Trump Order Helps Offshore Drilling, Stops Marine Sanctuary Expansion (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In an executive order signed on Friday, President Trump directed his secretary of the interior to review current rules on offshore drilling and exploration. This review is likely to result in a relaxation of the strict protections the previous administration put on offshore oil drilling in the Atlantic and in the Arctic. According to the Washington Post, a review of the rules is likely to "make millions of acres of federal waters eligible for oil and gas leasing." At the same time, Trump's executive order directed the secretary of commerce to cease designating new marine sanctuaries or expanding any that already exist. According to USA Today, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is also "directed to review all designations and expansions of marine monuments or sanctuaries designated under the Antiquities Act within the last 10 years." The Post says this "includes Hawaii's Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, which Obama quadrupled in size last year, and the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts off Massachusetts." Although these reviews could take some time to complete, they put in motion a bid to favor extraction industries like oil and gas mining. "Today, we're unleashing American energy and clearing the way for thousands and thousands of high-paying energy jobs," Trump reportedly told the Associated Press.

Comments

Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Disco inferno!

Re:Drill baby drill

[ls671]

Sadly, less and less ruffnecks (actually, the motorman would be doing it) know how to spin the chain because of those so call "ironruffnecks".

Re:Drill baby drill

[ls671]

I had a crazy driller once. Instead of using 2 tongs to break the joint between pipes while pulling out, he'd only use one combined with the torque of the rotary table.

God, we broke all records with regards to efficiently pulling out.

The iron ruffnecks are almost an order of magnitude less efficient in term of speed.

Anyway, sure it makes workers safer and I have nothing against it.

We sure had to keep our heads down and hope for the best when the backup cable tied to the A-leg was handling all the load of breaking the joint.

I am just saying; that was the old days...

Re:Drill baby drill

[ShanghaiBill]

Offshore drilling is dying.
It is not because of regulation or marine sanctuaries.
It is because of fracking.
Offshore drilling is hecka expensive, with huge liabilities if something goes wrong.
Deepwater Horizon ended up costing $62 Billion.
It is way cheaper to park a fracking rig in a North Dakota wheatfield.

So once again, Trump is pushing policies that make no difference in the real world.
He isn't going to revive coal mining.
He isn't going to revive offshore drilling.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Suck my cock.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Pulling out is a good thing. Only wish your dad had known that.

Re:Drill baby drill

[h33t l4x0r]

He's after the appearance of *trying* to bring jobs back. If he has that, he'll keep his supporters even if the jobs never come.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

he isn't going to live long enough to suffer the effects of any of his boneheaded decisions, either. so what does he care.. he's not just rich, but OLD, too...

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude are you writing a haiku, your text is in strange fragments.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

people with a brain disease exhibit weird traights

they

are

not

aware of you. once I see that a person is sick in the head, anything else he says might as well be coming from a clown. In some cases, the autism doesn't affect logic, in some cases it does, but I'm not going to spend time on the individual to try and figure it out for their benefit. clearly hit on the head with a genetic brick? your opinion doesn't count.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Suck my cock.

Tbags get so upset when confronted with reality.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm getting confused here. So many of these comments are arousing me. ... maybe I like the drilling of all holes?

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Offshore drilling is dying.
It is not because of regulation or marine sanctuaries.
It is because of fracking.
Offshore drilling is hecka expensive, with huge liabilities if something goes wrong.
Deepwater Horizon ended up costing $62 Billion.
It is way cheaper to park a fracking rig in a North Dakota wheatfield.

What makes you think Trump isn't going to make short work with the huge liabilities? That way, the companies earn more when things go well and everybody pays when things go bad, the net effect being a diffusion from the pockets of the poor into the pockets of the rich. Which is what Trump stands for.

Re:Drill baby drill

[thegarbz]

You have simplified a lot of very very complex topics.

Offshore drilling is cheap as chips. Offshore drilling in incredibly deep water with unfavourable geology is expensive. Things constantly go wrong in offshore drilling. Barely a week goes by without another leak, spill or something. The difference is it rarely happens in the way that deepwater horizon did with known failsafe systems having previously unknown failure modes, and its worth remembering that this happened to the deepest offshore drilling well in the world.

As for parking a fracking rig anywhere, yeah I don't think the existing owners of the field are going to like you very much. Fraking doesn't magically suck oil out of the air, you still need to find geology that supports it and contains an oil field. For the most part there's very little untapped oil. Then there's the whole fact that fracking oil in North Dakota is hell sour compared to the conventional oil and therefore hard to sell and often goes at a huge discount.

Right now oil majors can't seem to offload fracking rigs and the wells they sit on fast enough, while investing more and more in offshore rigs. Hell your horribly expensive $62billion disaster pulled the breaks on offshore drilling, but even that has stopped with the company involved just approving a $15bn investment that was put on hold in 2013 for Mad Dog 2 deep water field with the hope to start drilling ... early next year.

2 weeks ago Shell announced a $13bn new deep water project, hot on the heels of winning engineering awards for their successful deep water well that went into production only a few months ago. Exxon is negotiating with Brazil for more access to offshore deep water permits, oh and only 3 days ago awarded multi-billion dollar contracts to start developing the Lisa deepwater field. And this is just deepwater, the riskiest of the bunch. There's still a shitload of untapped beautifully sweet light and shallow Norwegian crude out there as well oil companies love to plonk rigs up on when the going gets tough and they need something cheap to prop up the balance sheet.

Trump's policy won't make a difference, I agree with that. But offshore isn't dying in the slightest. If anything, fracking is what is experiencing an unprecedented level of legal challenge in the world right now, and if there's one thing in doubt, I'd say it's the future of gas fracking.

Re:Drill baby drill

[BarbaraHudson]

Because even if they were exempt from all liabilities, new off-shore drilling (especially in the arctic) is just not cost-competitive. Plus, there's the longer lead times that tie up capital that could be put into other wells that have a more immediate return.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Khyber]

As a gay miner, can confirm. Drilling holes of all types is always fun and arousing!

Re: Drill baby drill

[tigersha]

Your momma said the same thing last night!

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

reverting to acts of "appearance" after only 100 days? His term is 1460 days so I wonder if his supports are so dumb that'll continue to work for that long.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot.

