He's one of my favorite guitarists. One of the best albums in history was Truth with Rod Stewart on vocals. He went on
to have a solo career with mostly instrumental albums.
Riff-meister extraodinaire.
Why should an oil company have a cap on liability?
- Thread starter OPTIONAL777
- Start date
He's one of my favorite guitarists. One of the best albums in history was Truth with Rod Stewart on vocals. He went on
to have a solo career with mostly instrumental albums.
Riff-meister extraodinaire.
Beck has of late been playing with a young phenom bass player...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDgkbLw4qkw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDgkbLw4qkw
Killer. Instrumentalism should be more appreciated. The REAL musicians.
Keep it simple. If drilling where they're drilling is genuinely not worth the risk then they shouldn't be drilling there. And they sure as hell shouldn't expect anyone else to shoulder the liability while they keep the profit. The cap poses a moral hazard. And, gee, look what happened -- they cut corners.
Thus far, it looks less like a case of the drilling there not being worth the risk, and more a case of management doing a "cost/benefit analysis" of preventative measures with no regard to anything other than the shorter-term financials. Not unlike the Ford Pinto saga.
It's the law.
Other than the fact that the law is the product of lobbying efforts of the oil companies...why should an oil company be limited in their liability?
We arthe largest importer of oil, in the world, and use the most oil of any country in the world, thus we are fully reliant on other countries if we dont drill, we need to drill further and further out cause stupid liberals tell us in the United States we cant drill in areas which would be easy to extrapolate the oil from, such as anwr. If we dont make it worth the risk for companies to drill in shady areas here then we are in a situation where we abecmoe more and more reliant on other countries. Im sure that liberals like optional777 and yourself would also be bitching about price gouging from oil companies if you were paying twice what you currently pay at the pumps today, so you cant have it both ways.
I would not expect you to understand this since conservatives in Canada allow companies to take the oil out of damn near every place it is available in Alberta, and thus you dont have to face the same crisis.
If gas prices currently, properly reflected 150-200$ a barrel oil in the united states the economy would be decimated.
I would not expect you to understand this since conservatives in Canada allow companies to take the oil out of damn near every place it is available in Alberta, and thus you dont have to face the same crisis.
If gas prices currently, properly reflected 150-200$ a barrel oil in the united states the economy would be decimated.
All the more reason to transition away from oil as fast as possible...
If oil prices were twice as high, it would open the door for alternatives to be competitive, and when alternatives ramp up, the cost of alternatives will go down.
Let India and China have the oil while we use clean renewable energy.
Let them be addicted to Saudi Oil...
I think it is better for the US to get off the crack as soon as possible...
If oil prices were twice as high, it would open the door for alternatives to be competitive, and when alternatives ramp up, the cost of alternatives will go down.
Let India and China have the oil while we use clean renewable energy.
Let them be addicted to Saudi Oil...
I think it is better for the US to get off the crack as soon as possible...
I agree with this, have you read the "pickens plan"? We have more than enough natural gas to sustain our country if we were to drill in anwr. I guess from what i was hearing from him on CNBC the other day it is only about a 3-400 dollar fix to switch a car from gas burning to natural gas burning.
The problem as it stands right now is the hassle which comes along with electric cars, you got to juice the things for 12 hours to get like 2-3 hours driving time, plus coal is just as if not more dirty than oil is, plus consumers pay more for these cars. If someone ever thinks of a viable green solution id be all for it, at the current time we have no viable solution to our oil needs, even hybrid cars when you do the math cost much more than they save you on gas. If we were allowed to use nuclear energy we could be on to something.
The problem as it stands right now is the hassle which comes along with electric cars, you got to juice the things for 12 hours to get like 2-3 hours driving time, plus coal is just as if not more dirty than oil is, plus consumers pay more for these cars. If someone ever thinks of a viable green solution id be all for it, at the current time we have no viable solution to our oil needs, even hybrid cars when you do the math cost much more than they save you on gas. If we were allowed to use nuclear energy we could be on to something.
About 17 percent of China's electricity came from renewable sources in 2007, led by the world's largest number of hydroelectric generators.
China has the largest wind resources in the world and three-quarters of them are offshore.Researchers from Harvard University and Tsinghua University have found that the People's Republic could meet all of its electricity demands from wind power by 2030.
China produces 30% of the worlds solar photovoltaics (PV).China has become a world leader in the manufacture of solar photovoltaic technology, with its six biggest solar companies having a combined value of over $ 15 billion. Around 820 megawatts of solar PV were produced in China in 2007, second only to Japan
