- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Gulf region lawmakers are demanding an end to the moratorium on offshore oil drilling imposed by the Obama administration, saying the cost to workers' livelihoods exceeds the risk of another spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
Louisiana Rep. Charlie Melancon joined several of the region's other congressional members on Tuesday to argue that a six-month moratorium would result in 20,000 lost jobs and the collapse of offshore drilling companies and suppliers, who contribute $6 billion a year to federal coffers.
FOXNews.com - Gulf Lawmakers to Obama: It's Time to Lift Ban on Offshore Drilling
Until they can fix a deep off shore oil leak in a timely manner the ban should not be lifted. Why is it unreasonable to not want another BP type disaster? This leak is worse than the Exxon Valdez oil spill and they still haven't cleaned everything up.
Did you hear Obama last night say that he enacted the moratorium for our own good? He's going to take our jobs away for our own good. That's just brilliant.
Why is it reasonalbe to kill even more jobs in an attempt to fix the leak?
Losing all those jobs isn't going to fix the leak any faster.
Did you hear Obama last night say that he enacted the moratorium for our own good? He's going to take our jobs away for our own good. That's just brilliant.
Was the shipping industry shut down after the Valedeze spill? Wasn't, was it?
And instead we should just let all off shore oil drilling continue as is without worrying about what caused this spill? If we lose some jobs over this that will definatly suck. I'm willing to bet though that it wouldn't suck as much as another one of these leaks that could potentially destroy an entire coastline of our country.
I would think not wanting the gulf of Mexico and the coast line to turn into a cesspool and not wanting fishing and tourism industry killed would be a good enough reason for most people. Considering it will take decades for clean up, those oil rig workers will have a alternate long term employment option assuming the fishermen and others who lost their livelihood due to the oil leak ave not already taken those clean up jobs.Why is it reasonalbe to kill even more jobs in an attempt to fix the leak?
Losing all those jobs isn't going to fix the leak any faster.
Until oil leaks like BP's can be fixed in a timely manner then it is a good move to enact a moratorium.Did you hear Obama last night say that he enacted the moratorium for our own good?
He's going to take our jobs away for our own good.
That's just brilliant.
What about the fishermen's jobs, what about the jobs of those who depend on tourist and others whose livelihood is threatened by the oil leak that will possibly take decades to clean up?
They aren't oilmen or shippers. Therefore "Screw Em." So what if those Americans lose their jobs and go on welfare? So what if we increase our trade deficits buying goods we normally bought from Americans that we now buy from foreigners? So what if entire industries go under causing many indirectly supported to lose their jobs as well? They aren't oilmen or shippers, therefore in the argument of Apdst, they aren't even worth considering.
The only jobs that matter are shippers and oilmen.
And instead we should just let all off shore oil drilling continue as is without worrying about what caused this spill? If we lose some jobs over this that will definatly suck. I'm willing to bet though that it wouldn't suck as much as another one of these leaks that could potentially destroy an entire coastline of our country.
Why is it reasonalbe to kill even more jobs in an attempt to fix the leak? Losing all those jobs isn't going to fix the leak any faster.
Did you hear Obama last night say that he enacted the moratorium for our own good? He's going to take our jobs away for our own good. That's just brilliant.
Was the shipping industry shut down after the Valedeze spill? Wasn't, was it?
Perhaps you should talk to the people who have lost their jobs because of the leak. Despite your very narrow view of the world, there are people who use the ocean for things other then shipping and oil drilling. There's thousands of crab and shrimp men who are going under because of BP. And let's not even start on the tourism. That's dead.
Um, oil shipping and shipping are not the same thing. A container ship holding rubber duckies that sinks is not going to cause a massive environmental castrostophy. Furthermore, Exxon failed to provide many of the basic things it said it was going to do. Like turn on radar. And have emergency response ships.
So, it makes since to just go ahead and kill the rest of the economy on the Gulf Coast? I would love to hear that logic. Now, there's not even a fall back for the fisherman to turn to to make a living.
I'd probably care more what the people of Louisiana wanted in this situation if their oil well wasn't on the verge of ruining our coast in florida. As it is, this is a disaster that has been waiitng to happen for decades. And now that the inevitable has occurred, you want to continue to do what brought us here? Real smart, Apdst.
Question, Apdst. Is BP paying you on a per post basis to shill for them?
I understand BP is hiring cleanup contractors.
And?......................
I'm not saying investigate the spill, but there's no reason to kill a few undred thousand jobs while you're at it.
Let's face it, the damage has been done. Another blowout in the Garden banks isn't going to make things worse.
JUST THE FACTS: Drilling Moratorium's Impact on Louisiana's Families and EconomyHow many jobs does the oil and gas industry provide in Louisiana now?
•The Louisiana Department of Economic Development estimates that the active drilling suspension alone will result in a loss of 3,000 to 6,000 Louisiana jobs in the first two to three weeks;
•The ban could cost Louisianans more than 10,000 jobs within a few months;
•The state risks losing more than 20,000 existing and potential new jobs during a 12 to 18 month period, if the federal panel takes longer than six months to do their reviews and write their reports;
•Coastal Louisiana, where one in three jobs is related to the oil and gas industry, services around 90 percent of deepwater operations in the Gulf of Mexico;
•The Louisiana Department of Natural Resources estimates that an average of two supply boats per rig work every day with rates of $15,000 to $30,000 a boat, which means that suspension of drilling activity will result in a nearly $1 million loss per day in supply boat rental income. Each drilling rig job supports four other jobs in local communities.
So, it makes since to just go ahead and kill the rest of the economy on the Gulf Coast? I would love to hear that logic. .
Now, there's not even a fall back for the fisherman to turn to to make a living
What would happen to the economy of the Gulf Coast economy if another oil rig or two had the same oil leak that will possibly take months to fix and decades to clean up happened?
You are aware that this clean up will take decades? So those fishermen and others whose livelihood was destroyed because of the BP oil leak will have a job for the next twenty to thirty years. Hopefully by the time the oil is all cleaned and the fish recover the oil companies will be able to fix a leak in a timely manner, not three or four months and 20 plus years of clean up.
Although the near-term risk of another similar accident is low, the impact would be catastrophic, especially as for all intents and purposes no credible plans for addressing such accidents exist (Congressional findings revealed that the accident response plans of the major oil companies were extraordinarily similar and the experience has revealed that the BP plan was not effective). Nonetheless, as a practical alternative to the moratorium, my view is that perhaps the other companies could be permitted to resume operations for a provisional 6-12-month period. Afterward, they would be expected to produce concrete plans for dealing with accidents similar to the current one along with reliable data showing that the plan's have a good chance of succeeding. An independent panel of leading scientists and engineers would need to evaluate those plans. During the review, the companies could continue to operate in the deepwaters. Failure to produce such plans within the 6-12-month timeframe would lead to an immediate suspension of deepwater operations for the firm(s) failing to provide the plans. Also, were the scientific panel to determine that the plan was not likely to be effective, deepwater operations for the firm(s) in question would also be terminated immediately and suspended until the defects were satisfactorily remedied.
Clearly, my suggestion would not go as far as the companies, contractors and their employees might prefer. At the same time, it would leave open the low probability of another catastrophic accident. Nevertheless, it would probably offer a reasonable middle ground by which the companies/contractors/employees could operate and put in place a process that would ensure that the issues that contributed to a lack of effective response to the present accident would be remedied.
Whether the Obama Administration and/or oil companies/contractors would be willing to accept such a compromise would remain to be seen. To my knowledge, no one has made such a suggestion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?