Re:Drill baby drill

[UnknowingFool]

Until his supporter who wanted jobs realize they are not coming back. For example his promise to bring back coal. Coal is in a worse state that offshore drilling. At least with drilling, companies can get oil and natural gas which are used in many applications. The uses of coal are dwindling.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

2/3rds of all mined resources go to the chemical industry to make nearly every project you can imagine. Have a laser printer? There's coal miner's boot dust inside.

In addition, huge amounts of coal are being sold to China. Their use is increasing. The rise of India and Africa are next.

Miners will be just fine.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

I. He already has revived coal mining. Coal country is turning into a popcorn machine, and its a good thing too. It is very cheap and we have enough in North America alone for 500 years.

II. Offshore drilling anywhere should never have been prohibited and we would never have had to beg the Osama bin Ladens of the world for expensive oil. There also would never have been an energy crisis where we were putting food in the gas tank. Of all the harebrained schemes that did nothing, this was one of the top 100. No reason in the world to cut ourselves off from our own energy, ever.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

His supporters aren't smart enough to ever realize the jobs aren't coming back.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Neuronwelder]

This is why I'm for younger presidents - They have to live with what they've done.

Re:Drill baby drill

[Neuronwelder]

Well when enough marine life dies and seafood dwindles, I think something is going to change when people have less on their plates. And rich folk don't have their lobster.

Re: Drill baby drill

[Anonymous Coward]

Because fracking is the absolute worst thing for the environment. It literally destroys it permanently. And not, it's not cheaper. By production, it contributes very little.

You just gotta say the opposite of trump. Just because. It is not objective. It is childish.

Re:Drill baby drill

[UnknowingFool]

I'm not saying that the by-products of coal are useless. I'm saying the uses of coal are dwindling. In heating alone, coal was used in vastly more homes, schools, businesses, etc in the past than it is used today. Combined with a surplus of coal, it's not likely jobs will be coming back or expanding any time soon.

Re:Drill baby drill

[jandersen]

He's after the appearance of *trying* to bring jobs back. If he has that, he'll keep his supporters even if the jobs never come.

Up to a point, I expect; the need of a lot of people is very real to them, even if Trump doesn't really know or care, and at some point they will probably begin to realise that he simply isn't going to deliver. It will, of course, always be somebody else's fault, but how long can you really stretch that? Promises that never turn into reality become disappointments, and who knows how angry these people will be when they realise that they have been taken for a ride? Hopefully they will know who to take it out on.

Re:Drill baby drill

[RockDoctor]

The opposite side of the ame coin is that you see far more roughnecks these days who can count to ten with their hands only.

(For those who don't know, the "spinning chain" technique cost an awful lot of people several joints off the tips of their fingers. That's why "iron roughnecks" - machines for torquing up and breaking out pipe connections - were invented.)

Re:Drill baby drill

[RockDoctor]

I had a crazy driller once. Instead of using 2 tongs to break the joint between pipes while pulling out, he'd only use one combined with the torque of the rotary table.
God, we broke all records with regards to efficiently pulling out.

Breaking out with the rotary motor only works if you've got more than about 300ft of pipe in the hole. Above that, you'll spin the slips on the pipe or on the bushing - neither of which is good for the pipe or the bushing. On the pipe you'll increase the likelihood of washing out or twisting off just below the tool joint. On the bushing - well, you don't want to have to free pipe stuck in a worn bushing.

Sure you'll have high pulling speeds. Until you count the lost holes with full LWD strings in them complete with sources. Break out the pink cement. You don't do that too often before your rig gets run off the field.

Re:Drill baby drill

[ls671]

How many times have you spun a chain? I am just curious. Anyway, I have several times and I am wondering how you could cut a finger spinning a chain unless you intended to. On the other hand, I have seen injuries when the motorman would lose grip on the chain and we basically ended up with a flying chain whip flying around the drilling floor potentially making several rotation around the pipe thus several pass around our heads.

Basic move to avoid getting hit; crawl on the floor.

Re:Drill baby drill

[ls671]

What about drill collars? They are much heavier than 10 pipes (300 feet of pipe)...

So I guess what you are saying depends on the weight of collars in the string.

Anyway, I already said that driller was crazy. Once, he got caught doing it by the toolpusher who ordered him to quit doing it and I was quite happy about that because if the backup cable tying the tong to the A-leg broke, we would have ended up with a flying tong revolving on the floor and killing everything in its path.

Re:Drill baby drill

[ls671]

hehe! I just realized, FYI, it is spelled: "ruffnecks".

Re:Drill baby drill

[RockDoctor]

FYI, it is spelled: "ruffnecks".

Not in Britain, Norway, Tanzania, Abu Dhabi, Russia, Korea, Holland or Canada. Or Benin, Gabon or Turkey. Where are you typing? Oh, I forgot Azerbaijan. And Ireland.

Re:Drill baby drill

[RockDoctor]

I've never spun a chain. It was banned a couple of years after I started working the rigs, but by then I'd long since got over the fascination of large powerful machinery to recognise drill floors as dirty, noisy and extremely dangerous places. But the number of drillers and toolpushers you'd see in the old days missing one or two joints from their index or middle fingers was noticeably high. When explaining why the spinning chain was being banned and replaced with a pipe spinner hanging on one of the tugger lines, these people would point at their missing digits and say "I lost that to a spinning chain." Frenchy and Stretch on the Highlander, I'm thinking of you in particular in pre-shift safety briefings.

Einstein never worked a drill floor - did you know? If he'd ever seen a drill crew disappear when a stand of pipe slipped out of the elevators, he'd never have come up with that silly idea that nothing can move faster than light.

Drill floors are nasty dangerous places. Avoid when at all possible. Which for me, is now down to witnessing wireline tool checks, collecting the sidewall cores, and catching conventional core (with breathing apparatus when necessary, and always when cracking the top of the barrel). Oh, and occasionally watching the torque gauge when coming to pick a horizontal casing point.

Re:Drill baby drill

[RockDoctor]

What about drill collars? They are much heavier than 10 pipes (300 feet of pipe)...

Typo. I should have typed "3000 ft." But it is that long since I saw (or cared much) about the practice that my memory may be fading.

Yes, weight of pipe in the string is the critical point. (Or it was when you had drillers who were allowed to do such things. Decades ago, or 5 years in Korea.) But by the time you get into the collars there isn't enough weight to the string to keep it locked in the slips.

