Badmovies.org Forum

McCain plays with fire on offshore drilling
By calling for an end to the federal ban on offshore oil drilling, John McCain is placing a risky bet. He is wagering that skyrocketing gas prices have finally reached a tipping point, a threshold moment that has led voters to rethink their strong and long-held opinions against coastal oil exploration.
 
The stakes couldn’t be higher: If he is wrong, McCain will have seriously damaged his chances in two key states with thousands of miles of coastline — California and Florida — and where opposition to offshore oil drilling has been unwavering. And he will have undermined some of his closest political allies in those states and others, including potential fall battlegrounds such as Virginia and North Carolina...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080617/pl_politico/11154 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080617/pl_politico/11154)

What's he got to lose? A lot of people have been begging him to flip on this issue for a long time. The polls are in his favor:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lower_prices

And Charlie Crist just flipped in his favor too:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/573350.html

Also, doesn't this story belong in the "Off Topic" section? This doesn't look like movie news/press releases to me.

No.  This part of the forum is Press releases and Movie News and all regular news stories on this board are posted here. 

My opinion on offshore drilling: who cares if the view of a few coastal Texans/Floridians is impaired?  When you build a house by the sea, you bear the risks, including the possible erection of offshore platforms, flooding, and saltwater zombies. 

My opinion on whether it's a good political move for McCain: I dunno.  Ideally, [entering fanatasyland] a candidate should build his platform around what he thinks is good for the country, and try to sell his vision to the voting public through convincing facts and analysis[/fantasyland].

On whether this should be posted in "off topic" or "press releases": no opinion.     

On Allhallowsday's new identity: Wonka, I think you should log back onto your profile to post.  If you keep this posting pattern up you're in danger of turning into Menard II... *shudder*

The concern with offshore drilling is oil spills, entirely environmental.  I offer no opinion one way or the other, simply that clarification. 

Oh, and All Saint's Day is not a new identity, it's a nom de plume.  More to the point, I'm sharing InYourRear's temporary banishment which ends Friday, a negligible punishment.  His karma continues to rise, but mine, not at all.  Obviously, that turd has fans here, but I lack that coterie.  My point is made for my own sake, if not for anyone else's. 

The real point is that allowing oil drilling offshore isn't going to be any quick help.  It'll be long after the next two presidential terms before they could get the rigs up and running.

I agree with your last sentence, but I heard an interview last week with an ex-floor trader on the issue of commodities trading.  She said if it were announced today that we are going to drill on the shelf or in ANWAR, the price would drop pretty quick.

Those advising buy or sell on oil are looking into the future about 10 years or so.  Her point was that because they are advising long term investors, ie those with big bucks that really make a difference on this kind of thing, "sell now because the supply side will seriously change within the next 8-10 years), the effect will be almost immediate.

She's not in it anymore, so her comments were not to push up her commissions or anything like that.  She was just offering the experience of someone actually in the finance industry.

Count me as a fan, either 'Hallows' or 'Saints'.  :cheers:

Consider this a Karma IOU you can collect after your return.

(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/morrisawilliams/KarmaGautengLogo.gif)

FUN FACT: If you do a Google image search for KARMA you gets lots of pictures of ladies' naughty bits!
Not recommended for children under 18, pregnant women, highly nervous persons, or persons with weak hearts or back trouble.

You're funny... Thanks for the kind words; means much more than you may realize.  And you can find me right in this part of the forum, just look for the notorious thread (not that one) about BUSH and Iraq Intel, started by Allhallowsday.  I have logged in a few times, but only to pm a few friends and restore the karma of the others I know were "smited" by InYourRear.  I don't think they know I've been doing that, but it makes me feel better.   :thumbup:  I'll be sure to karma you, too.  Karma is not quite as meaningless as I had thought.  It's symbolic.  

FIGHT THE POWER!

(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/morrisawilliams/Fight20the20Power.jpg)

One of the reasons I hate to post in these types of threads is that to do competently requires more time than I'm willing to put in.  I thought of the environmental concerns, but they're more theoretical than real, to my knowledge (which doesn't mean they can't motivate people).  As I recall from growing up in Texas near the Gulf coast is that people hated the fact that they spoiled the view.

