Polar Bears United Against Sarah Palin

[AAAintheBeltway]

Number of fatalities in US from nuke plants: zero.

Greenhouse gas emissions from nuke plant: zero

Effect on food costs: zero

Money sent overseas to terrorist regimes because of reliance on nuclear power: zero

Countries heavily reliant on nuke plants: France, Switzerland, Belgium

Liberal assessment of nuclear power: run from room shrieking about hideous danger. In fairness, most liberals are liberal arts majors and believe radiation travels through power lines with the electricity.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Liberal assessment of nuclear power: run from room shrieking about hideous danger. In fairness, most liberals are liberal arts majors and believe radiation travels through power lines with the electricity. [/B]

It also interferes with transmissions from the "mother ship". Their tin foil hats simply melt on their heads.

 

[OldTrader]

Quote from bigdavediode:



Actually refinery capacity has grown massively over the past decades. In fact, so much so that old refineries were cheap to buy.

I don't think the article indicated that capacity has "grown massively". Rather, the refining business is a lousy business, plenty of companies (like Exxon for instance) selling refineries because the business is a low margin business, the refineries are old, and because new refineries make no economic sense due to environmental requirements. Really, your article just confirms the larger point that I was making. A variety of restrictions make this an unattractive business.

There are tens of millions of acres that have been leased but are not currently being drilled. Not because of environmentalists, but because it's cheaper (and more profitable) to not drill or to drill on land.

So I guess the point you're making is that there are huge quantities of oil that the oil companies are uninterested in??? LOL. That's the liberal talking point, but really, it pays no attention to reality. The fact is you can't just punch a hole in the ground any old place and hope to find a commericial field. The leases that aren't being drilled are not being drilled for a reason. There is a question about whether there is a commercially viable oil deposit there. I grew up in the oil business...my dad worked for an oil company. It's a risky business...these guys are successful because they're careful. It's really that simple. When I hear liberal politicians, and guys like you claiming oil companies are not drilling what they have, so why give them more, I get a good belly laugh out of your collective lack of knowledge.

The bottom line is that everytime you restrict one of these energy related endeavors, it's going to hurt a segment of our population, usually the lower levels. The chickens are just now coming home to roost, and believe me, it can get worse if the liberals manage to block any forward progress. But the polar bear will be fine. LOL.

OldTrader

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Number of fatalities in US from nuke plants: zero.

Greenhouse gas emissions from nuke plant: zero

Effect on food costs: zero

Money sent overseas to terrorist regimes because of reliance on nuclear power: zero

Countries heavily reliant on nuke plants: France, Switzerland, Belgium

Liberal assessment of nuclear power: run from room shrieking about hideous danger. In fairness, most liberals are liberal arts majors and believe radiation travels through power lines with the electricity.

Don't let the rest of us stop you, start a petition in your area to build one near where you live. Should be easy since only the "liberals" are opposed to nuclear power stations.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from OldTrader:

I don't think the article indicated that capacity has "grown massively". Rather, the refining business is a lousy business, plenty of companies (like Exxon for instance) selling refineries because the business is a low margin business, the refineries are old, and because new refineries make no economic sense due to environmental requirements. Really, your article just confirms the larger point that I was making. A variety of restrictions make this an unattractive business.

Well the argument is that refineries weren't being built due to environmental restrictions, so existing refineries should be held dear (and not be cheap). And the quote from the article from 2004 even says that it wasn't worth building them, not that they wanted to but couldn't because of those evil kids on their lawn... I mean... environmentalists.

You can see from this graph that refining utilization has actually dropped:

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/Diesel0608Chart2.pdf

What the Republicans have done (with the help of the oil industry) is to compare refining capacity against about 1987 -- cherry picked the year -- to appear as if refining capacity has decreased overall.

So I guess the point you're making is that there are huge quantities of oil that the oil companies are uninterested in??? LOL. That's the liberal talking point, but really, it pays no attention to reality. The fact is you can't just punch a hole in the ground any old place and hope to find a commericial field. The leases that aren't being drilled are not being drilled for a reason. There is a question about whether there is a commercially viable oil deposit there.

Well that's true and I agree that they can't know for certain where the oil is. Ultimately, it's cheaper to explore on land as I said. Thus the push towards ANWR.

I grew up in the oil business...my dad worked for an oil company. It's a risky business...these guys are successful because they're careful. It's really that simple. When I hear liberal politicians, and guys like you claiming oil companies are not drilling what they have, so why give them more, I get a good belly laugh out of your collective lack of knowledge.

Well that is true, and it's a difficult business. However, house Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) proposed that oil and gas companies would pay $5 a year for every acre they hold but are not actively working. -- The companies went ballistic.

So in my mind it's exactly like the game Monopoly.

The bottom line is that everytime you restrict one of these energy related endeavors, it's going to hurt a segment of our population, usually the lower levels. The chickens are just now coming home to roost, and believe me, it can get worse if the liberals manage to block any forward progress. But the polar bear will be fine. LOL.

OldTrader

It's funny you believe that. My perspective is that the oil companies will be fine and the polar bear is on his own.

 

[acronym]

Presumably, polar bears would be pro-hunting?