Why isn't it allowed any more? Simple - if the pipe spins in the slips, then the dies leave grooves in the neck of the pipe, just below the tool joint. And that has been traced as the root cause of nearly half of side-wall washouts. I've had to write that report myself - microscopic photographs of the torn-off end of pipe after you've pulled he string, with the wash clearly originating in a band of circumferential die-marks. Make the photographs, write the report, and fax it (email, more recently) off to the client office onshore - typically before the drill crew have finished making up the overshot assembly. (Which coincidentally means the on-shift driller and toolpusher are too busy to put a lean on me to cover up the evidence. And of course, once the photos have gone in, there's no point in "accidentally" losing the torn ends of the pipe before shipping them back to shore.

You'll have gathered that I'm hired by oil companies, not drilling companies. Though I've covered enough driller's ass over the years. Like providing records that there was no washout preceding a twist off, just a week before that driller was due to attend his competence exams, where the mantra is "twist-offs are always preceded by a washout".

Another factor to bear in mind is whether the pipe is actually owned by the drilling company, the oil company, or hired from a pipe supply company. Pipe companies for sure don't like their pipe being spun in the slips, and when the pipe comes back to the yard they always inspect every joint for evidence of it. (I used to know a pipe inspector.)

Oh, sorry, you mentioned drill collars. Didn't your drill floor practice require use of a safety clamp ("dog collar" in North Sea English parlance ; I never did figure out what the Korean, Azeri or Russian equivalent was) on every slick (not externally upset) tool joint.

that driller was crazy. Once, he got caught doing it by the toolpusher who ordered him to quit doing

You can tell why one guy is a toolpusher and the other merely a driller.

I was quite happy about that because if the backup cable tying the tong to the A-leg broke, we would have ended up with a flying tong revolving on the floor and killing everything in its path.

Dangerous places, drill floors. As you 'pusher obviously appreciated.

But, isn't your maintenance and replacement schedule for the backup lines adequate? It was never my business to do the paperwork on that - toolpusher's job - but I've used enough heavy tool store rooms as temporary sample stores to know that all of the lines stored down there go through the same colour coding and inspection and replacement regime as any other loaded equipment. Hell, at least once I've had to shift my stuff out of the store to make room for the inspector to get at the tools in the store.

Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

This has nothing to do with tech, just another Trump bashing article. We get it already, stay on topic or we're going to keep losing people.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

This is very important. This is pushing is one step closer to environmental destruction. No more marine life, just so some oil companies can get richer even faster.

This is important.

And fuck Trump.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually this kind of article will probably fain people because it seem the more political the article the more is people are reply it.

Re:Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this Trump bashing? This is exactly what America wants him to do! Who gives a fuck about "marine sanctuaries"? Lets Make America Great Again!

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump bashing is important to help the people. Help the people.

Re:Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wait till all the comments roll in. Slashdot runs a "Trump did a thing, let's bash him!" article every day.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for showing the low average intelligence of the typical Trump basher.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

This leftist mindset of yours is really odd.

You and your kind claim that drilling for oil will cause "environmental destruction", yet all of the evidence suggests otherwise. Oil is produced naturally. It's not man-made. It used to seep out of the ground in various areas. In some places, like the Alberta oil sands, it literally is a significant part of the natural surface soil layers. And even the worst oil spills, or the mass burning of oil wells in Kuwait during the first Gulf War, had rather limited long-term impacts on the environment.

While you and your kind get so upset about this minimal risk of "environmental destruction" from oil, your kind actually support activities that are far more damaging to the environment than oil ever could be.

For example, you leftists push for "clean" hydroelectric energy generation, totally ignoring that the reservoirs that are created by hydroelectric dams flood and destroy huge areas. And you totally ignore the environmental impact of producing and transporting the concrete and other materials for these dams.

The same goes for your obsession with solar power generation. You'll cover over huge areas of prime farmland with solar panels that required a huge amount of energy and harmful materials to produce.

Another example is how your kind keep insisting we provide massive amounts of aid to overpopulated third-world places like Africa and the Middle East, which only serves to promote even more overpopulation, which puts an even greater strain on the environment. So while most Western nations are naturally reducing their birthrates to sub-replacement levels, and thus reducing the impact their populations have on the environment, your kind end up doing what you can to increase the overpopulation in some of the areas that haven't been able to properly support even the existing populations for decades!

Then there are all of the environmental conferences your kind fly to so often. Flying numerous representatives from 150+ nations to places like Kyoto, Copenhagen and Paris is rather harmful to the environment. Then there are the many smaller environmental conferences that are held, yet still get attendees from around the world flying in by plane.

Before you and your kind start going off the rails about oil, you should really look in the mirror first. You'll find that you're the cause of far more damaging and widespread "environmental destruction" than oil ever will be.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Because nearly everything he does is harmful to humanity in some way. Thats why.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

The fish, corals, dolphins, sea cucumbers, squid, do I have to go on?

And I do. I love my sushi mmmmm

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post is the same old mindset of the retard US right, desperately clinging to yesterdays technology and ideas, whilst the rest of the world leaves the US behind.
Its like you a desperately seeking irrelevance. China will eat you in the next twenty years economically. Good riddance.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

China will eat you in the next twenty years economically.

That's something that should make any Western leftist shit his/her/xir pants. If you think America's track record for environmental protection is bad, you clearly know nothing about the state of China's environment today!

It's really strange that so many leftists oppose President Trump on this matter. His economic policies are the first in about 50 years that would actually put America's economy back on track, which would ensure that China's economic influence would be kept at bay.

By not supporting him, these leftists are doing everything they can to shift global economic power over to a nation that has never considered the environment very important at all. That's something else to add to the list of ways that leftists cause the most harm to the environment!

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you make some valid points. Like perhaps leftists could use telecommunications software to reduce their carbon footprint from flying to conferences around the world. No one's perfect.

But clearly, their plans and actions are much better than the conservative ones. In the grand scene of things, a few flights is nothing compared to letting thousands of multinational corporations dump all the waste into rivers and overfishing so that the ocean's food chain collapses, etc.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Completely and utter nonsense you fear mongering liberal.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it hilarious how the same people who say that bullying is a terrible thing will turn around and try to harass, demean and insult President Trump all of the time. Their bullying is some of the harshest by far!

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, I said nothing about bullying. And almost everyone universally agrees bullying is a terrible thing. We just disagree about how to solve it. A lot of pansies want the teachers to step in and deal with it, whereas I say the solution to bullying is to teach kids to wind up and clock the bully in his face as hard as they can. That's the o ly way to truly deal with it.