Nice to hear that the self-imposed banishment will end.  I wasn't aware that InYaRear's karma was rising.  He must have a secret dedicated fan.  Don't let it bother you, it's all childishness. 

Spot on, markets are futures and speculations, some want to say "Oh you won't get nothing for 10 years!" well yeah and you point is? The knowledge of the trader, the speculator that more product will one day enter the market will drive the price down now as they deal in futures. While short term futures my rise, long term futures will fall.
The Chinese announced that they will no longer subsidize oil, the price dropped $5 a barrel today and will likely fall more tomorrow as after hours trading was down. Now once the impact of a 20% rate hike on the Chinese people has time to play out and the market can see if consumption goes down the market will react again.
Just the news that American drove 1.8% less this year than last will drive prices down, now 1.8% doesn't sound like much until you factor in that Americans drove over 3 TRILLION (Trillion with a T) miles last year according to the Federal Highway Administration. 1.8% translates into a lot of gas.
It's all supply and demand, great supply and falling demand equals lower prices.

ONE of us must have spelled it wrong because I didn't find a thing. Not even a single granny-sagging inverted nipple. I'm not one to give negative karma, , but if you get my hopes up like that again without reason, I won't be held responsible for my actions. Nudity is something I take VERY seriously (but my wife, she doesn't, , cuz whenever I'm naked, she's always laughing, , never have figured it out. . )

You must still have safe search turned on in Google as I just Googled "Karma" and will I got chicks behaving badly.

Yep, apparently "Karma" is a 'rising' porn star.  I found this glowing description of her:

"Karma Karma Karma! Karma is a really nice girl with a real NAUGHTY side. She loves to push the envelope when it comes to sex. If you met her in a club and she was into you you just might be lucky enough to slip out back and get her Karma Specialty  :buggedout:"

Sadly, I have the suspicion she won't be impressed by my "karma score."

And just to keep the thread on topic, add "And speaking of drilling..." to the front of my previous comments.

You sir have opened up a whole new world to me. Karma for pictures of, , Karma, , naked, , and, , , gottagobye. .

I say, screw digging up any more oil. Instead, work on a cheaper, more enviromentaly friendly power sorce. Duh.

What are you going to do in the mean time, while all these new, magical, perfect panacea solutions are being "worked on?"

And here's a reason why your suggestion to stop digging for oil is extremely short sighted and one dimensional.  Oil is not just used to fuel our engines.  If we stop digging up oil, how are we going to make all those cool plastics and other synthetics that we all rely on so much (everything from bubble wrap and DVD disks to some VERY useful medical supplies - tubing, replacement joints, etc).  No more gortex or nylon or dacron; no superglue.  All of these things that are made from synthetic polymers have petroleum precursors. Take a look around and imagine your life without all the things you have used in the last 24 hours that ultimately came from oil.

The thing that bugs me about almost every one of these discussions on energy is how a "one size fits all" approach seems to be universally assumed.  I don't understand why no one is saying "oil is okay for this application, electric is better for that application, solar works good for this, wind for that, fuel cells there," etc.

Instead, it seems like everything has to be "all or nothing."  Either we ALL get off oil and onto ONE other thing, or we ALL use oil and continue to complain about it.  And all the "other things" are competing for mindshare to become the Next Big Thing, the One Thing that replaced that Old Thing oil.  It just does not make sense.

Right tool for the job.  There are just some things that right now, given present day technology, petroleum is REALLY good for.  Economies, like governments, carry a certain degree of momentum.  You cannot undo the last 100 years or so of growth on a petroleum foundation overnight.

Magic? Hmm....now THERES an idea...So you're saying I should vote for Harry Potter?

From now on, all things will rely on the power of MAGIC! case closed! Goodnight, everybody!

