaches. Floridians, economically, would be crazy to embrace drilling. 

You go to the Texas gulf coast, and there are places as you leave the beach to scrub the oil off. Globs of oil is a thing. Most of the Texas Gulf isn't tourist oriented, and Texas tolerate it. Besides, the oil was there as an industry before there were many people.

Florida is a great example of human engineering, we can make it work, even if perhaps we shouldn't. Without A/C the population would be much smaller. Half the state should be swamp, but they've set up remarkable drainage systems to support cattle, and suburbs. It has effected weather patterns, no doubt species died, but it doesn't mean the planet is ending, we just are changing it. Rarely are the results exactly as intended, but ask the Dutch, it's not that hard to live below sea level.

Ever been to Santa Barbara? The beaches there had oil hundreds of years before there was an oil industry. It's called natural seeps. The famous Cantarell Field was discovered because a Mexican fisherman named Cantarell went to Pemex to complain about oil in his fishing spot. It wasn't their oil, it was a natural seep. Cantarell never made a nickel of course and the stink about Santa Barbara beaches ensured the death of offshore drilling in California, never mind that the prevalence of oil on the beaches went DOWN because of production. But facts don't stand a chance against stupidity and emotional decision making. Stupid people outnumber voters smart by a factor of ten. It's only a matter of time until stupidity uber alles. 

[John Foote + 1,135]

16 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Ever been to Santa Barbara? 

Yup, and the tar pits, and so forth. If there is a prettier coast in the USA than the bottom of California to the top of Washington State, I haven't seen it. And I've been top to bottom on the east, and the Gulf. I don't count Puerto Rico or Hawaii, too small, but stunning. 

It's not natural seepage tar balls at Port Aransas you have to scrub off yourself prior to going back to your condo. To imply that natural seepage is a statistically significant amount of the oil leaked into the Gulf of Mexico over the years is downright absurd.

A Stanford grad discovered the stuff in Saudi. Go to the Stanford Earth Sciences graduation ceremony and it's PhDs in petroleum engineering on parade. Californians might not think of themselves as cornerstones to the industry, but they are.

I live in Texas and I'm fine with offshore drilling, but a Floridian would be a loon to embrace drilling. The risk/benefit equation for the locals doesn't justify it. There is plenty of oil out in the world already, and people wanting to sell it. 

 

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,177]

19 minutes ago, John Foote said:

I live in Texas and I'm fine with offshore drilling, but a Floridian would be a loon to embrace drilling. The risk/benefit equation for the locals doesn't justify it. There is plenty of oil out in the world already, and people wanting to sell it. 

Well the damn Saudi's keep cutting back to drive up the price. I am part time Texas resident, my thoughts on the subject is let them drill but 40 miles out. Doubt much oil closer to shore, but out there is plenty. Clear down to Cuba, but more difficult to drill I would think, or they'd have their own platforms instead of Venez oil being shipped to em. In my thinking it's best to be 100% oil independent and learn from past mistakes. Ultimately the American public pays when crude skyrockets. Would be nice to have insurance from unstable parts of the world.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Old-Ruffneck

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, John Foote said:

Yup, and the tar pits, and so forth. If there is a prettier coast in the USA than the bottom of California to the top of Washington State, I haven't seen it. And I've been top to bottom on the east, and the Gulf. I don't count Puerto Rico or Hawaii, too small, but stunning. 

It's not natural seepage tar balls at Port Aransas you have to scrub off yourself prior to going back to your condo. To imply that natural seepage is a statistically significant amount of the oil leaked into the Gulf of Mexico over the years is downright absurd.

A Stanford grad discovered the stuff in Saudi. Go to the Stanford Earth Sciences graduation ceremony and it's PhDs in petroleum engineering on parade. Californians might not think of themselves as cornerstones to the industry, but they are.

I live in Texas and I'm fine with offshore drilling, but a Floridian would be a loon to embrace drilling. The risk/benefit equation for the locals doesn't justify it. There is plenty of oil out in the world already, and people wanting to sell it. 

 

They had tar balls on the beach in Port Aransas in 1917. Who was the offshore operator then?

The Ixtoc spill left a large mess that was never cleaned up, unlike BP, Pemex never did a thing for us after their disaster. There are some tar balls that have been buried in the beach sand and wind and waves bring them back up to the surface. 

Statistics, hmm, there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Given the depths involved you'd think seeps would be incredibly rare. Given the pressure at times, you'd think they'd be far more common. We have barely a clue what's under the ocean, there are over 100 active volcanoes in our oceans every year, with new ones popping up all the time. Like that tree that falls in the forest, if we're not listening for it, it's like it never happened. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

First, unless I am mistaken, a study was performed back in the late 70's/early 80's and the majority of oil washing up on the Texas coastline was due to ships pumping their bilges out in international waters.

Secondly, Florida enjoys the benefits derived from offshore drilling in other States assuming that they use products refined from that oil. They do have the right to ban drilling in their State. By doing this they are essentially telling the other Gulf Coast States that it is acceptable for them to absorb the risk of environmental damage to provide oil and gas for the country as a whole but Florida will not accept the risk but will continue to use the product.

Fair enough. Place an additional tax on all petroleum products used in Florida and put the money in an account strictly for mitigating damage from any future spill etc,,, Fair is fair.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

On 4/12/2019 at 7:53 PM, Meredith Poor said:

some Republicans told Politico that losing Florida with the approval of the drilling plan could cost Trump a second term in office." Trump is already toast, so this would simply be a cherry on top.

Amusing that Politico still thinks that Trump will lose in 2020.  Slow learners.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

7 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Amusing that Politico still thinks that Trump will lose in 2020.  Slow learners.

The fog of war. If someone knows who's going to win in 2020, why can't they win the $1 billion bet on March Madness?