Yet I am generally a liberal. Just not the "special snowflake" or "safe spaces" or "everyone is a winner" kind that seems to be popular these days. But economically and environmentally I am definitely liberal.

And lastly, nothing in my post was bullying at all. Now, simply saying most of Trump's policies are harmful is called bullying? I guess you don't like the freedom of speech this country was founded on. Maybe moving elsewhere, like China or North Korea, would do you wonders.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Xir? What the fuck is that?

You just lost all credibility by using that term. Just so you know.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

None of those are "who".

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you are not environmentally liberal... you are environmentally fascist.

Nothing wrong with it, i'm an environmental fascist as well... just be honest with yourself.

Re:Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

These days, all the good technical articles are reposted from Ars. Trump bashing /worship is the only thing that differentiates Slashdot.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Cross (gen)der. Leftists made it up, blame that faction. You need to calm down and think for awhile. You seem to stupid and fanatical to be rational.

Re:Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump deserves to be bashed. He has demonstrated nothing but a childish attitude, incompetence and a flagrant disregard for the Earth.

He is trying to murder us all. Someone ought to put a bullet in his head.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Then let's do nuclear.... It's the most environment-friendly energy-production we have...

Go with thorium or something similar and you don't even have the risk of a melt-down... We could build them in the old uranium mines (and covered with dirt) and when they are retired it should not be more than a few hundred years before we can ignore them.. If they would leak it would still be on the same level of radioactivity we had in the ground before we dug the uranium up.

What the "environmentalists" don't care about is not the earth.. If they care they would listen to reason and look at actual facts instead of "it feels good".

You know that an artificial lake, like the ones use for hydro-power, releases a shitload of co2?

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny how most liberals scream that other people are wrong all the time, but if someone says anything bad about their ideas you get called a fascist.

I'm not liberal or alt-right or have any party-affiliation... I would love a society where everyone could be impartial to who submitted a study/idea/action that would be a peer-review of said study/proposed action and then discuss and come to an agreement if the study is scientifically valid and the proposed action would be justifiable to correct the issue found in the study. All done without any party-affiliation.

Currently you have to go with the side that has the most matching and least amount of non-matching thoughts..

Trump has had a few good ideas, but 80-90% has probably been garbage.. The same goes for any other politician in the world.. They all have their own small world-view and act solely on that, and if they change their mind they get bashed by both their followers and opposition.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

9 out of 10 doctors recommend Trump bashing for their liberal patients still suffering from existential butt hurt after November 2016.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Zontar The Mindless]

I thought it was the right-wingers who were trying to prevent aid money from going for family planning?

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Zontar The Mindless]

Nuclear only looks cost-effective when propped up by large government subsidies and allowing the environmental impact to be someone else's problem.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never seen it used outside of tumblr blogs.
YMMV, but in my experience, "he" or "she" will serve in most cases, with "they" working in almost all of the other cases. Generally speaking, you don't ever really need to think about new pronouns. The ones you know already are the ones that are commonly used.
Other pronouns, while very specific, can generally be replaced with "they" without ruffling too many feathers.
In terms of speaking or writing, "he/she" is unweildy, and should be replaced with "they".
For further reference, please see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you support dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and direct control of industry and commerce in matters relating to the environment?
If not, you are not an environmental fascist.
You probably mean that you believe very strongly that many parts of the environment are worth protecting or preserving, which is an entirely different concept.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, some RWNJ alt facts eh?
China is going renewable big time, and trying hard to clean up their environment, whilst Trump dismantles the EPA. But its leftists harming the environment, LMAO.
What a stupid cunt YOU ARE.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a paid shill trying to protect oil companies from reality.

Re: Nice try Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

So the entire morning dale east is advanced? You little minded freak. Almost all petrol comes from oil. You are the literal retard here. Holy shot you are stupid.

Okay. How about off Florida?

[fahrbot-bot]

Is there oil off the coast of Mar-a-Lago? Trump pitched a fit about a wind farm off the coast of Scotland near his golf course there. Wonder how he'd feel about a few oil drilling platforms or a spill?

Re:Okay. How about off Florida?

[ShanghaiBill]

Is there oil off the coast of Mar-a-Lago?

All wells drilled off Florida's east coast have been dry. There have been successful wells south of Florida, in the strait, and to the west in the Gulf of Mexico.

But Florida is a swing state, and it would be a political disaster to drill there. Instead, he can push drilling off the coast of Massachusetts, where he has nothing to lose, or in Alaska, which is so red that drilling is actually popular there. Alaska residents get an annual royalty check from their state government.

Re:Okay. How about off Florida?

[h33t l4x0r]

But Florida is a swing state, and it would be a political disaster to drill there.

I don't know if that's true. Miami-Dade and anything south is overwhelmingly blue. Drilling south of Miami or the keys won't change any hearts or minds.

Re:Okay. How about off Florida?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there oil off the coast of Mar-a-Lago? Trump pitched a fit about a wind farm off the coast of Scotland near his golf course there. Wonder how he'd feel about a few oil drilling platforms or a spill?

Probably feel the same way Ted Kennedy did while trying to keep wind farms away from his property in Mass.

And what about Naiomi?

[Okian Warrior]

Is there oil off the coast of Mar-a-Lago? Trump pitched a fit about a wind farm off the coast of Scotland near his golf course there. Wonder how he'd feel about a few oil drilling platforms or a spill?

Has the DNC E-mail leaker been found yet? Hillary was inconsolable after the election, and you know how people who cross her tend to end up dead. Wonder how she would react if the DNC leaker's name were made public?

Re:And what about Naiomi?

[micahraleigh]

It's not like the wikileaks stuff is the only indication of her mistakes. It's out in the open and not really disputed.

You should check out the recent rolling stone review (i.e. not a conservative "rag" or whatever) where her aides and supporters could not answer the question of why Hillary should be running.

Not casting doubt on the peculiarity of the DNC deaths right after the leaks, it's just that your point is out in the open.

Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Republican politicians often run campaigns claiming they are "new style" politicians who are not beholden to any political party. Once in power, they can be reliably counted on to advocate pissing in the well, to collect those big checks from the oil and gas ndustry, the coal industry and their various PACs.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[sexconker]

Republican politicians often run campaigns claiming they are "new style" politicians who are not beholden to any political party. Once in power, they can be reliably counted on to advocate pissing in the well, to collect those big checks from the oil and gas ndustry, the coal industry and their various PACs.