I'm in favor of doing it all. Let's drill for oil, blast for coal, build those wind turbines on Cape Cod, set up massive solar energy arrays in Death Valley, build oil refineries and nuclear power plants, keep working on producing biofuel and continue developing more generations of Tesla Roadsters. That oil and coal isn't doing the environment any good sitting in the ground and the desert animals ought to appreciate having more shade from solar panels. The only flaw in McCain's energy policy is that he isn't fired up enough about it.

Offshore drilling seems to be slowly turning Newfoundland into a Canadian "Have" province.

I have to agree with you 100%. We also have to come to the conclusion that some of the "Holy Grails" of energy were are looking for just may not ever happen, like cold fusion. There's currently a serious search for a small scale nuclear direct to electricity solution, and by small scale I mean vehicle, and it very well may be unattaiable.
Your right tool for the right job approach is exactly what people need to understand. Solar won't work well in northern Alaska due to the long winter darkness. Geothermal is another that only works well in some places, and where it works, it should be used.

"screw digging up more oil?", OK, so we then start paying $300 for forign oil, since we need it now for out cars, heating, etc. Not digging for oil does not equal not NEEDING oil. Oil will always be needed, there's no avoiding that, but the key is to use alternatives as much as possible, especially for the large-scale uses. There are still many electrical power-plants that are oil-fired.
The (or at least ONE) problem is, that every alternative has it's opposition, and not just the competition. People complain about hydroelectric because of the perceived danger downstream, and how it changes the landscape. People complain about wind, because those windmill farms break up an otherwise picturesque view. Nuclear? Pretty obvious what the objections are there. CNG is a damn good, clean resource that's been used for decades, but if you talk to some, especially where there is none, they don't know how useful it is. I had a neighbor that was opposed to NG being brought to the area, and swore that entire villages were randomly exploding due to it.
People just aren't realistic I feel. An example, is the area I go hiking in, it's about 30 miles square, and has a trail that basically loops in about 5 miles, and another trail that sprouts off to a lake a few more miles. 8 miles of trail total. This is a foot trail, just wide enough for one person, yet, if you step off, some people will b***h. Litterally, this trail takes up 0.00016% if the park, and someone b***hes when you step one foot off the trail? THESE are the people energy, including ALTERNATIVE energy are up against. It's no wonder we're stuck doing what we have been doing all along, headway is hard to make, but the blame for lack of success always goes elsewhere. I hear people talk about how some dude at GM invented a carburator that will allow any car to get 300mpg, but the oil companies bought up the patent.  People believe this, regardless of how logically and scientifically flawed it is. Anyways, I'm getting off subject. Now you know why those "Scarlet Fry" posts come so naturally for me, it's the A.D.D.

Right, and the people that believe asinine drivel like this have no clue how businesses operate.  Businesses exist to make money - to generate wealth.  They really don't care how or what product.

So, IF this carb did exist, and IF the oil companies DID buy up that patent, don't ya think they'd make a killing selling cars that get 300 mpg? 

Why would they care if they were no longer selling as much oil? They'd corner the car market.

And this applies to ANY new alternative tech - be it solar, fuel cell, whatever.  There is absolutely NO motivation for them to suppress the tech to protect their "profits;" if they know it exists and is viable, the smart business move is to exploit the new tech and make profit on THAT.

Besides, the 8% or so profit in the petroleum industry is probably not worth fighting for as hard as 'these people' seem to think it is.  It just boggles my mind, continues to boggle my mind, how little so many people understand about how economies and businesses work.

If a car were out there that made 300 mpg, I'd happily pay $15 a gallon, , that's 20 miles per dollar, instead of the <5 miles to the dollar I'm paying now at $4.83 or so. They'd make more money, have to do less, and it would last longer.

Nevermind that 99.9% of the energy in a gallon of gas is accounted for. In an average sized car, the energy needed to move the car equals around 30% of the energy found in gasoline, so most cars just can't get better than 80 by only increasing engine efficiency. The problem with the internal combustion engine is that it wastes TONS of energy in the form of heat. Think about it: Do you know of ANYTHING besides your car that has NO insulation, yet there's never a problem keeping it warm? The reason is that there is such a huge amount of energy wasted as heat, that if we reclaim just a small portion of it with a cheap and primitive system such as a car has, it's enough to keep the inside of an uninsulated vehicle running down the road at 60 mph in -30f weather nice and warm with no trouble at all. That has nothing to do with the carb, it's inherent to any internal combustion engine.