As opposed to all the "Hope and Change" Obama brought?
Do we need to go back through the rest as well?

EVERYONE promises change. Almost no one delivers.

Re: Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

And trump promised to make america great again. So far he's been doing the exact opposite.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Howitzer86]

That's what I didn't get about all the love for Bernie Sanders. The guy was like a candidate for student government promising extended recess and more pizza days. With the government what it is, and being a part of it, he must have pegged some of us for saps.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama actually did set aside large areas of endangered habitat from such destructive activities - Like the arctic, a perfect example. Trump has no understanding of why Obama did that, only that BECAUSE Obama did that, it must be his retarded life mission to overturn that to please his moronic base, cost be damned.

And you fell for it? How? Seriously, you can't be stupid enough to try to compare Obama's record to Trumpy's can you? Honestly, lol.

Say what you will about Obama, mention every single failure from 8 years three times... it still won't compare to Trump's selling-out in just these first 100 days.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any lasting damage from Deepwater Horizon? No, not really. Nothing that anyone can easily point to. It was a worst case scenario come true, and a few years later you have to look really hard for evidence it happened at all.

That's the reality. Does the reality matter at all?

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your paraphrasing isn't even close. Bernie promised BANK REGULATIONS. He promised MEDICAL OVERSIGHT. DRINKABLE WATER. You're a fucking ham trying to pretend turkey is the same as beef, fuck you for lying so loosely.

Go drink some oil, Trumpy. Or some blood.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Howitzer86]

Sigh. I'm still not convinced people like you are real, rather than just trolls. I have been coming across people like you more often though... just online thankfully.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Howitzer86]

But if you want to get into specifics, my main gripe with him is that he promised free college and debt forgiveness, while completely ignoring how the political climate and the lobbying power of that industry would have made that an impossibility. He promised so much in general that the other Democrats were scrambling to counter him. The only one who wasn't doing that, Jim Web, left the race rather than take part in that sham.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[meglon]

No, you either need to live in the gulf area, or listen to news from the area. Like most things, peoples memories are far too short for the good of the species. Is there lasting damage from it? Yes, it's just not in the news every day.... and stupid people have forgotten about it, or try to minimize it.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a fucking idiot. College tuition is the life blood of industry and the price is next to an afterthought compared to defense spending or tax cuts for the richest.

YOU believe TRUMP is a more realistic candidate than Bernie in terms of promises made? Then math is not your strong suit either, Bigly.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, somehow the rest of the developed world manages to provide education and healthcare to their citizens. Just not us, we're all about rugged individualism for the poor, and bailouts for the banks.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

God damn you are stupid, just go sit in the corner while the other kids play.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

" the lobbying power of that industry" I hate this, lobbyists only have the power you give them. Goverment is up to the elected members not some prick sent over from a lobby firm. Just ignore them...

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[ShanghaiBill]

... Jim Web, left the race rather than take part in that sham.

Jim Webb didn't leave the race because of his "high principles". He left race because he had 1% if the vote.

Years ago, Webb actively campaigned to have women kicked out of the service academies. He resigned as Reagan's Secretary of the Navy because he wanted more money to buy even more weapons that we didn't need. And this guy expected to be elected by Democratic primary voters? He was in the wrong party.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Jack9]

Somehow you managed to respond to the wrong post or are mentally deficient. Either way, your post made no sense in regard to the discussion you replied to.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Does the reality matter at all?" Go fishing in the Gulf and eat what you catch for 10 years, and we'll call that a baseline study of actual reality. If you live, you can tell us you told us so. Bitch, the reality is you have no concept of reality and you say bullshit online trying to invent reality, but you're bad at it. That's the reality.

Fuck you reality-free Trumpies. GET TESTED FOR LYING.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite a big chunk still:
https://www.topuniversities.co...

Then you have people going to college before they know what they want to do so they stay there, building up debt.
https://www.edvisors.com/colle...

So lets say 4-5% yearly interest and 4 years at a in-state public college. 4*20k = 80k.. 4% of that is $3200 per year in interest plus paying it off.. So if we say 20 years to pay it off.. Thats $4000 for the first year and then slowly dropping down. Quite a bit of money for most people that just got out of school and started their first job..

I would say scrap all publicly funded/partly funded colleges and have the state offer scholarships in areas needed by the society as a whole... And only allow student-loan financed degrees in areas that are in demand in the work-force. And offer self-studying people to just pay for the tests to get the degree, if they can manage to study on their own.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you reality-free Trumpies/Clintonists. GET TESTED FOR LYING.

Fixed that you

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[BarbaraHudson]

Then why did Trump take the visitor logs to the white house out of public view, if lobbyists are "so powerless?"

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama actually did set aside large areas of endangered habitat from such destructive activities - Like the arctic, a perfect example.

I work in the oil industry, and am currently working in the Arctic. The oil companies are not destroying habitat up here. Anytime a well is drilled, there is no trace when they're done. The wildlife up here is treated with the utmost respect, and measures are taken to protect the wildlife no matter the cost. Containment measures are very effective in the event of an issue. If a drop of anything hits the ground, the soil is dug up and replaced. The caribou migration will be happening soon, it's a sight to see. You should visit.

Re: Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

I need some citations and pics of before and after sites.

Because ancedotes are like assholes, everybody has one xD

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

No Jack, you're just another GOP illiterate.

Re:Yay, more Deepwater Horizons!

[Anonymous Coward]

People untutored in biochemistry have no idea that raw crude is biodegradable. It naturally decomposes and given enough time and exposure to above ground environment you'll never know there was ever a spill
They got a great deal of it up anyway.

ivvjjfksjvifkancoofrjf

[Anonymous Coward]

Idiot.

Thats just a stupid ass conspiracy theory. I bet you believe we didn't land on the moon too. Or Bush did 9/11 (oh wait, maybe not that one because it was by a republican lol)

Whoosh!

[Okian Warrior]

Idiot.

Thats just a stupid ass conspiracy theory. I bet you believe we didn't land on the moon too. Or Bush did 9/11 (oh wait, maybe not that one because it was by a republican lol)

Whoosh!