What you are alluding to with the heat thing is what in thermodynamics is called "Carnot Efficiency."  It's a fundamental consequence of the Second Law of Thermodynamics (the same law that brings us the concept of Entropy).

Basically, this has to do with how heat is converted to work and vice versa in an "engine" (here engine is far more general than internal combustion engine, it's any 'device' that converts heat->work and work->heat).  The Carnot Efficiency is inversely related to the ratio "cold side" temperature divided by the "hot side" temperature.

If we cool the exhaust (making the hot and cold sides closer to the same temperature) so we don't waste all the energy as heat would dramatically lower the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine.

The only point I was making was how erroneous the mythical "300 mpg carburetor" was. My point was that there are other things that have been observed to be inefficiencies that have nothing to do with the carb, and also the fact that there just isn't enough energy in a gallon of gas to move a medium or large size car 300 miles on typical roads.

You lost me WAY before "carrot effigy", , something to do with Easter Island?  :twirl: :bouncegiggle:

I gotcha... :cheers:

I was just emphasizing your point.  Those that make arguments like 300 mpg cars are talking the impossible because that sort of thing violates the fundamental physical laws of the universe (at least as the brightest minds the earth has produced understand them).

It's ridiculous on so many levels, and ignorance is compounded by stupidity by the assertion that is made that the oil companies would suppress such tech if it were possible.

Carnot Efficiency - I know what it is, I know the concept of how it works, I have no idea how to 'splain it.



What is it was a really small car?



Correct, that thinking (300 mpg carb) in line with some of the nut jobs you here in "Coast to Coast AM with George Noory" (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/) the government conspiracist type that think there is little green men in Area 51. (We all know their Gray .. jeez)

I heard a rumor year ago along the same line that some guy invented a oil filter that was so good you never had to change you oil. But the oil companies bought and silenced him. Righhttt.

I'm never ceased to be amazed by the number of people that believe just flat out stupid sh!t. And the worse part is I hear some of these insane rumors repeated by seemingly intelligent people. If they would just sit down and think about realistically and logically they'd see the flaws in the claim.

If we want energy independence where going to have to drill and use our own oil and while doing that develop AFFORDABLE alternatives. I live on a hill the wind blows nearly all year long, so I looked into a wind generator. Well one big enough to power my house and shop with a little left over to feed the grid was nearly $25,000.00  by the time it was installed, wired, new  reverse meters etc. it was going to be close to $30,000.00 just not going to lay out that kind of cash on it.   

Yep, a few years ago I was engineering off-grid and back-up power systems, mostly for home use.  I remember the summer there was something in the paper about what I was doing (not an ad, not an interview, more like a letter to the editor type thing) and I got all kinds of phone calls and emails and the like.  Every one liked the idea of living off the grid or having back-up.

But no one wanted to pay what it costs.  It was a ten year investment before ROI, and that just does not fit into the instant gratification demands of our culture.

That and the cost, a wind generator likely wouldn't last long enough to pay for itself before it needed replacing and that is a negative ROI.

I have the papers somewhere, but the money I was going to theoretically save verses investment and yearly maintenance wasn't enough to out last the service life of the generator, in fact it was a negative gain. So why invest $30K to realize a 0% financial gain when you could leave it in a saving account or money market and realize a modest gain.

If you look at a wind generator, you just don't see $25K-$30K worth of parts, design and labor. What you do see is someone trying to get rich while every one is in "save the planet" mode. Well, I'm in "save my money" mode and can small an opportunist. 

The wind turbines I was using were designed for marine use - very robust.  I'd have to check on the service life numbers, but they were not THAT expensive, either - like $1000-$2000 for the wind gen by itself.  I'd be very suprised if they did NOT last 10 years.

The total systems I spec'd out came to $10,000-$20,000 (except one, and he wanted to power some industrial grade irrigation pumps for his farm!!).  The hard thing was when someone had electric heat, dryer, stove, etc, instead of gas. 