Re:Whoosh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not the same AC, but wow, are you dense. Woosh, indeed. You're posting a "joke?" about Hillary, this long after the election?

Recall the copied Exxonmobile press release

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you remember the Whitehouse press release that was copied verbatim from Exxon's press release?
https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/838874217852567552/photo/1

That Exxon document pretty much tells you what happened. They went to Trump said "it will create job if you sign this and make you popular", he went "where's my pen, my most beautiful pen, look at you pen, I think I have the most Presidential pens of all". Then he signs.

"ExxonMobil is strategically investing in new refining and chemical-manufacturing projects in the U.S. Gulf Coast region to expand its manufacturing and export capacity. The company’s Growing the Gulf expansion program, consists of 11 major chemical, refining, lubricant and liquefied natural gas projects at proposed new and existing facilities along the Texas and Louisiana coasts. Investments began in 2013 and are expected to continue through at least 2022. "

Rex Tillerson of Exxon / Secretary of State will be pleased.

Re: Recall the copied Exxonmobile press release

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded down for telling the truth. What a shame: oh nm this is slashdot.

Someone explain the actual economics to Dumpy

[Anonymous Coward]

Not being able to drill for enough oil really isn't the problem with America's economy. Someone should tell this fucking idiot.

We deserve Trump

[Foxhoundz]

You know that, right? We wanted this. Wanted the chaos. God help us all.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Tulsa_Time]

You bet we did.... thank god every day that Hillary is not in power.
All the energy workers that moved to the NE in the last 8 years... (Pennsylvania) won the election for Trump.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

Downmodding for political opinions. Grand show of character.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

You know that, right? We wanted this. Wanted the chaos. God help us all.

As someone who voted for Trump as an act of anarchy, I echo your sentiment.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

WHOOSH

Re:We deserve Trump

[udachny]

what do you mean by that? Trump is business as usual. I actually want restructuring of the debts, I want clearing of the debt bubbles, I want the bursting of the government bubble, removal of 99.9999999% of everything that all governments do. Where do you see that in Trump at all?

Re:We deserve Trump

[Gravis Zero]

You know that, right? We wanted this. Wanted the chaos. God help us all.

I wanted Bernie but was willing to settle for Hillary. I did not want this, the people who voted for Trump wanted this.

Re:We deserve Trump

[meta-monkey]

Tillerson is downsizing State Department employees by 9%. It's a start.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Enigma2175]

But Trump has proposed increasing the military budget by $54 billion (to $639B) which is more that the state department's entire budget, including all foreign aid. People keep electing republicans because they say they'll shrink the government but history has shown it never happens. If anything, republicans spend MORE than democrats but are less likely to pay for it. Just like today, where Trump has proposed a massive tax cut (mostly for the wealthy) while simultaneously proposing increased spending. Where are all the tea party revolutionaries that were so against any spending (to the point of shutting the government down and getting the US credit rating downgraded, which cost REAL money) during the Obama administration?

Just like the abortion issue, small government is an issue that republicans campaign on but never deliver. You would think that people would realize they are never getting what they voted for but for some reason they just keep voting republican again and again even though abortion is still legal and government is still massive.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

I sure do! My stocks thank me every day he is in office. Don't know why Obama was such a wet blanket on markets, but he was.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

... We wanted this. Wanted the chaos.

Yes, Americans did: To reveal corruption in the political system.

Bush Junior attacked the Greenpeace/GW movement, gave tax cuts to rich people, gave the energy industry sweeping powers plus deregulation and there was little discussion about the damage done to the people: This time, everybody will know it didn't work last time.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

You know that, right? We wanted this. Wanted the chaos. God help us all.

Guess I know what I need to do to get good karma around here.

Re:We deserve Trump

[chihowa]

Bernie seemed good, but I had no interest in Hillary or Trump. Those of you who were willing to "settle" for Hillary bear some responsibility for this, too. She was a terrible candidate is probably the only person who could have lost to Trump.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Gravis Zero]

Those of you who were willing to "settle" for Hillary bear some responsibility for this, too.

That is one very dumb argument because "no, I'll vote for Bernie even if he's not the party candidate," or "I rather not vote than vote for Hillary," only results in a higher chance of Trump being elected in your district. Perhaps you don't know how the mathematics of elections work. I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying how it is.

Re:We deserve Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

That is one very dumb argument because "no, I'll vote for Bernie even if he's not the party candidate," or "I rather not vote than vote for Hillary," only results in a higher chance of Trump being elected in your district.

Yeah. It does. Unfortunate, but true.

Perhaps you don't know how the mathematics of elections work. I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying how it is.

Right.

The problem is that too many think like you do, thus perpetuating the state of no change for the better.

What people need to do is to start voting for what they actually want, even if it may hurt their prospects in the short run. If people start voting for what they actually want, and stick to it, eventually there will be actual change.

Stop playing games. You can't win.

Instead, vote with your conscience. Even if you lose, you know that you stood up for something you believe in. Show some character.

Boners!

[Anonymous Coward]

Miss Mash wish she could enjoy boners the way other woman do but it not in the card for her today, ha ha

YUO FAIL It

[Anonymous Coward]

nearly two 7ears Available To We'll be able to

LET'S BE CLEAR! TRUMP IS BUT A PUPPET!

[Anonymous Coward]

His strings are pulled by others. Many others.

Oh, and puppets are stupid. Capcha says so, with "retard". Mean? NO! THE TRUTH!

Purely symbolic

[onkelonkel]

At $45 / bbl who is going to be doing any offshore exploring?

Re:Purely symbolic

[thegarbz]

Exxon, Shell, BP, the list goes on. Just open a newspaper dedicated to the industry to see how investments in deep water are continuing. Exxon only awarded a contract to start on the Lisa deep-water field 3 days ago. BP announced a go ahead for Mad Dog Phase 2 (in the Gulf), Shell only just started up a new field in December and only 2 weeks ago Shell announced $13billion investment in a new deep-water field in Nigeria, that came hot on the heels of approving capital for the development of the Ursa basin (in the Gulf) expecting first oil in 2019.

So the answer to your question is: everyone.

Re:Purely symbolic

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who thinks that it will go up. Rigs have been dirt cheap. Service companies are cutting costs. Cheapest time to do exploration. If the cost of a barrel goes up, and you have nothing to produce because you didn't explore when it was cheap, then that's the price you pay.

Re:Purely symbolic

[Anonymous Coward]

At $45 / bbl who is going to be doing any offshore exploring?

With new American industries, renewables, competing with oil, a policy that reduces oil price seems like it could kill jobs, not create them.

We didn't vote for him

[Anonymous Coward]

He wasn't the person chosen by 'we the people'. So all the "America deserve this"/ "this is what America has come to"/ "blame ourselves" bullshit, that's *not* what America is.

It's not even what the Republican party is. They were hijacked too. A combination of their rule rigging (remember the 2012 Teleprompter "the ayes have it"?). And the endless voter disenfranchisement and gerrymandering, means they don't have a solid majority to keep them pro-America.

At times, you could watch Fox and turn over to Russia Today, and you couldn't tell the difference they were so aligned.

"Party before country" thinkers just follow whatever flag the leader is carrying. Even a false flag of a foreign nation.

Re:We didn't vote for him

[Anonymous Coward]

How dare you compare Fox and Russia Today. RT is nowhere near that biased.

Awful modding here today!

[Anonymous Coward]

There are 31 comments right now, but with the default modding it didn't show any comments at all! I had to shift to -1 to see any comments. To make matters worse, the only comments worth reading were at 0 or even -1! The modding system here needs a total overhaul. It hides good comments, emphasizes the worst comments, and sometimes hides all comments by default! It hurts more than it helps. If I have to browse at -1 anyway just to see any comments, then the entire mod system might as well just be removed!

Re:Awful modding here today!

[EzInKy]

All you have to do is set yourself to -1 and you will experience /. in all its glory. Why is an overhaul needed? The answer is before your eyes and you still want to ignore it? Perhaps some inward soul searching is in order? For example, why would you want others to filter content that you are perfectly capable of filtering yourself?

Re:Awful modding here today!

[EzInKy]

For example, it is pretty obvious that any post that contains "SJW" or "snowflake" is not worth reading. People who use those terms put no thoughts into their posts and only spew out the hatred they hear from the like of Limbaugh and O'Reilly.

Re:Awful modding here today!

[Anonymous Coward]

By deduction, you obviously put no thoughts into your post and only spew hatred.

It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The value of assets is virtual anyway, so if Exxon was prevented from drilling for oil, the value of its field rights is zero. On the other hand, if Trump can find some drilling rights that can be assigned, then on Exxons books they can put those as an unrealized asset. Something they can borrow against to buy oil assets elsewhere.

I say Trump, but this is really Rex Tillerson, ex Exxon CEO and now Secretary of State, Trump is a zombie President at this point. Putting out one page 'plans' that nobody pays attention to.

From a comment above that was modded down to surpress it: The Whitehouse press release that was copied verbatim from Exxon's press release.
  https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/838874217852567552/photo/1

This shows how Exxon are the main drivers of policy related to oil. Tillerson is a golfing buddie of Trumps, hence Trump just parrots Exxon press releases without any analysis.

Tillerson will have gone to Trump, said "it will create jobs and make America great again", and Trump won't remember all the Exxon Valdiz or Deep Water Horizon stuff, the reason these zones were created, and he will simply have signed it without any conscious thought on the matter.

Re:It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump doesn't care about black people

Job Gain or Loss?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thousands of jobs gained he says, but isn't there quite a bit of work going into all of those conservation efforts? How many jobs will be *lost* from these cuts, on top of the damage and destruction to our environment that we'll be footing the bill for?

I get the feeling the loss column is probably several times the gains even in jobs alone.

Re: Job Gain or Loss?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all jobs are equally productive. Harvesting oil is productive, because more resources (like energy) are obtained from the oil than were put in to harvest it. On the other hand, having a government (read: taxpayers who had tax money taken from them under the threat of punishment) pay some hippies to count shrubs isn't productive. It consumes more resources than it produces. It makes economic sense to reduce or eliminate non-productive jobs, even if they might be replaced with fewer productive jobs. The fewer productive jobs will result in a net benefit to society, while each non-productive job actually harms society.

Re: Job Gain or Loss?

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, you are a fucking idiot who failed ecology and mathematical modeling, and I really doubt you even know what those words mean.

high-paying energy jobs

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see oil rigs getting cheaper or the oil price going up, so in which parallel universe will these high-paying energy jobs materialize?
Don't even think the current oil price is low because of economic situations. $50 is high for an industry that is about to scale down. I'm not talking about peak oil, there will be plenty of oil in the ground, forever. The stone age didn't end because we rand out of stones, it ended because we found something better. The oil age won't end because we ran out of oil.

What's the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pasty-faced slabs of lard who never venture outdoors without an iPhone to stare at are worried about what? How does this affect them? Not at all, except in the positive way of cheaper, more affordable energy. Like the man said, "drill, baby, drill!"

Re:What's the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

retard!

One word!

[Anonymous Coward]

Foreigners. Mostly Soviet Aholes. They 1) Don't get it, and-or 2) Perpetuate disinformation (fake news). The rest of republicans, but not that many because, well, because they're stupid and few of then can type a complete sentence.

She cut off her nose

[Anonymous Coward]

to spite her face.

kaspersky

[Anonymous Coward]

If you need help on activation and installation please call USA 1-855-408-6697 for USA and +44 800-088-5029 for UK and 1-855-408-6697 for Australlia.Activate and install your Kaspersky online just by vising www.Kaspersky.com/setup.

Re:kaspersky

[Anonymous Coward]

"All emails to whitehouse.gov are down. You are being redirected to our automated operator."

"For KGB-sponsorship, please press #1 now."

"To betray your nation, please hold and Herr Drumpf will be on the line shortly."

"Our waiting time is now: 12 incomprehensible tweets. Please hold."

"Trump/Satan 2020 - you really thought he wasn't the Antichrist?"

Re:kaspersky

[Anonymous Coward]

> kasperskyactivate.net

Known phishing website.

> call USA 1-855-408-6697 for USA and +44 800-088-5029 for UK and 1-855-408-6697 for Australlia

Maybe they will by visited by Magomed the chechen giant, at street addresses associated with those phone numbers?

it could pay to have no wind turbines

[Anonymous Coward]

If there are enough rich people, paying enough money at a luxury resort to have no wind turbines visible nearby, I will argue it is worth it to not have wind turbines around.

Jobs in the USA

[AHuxley]

How about some nice energy jobs in the USA.
Why keep on funding kingdoms, monarchies and theocracies that want to enforce their blasphemy laws in the USA?
Support freedom and US energy independence.