The bulk of the cost was all the other stuff you needed, such as charge controllers, batteries, as well as installation labor and design cost.  Some had some really bizarre design details.  I did one design for a combined wind/hydro system for a guy, and I had to set up all kinds of automatic stuff like opening and closing the valve to the hydro, etc.  After all, I was not in it to lose money.   :wink:

I do believe that at least some decentralization of power production would be a Good Thing.  But like everything else, to 'grow your own' takes work, and too many folks like to just turn on the light switch and have the light come on, no fuss, no muss.

The one I was looking at was 10kW ...
http://www.solarhome.org/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=920 (http://www.solarhome.org/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=920)

This would supply the house, the shop and produce excess to feed. However, our local small co-op electric company was unsure how to use a reverse meter and if it would cause problems to there system and didn't want it attached without further study, which they wanted me to pay for.   

So I didn't want to get completely get off the grid, since I wanted to feed the grid with excess and get a check from the utility. Which would be the idea thing, enough people pump energy back into the grid that those leeching the grid pay the feeders through the utility.

So I've thought of going with a smaller one to supplement, but I'm still looking at it.

Back to my no one-size-fits-all idea...one idea you might consider is split your load.

Convert to 12 V (or 24 or 48 if you prefer) for lights and small appliances.  Run the appliances of an inverter if you need to.  DC is much better for "local" power distribution.  It lost to AC back when they were figuring how to get juice from the plant to the cities...AC wins on long distance distribution.

So, if you are making your own juice, be it from hydro, wind or solar, think DC, not AC.  Then you can use batteries to store energy to dip into for "peak" use; provided your peaks are not too large or happen too often, you can dramatically downsize your generation needs.  Let the batts absorb the peaks, rather than having a generator large enough to meet the peak demand you only hit once or twice a day for relatively short duration.

Power everything you can light load wise with this setup.  Stay on the grid for air conditioning, electric heat, clothes dryer, etc, all the big demand loads.  At least initially.

Part of the trick is to design a small system first, but one that can expand later.

Finally, living off the grid, at least cheaply, does perhaps take some lifestyle changes.  If you are running on batts at night with only solar charging, you just think more about leaving lights on in rooms when you leave.

Oh by the way...that's be nuts.  Going just solar I mean...and for a LOT of reasons.  Solar is great, but wind/hydro are MUCH better.  I could set you up with a 5 kW hydro system for peanuts compared to what you were talking about paying for your total system.  Use two of them to meet your 10 kW demand if need be, and it'd still be less.  *IF* you live near running water, or a pond with sufficient head pressure.   :wink:

Well living in the flatlands of far western KY we have ton of water and hydro electric damns (TVA) but little head pressure with a damn, creeks, streams here a slow moving and would require damning and re-engineering to get a sustainable flow.

Wind would work best for me, but even the wind is not steady. A may try something on the shop at least in part of it, it's the biggest energy hog is saws, planners, drills, compressors etc. If it proves profitable to shave the utility bill then it would be worth looking at.

I had a supplier that made hydro systems for slow, low-head applications.  It was pricey.

Their principal market was water supply for remote third world villages.

I'd have to look it up because I don't recall the name, but if you want it, let me know.  You'd probably need 5 figures to buy one (good price for a village, not so good for a single home).

If you're bored look it up, otherwise don't. I have to do a cost benefit analysis of this little endeavor. I've looked at wind, hydro, solar and even switching to geothermal but the water table is really to hight here for a proper application of GT.

My goal was to find away to supply enough power to run everything here and maybe make a few bucks feeding the system.

as you've mentioned I've looked into low voltage interior lighting, led lighting, dual fuel HVAC, but I have so much going on right now I don't have enough mental room at the end of the day to invest in it.

I have no idea why I'm busy the news said there was a recession going on, so you know it got to be true.

I'm going to re roof my house this fall (hopefully if time permits) and I'm looking at various energy saving products to reduce cooling cost in the summer. The roof is over 50 squares so that's a big surface to suck up heat.