Re:Jobs in the USA

[Anonymous Coward]

Grow some balls and grow the fuck up. Trade is how you make money. Outsource all the shitty polluting jobs to keep the American people healthy so we can win the next war after pansy Trump leaves.

Re:Jobs in the USA

[Gravis Zero]

Support freedom and US energy independence.

I support both things highly which is why we need to dump oil entirely. Solar, wind and nuclear (especially 4th gen reactors) could make us fully independent if we only invested in them.

Whales

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck the whales,. What have they ever done for us?

The Idiot and Chief

[JimSadler]

The lying bag of fat we call Trump is an outrage. We need far more protection of the rivers and oceans than we have ever had before. We need to totally get rid of coal and we need to reduce the use of oil and gasoline as well. Climate change is behind quite a few of the wars in the Arab regions and we are already paying a dreadful price for past and current pollution. What we do not need is a sleeze bag trying to destroy conservation efforts.

Re:The Idiot and Chief

[drinkypoo]

Climate change is behind quite a few of the wars in the Arab regions

SHUSH! That's not an argument against in their book, fool. Remember, we spend a shitload on "aid" to Israel which is spent keeping down the Palestinians. Our government does not want stability in the middle east any more than it wants it in Mexico.

Re:The Idiot and Chief

[JimSadler]

The very reason the US has supported Israel is that we want stability in the region. But climate change is causing economic turmoil in the Arab regions and the violence is being whipped up by the poverty caused by failed crops and the like due to climate change. It is now expected that the Arab emirates will have to be totally evacuated in the next eight years as the heat will go past the survival point in those nations. Can you imagine the degree of wealth in Dubai and all of the people evacuating as daily temperatures pass 125 degrees F.? How will Europe react to the super massive immigration that is certain to occur. Essentially all of Africa that is north of the equator will head for Europe.

popular vote

[Anonymous Coward]

You know that, right? We wanted this. Wanted the chaos. God help us all.

The majority of people in the US (by popular vote) actually did not want this.

Sounds familiar

[virtig01]

Like when Obama expanded offshore drilling (before the Deepwater Horizon disaster):

http://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/obama-expands-offshore-drilling-035223

What Exactly Does This Have To Do With Technology?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot is a geek/tech news agregator. This article has nothing to do with that bullshit. I get the shills are constantly out in force pushing their "OMG Literally Russia!" or whatever retarded bullshit they can concoct and collude with MSM over, but that doesn't mean it has to be here on Slashdot. I guess the shill money is too good to ignore, eh?

trump is a fool

[Anonymous Coward]

you'd think that Trump didn't know that millions of Americans rely on healthy fish populations for sustenance, jobs, and recreation.

Only a fool CEO

[Anonymous Coward]

Only a fool CEO would start drilling offshore because of Trump's EO. It is temporary. There is a very good chance that it will be undone in four years. And that would mean all of the time and money invested will be for naught.

RTFA --------

[NetNed]

Does no one read the article? Even the little summary has it. "This review is likely to result in a relaxation of the strict protections the previous administration". Likely hardly sounds like enough to make the assumptions in the article. Do people really just glaze over this shit and ignore it? No wonder it's so crazy now a days. People have no reading comprehension anymore. This story is nothing more that an opinionated piece of drivel from a left leaning tech site that doesn't even cover tech well anymore. You can hate Trump as much as you want but if you fall for the bullshit of articles like this one, Trump is the least of your problems.

Good

[rey2]

very good

Nuclear is stupid; here is why

[bussdriver]

I'm giving up moderating hoping to wake some people up.

1) Nuclear power takes 10+ years to build. This is fact not some next gen "in 5 years" magical nuclear power which can go from permit to power in a year. By the time they build nuclear power, the coal plants will have been running too long. Global warming has time limits... which we probably passed already (but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to minimize how much we are screwed.)

2) Solar is cheaper than nuclear, has been for years now. Wind I believe did or will soon.

3) Nuclear is HEAVILY subsidized by government, it's totally dishonest. If you subsidized solar and wind that much they'd be so much cheaper it would be funny to look at anything else. (coal is subsidized too; even with automation killing about half their jobs natural gas is the main reason they can't compete and I don't think natural gas is subsidized as much as coal.)

4) Base power issues are almost solvable with an upgraded GRID. the transition process might take 10 years (depending on our motivation if we acted like this was WW3 it would be done in no time.) Natural Gas can fill the gap.

5) Battery storage is a new market. It is moving quickly. We could move to storage right now at higher prices-- we don't need to WAIT for the perfect solution-- which is a common trick used to delay progress. The time and cost wasted on nuclear can be put into battery storage power. If we are SERIOUS we can take the added expense on, it's pure BS to say we can't do something right now.

6) Nuclear regulation is poor and less of it won't help; more of it likely won't help either since it's just more of the same incompetence. They only people who seem capable of managing nuclear properly is our military. The worries about it being safe are totally justified. Sure newer stuff is better, the newest things actually being done NOW are way better but are they as safe as our growing incompetence? I think that is hard to predict... Maybe the "in 5 years" tech will be that safe but it's going to take too long to implement even with a faster build process because it's new tech that won't be proven for maybe the 10 years a conventional nuclear plant would take to build.

7) too many people. most problems are a result of too many people in the world. that is the topic that never gets discussed. we will have 10 billion people not long from now unless a bunch die off. (many years ago now everybody needed was born-- they will have kids at projected rates and that gives us 10 billion. known. already. trends have to drastically change for the basic stats to not be proven true.)

Re:Nuclear is stupid; here is why

[Gravis Zero]

I agree that the current reactor designs are not cost friendly which shouldn't be a surprise since they aren't designed that way. My interest is in the 4th gen reactors that congress refused the finance because it couldn't be used to make nuclear weapons. However, when you take radioactive materials out of the mix, you can make power generation totally autonomous and inexpensive.

Frankly, I would only want to keep nuclear around for the power hungry businesses and high density cities because if people had solar roofs + battery then they would be independent of the grid. This is better for security and is cheaper than maintaining the grid to reach every single house.

Nuclear isn't stupid, it's just that our current reactor designs are intended to be used to churn out weapons-grade plutonium.

But mostly handing you the bill.

[Anonymous Coward]

For the jobs created cleaning up the mess.