Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Obama Administration to Announce Tougher New Regs for Offshore Drilling"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:04 AM
Original message
"Obama Administration to Announce Tougher New Regs for Offshore Drilling"
Obama Administration to Announce Tougher New Regs for Offshore Drilling
May 25, 2010 9:49 PM

Obama administration officials tell ABC News that on Thursday President Obama will announce new measures the federal government will take to try to prevent any future BP oil spills.

Changes will be made to the way the government allows offshore drilling, the administration officials say, including new measures for the permitting process, new safety requirements for offshore rigs, and what was described as “strengthened” inspections for drilling operations.

The changes will be announced after the president receives a report from Secretary of the Department of Interior Ken Salazar on the safety issues that have arisen as part of the investigation into the Deepwater Horizon explosion on April 20. The 30-day review was ordered by the president after the explosion and is technically due Friday, though Salazar will turn it in on Thursday.

The White House and Obama administration has come under criticism for maintaining what officials have long described as a corrupted oversight process at the Minerals Management Service, the federal regulatory agency in charge of supervising offshore drilling, and for not being tough enough on BP.

The news of the president’s announcement was first reported by the Wall Street Journal’s Jonathan Weisman and Jeffrey Ball earlier tonight.

-Jake Tapper

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/obama-administration-to-announce-tougher-new-regs-for-offshore-drilling.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. nothing quite as sharp as 20/20 hindsight . . .
except possibly foresight. Like Brylcreme, a little dab'll do ya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
21. He was proposing stronger regulations even before the spill.
Part of the proposal of limited expansion of drilling was to have new regulations. Most of this isn't new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. So they still want to drill
They are still selling the idea of "safe" drilling at 5000 feet under the surface of the water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. It actually can be done with a high level of safety
So long as at least two relief wells are always drilled side by side with the exploratory well in any water deeper than 1000 feet, and at least one relief well in water shallower than 1000 feet, you have a means to shut off the flow of oil quickly should there be a blowout combined with a failure of the blowout preventer.

Beyond that, higher standards of inspection and greater care in the cementing process, with strict adherence to a regimen for proceeding each step of the way, should prevent most blowouts from happening in the first place.

If you reduce the number of blowouts and provide for relief wells already being in place, gushers like this will become a thing of the past.

And like it or not, so long as we are addicted to oil there will be off shore drilling. Until alternatives are developed and in place, it's going to continue and no amount of protesting it will do anything but increase oil dependency due to the gasoline used by protesters to get to the protest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. High "enough"?
The problem is that a single "accident" can cause extremely high levels of destruction, some of it permanent. The cost/benefit analysis is going to be hard to do. Even with predrilled "relief" wells, they may not be sufficient, and you won't know it until after you have the blow out. They've had to drill as many as 5 relief wells before to completely stop the flow. And it isn't just the depth of the surface, it's the depth to which they drill down to the oil was well.

We will be "addicted" to oil as long as we allow them to continue to drill for it "cheaply". If this was nuclear, they'd been required to build a "containment" facility 5000 feet down to prevent this. And it would have made the whole effort cost prohibitive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. If relief wells are put in place and a blowout happens where the BOP fails
It's a matter of opening a valve to cease the flow out the resulting hole
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. And as we've seen
Valves don't fail do they. And relief wells never fail to relieve the pressure enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. You are ignorning the level of redundancy here
A Blow Out Preventer and two relief wells.

That's more redundancy than NASA uses
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Challenger
NASA is willing to take relatively high risks. Higher than commercial transport is ALLOWED to take. I'm ignoring nothing. You, on the other hand are ignoring that there was already "redundancy" in the current situation, and also that the redundancy is often not "truly" independent variables. Drilling one relief well that won't work isn't improved by drilling 2 that won't work. I have some background in "fail safe" technologies. The requirement is often that the "backup" to any system cannot utilize the same technologies as the primary systems.

As an example, a "fail safe" solution for this situation would probably have to consist of the BOP, a containment dome, and a buried explosive charge (quite large) which would collapse the primary well shaft BELOW the relief well point. That's 3, independent systems for containing the disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. And you are still ignoring the biggest factor of all.
We are addicted to oil and nothing you or I say or do is going to alter the fact that we WILL continue offshore drilling and we WILL continue deep water drilling.

So make it as safe as possible and move the fuck on because the only way to stop it is to move off oil and we are at least two decades away from that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. So is it safe?
I'm losing track of your point. They want to drill or they want to make it safe? It appears to me that they want to drill, still. I'm a bit amazed, with the spill still going on, that they would talk about new regulations to allow new drilling. That would seem to me to suggest they don't care about safety, they care about drilling. In any other context, you'd wait until the hole was plugged and the beaches cleaned up before you talked about NEW drilling.

You started out suggesting we could make it safe. Now your suggesting that safety isn't the issue. I'm losing the thread here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Nothing in life is safe.
It can be made much safer relatively easily, so we have to take those measures to make it safer.

But nothing you or I say or do is going to alter the fact that we have no choice but to continue deep water drilling. No amount of posturing, bitching, moaning, or whining will alter that simple fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Just laws
What job does he have again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. No one wants to admit that we are so addicted to oil that
we will not stop drilling anytime soon. And the oil is getting harder to find, so it is becoming more and more risky. There is no viable network of renewables in place to replace drilling overnight. And the main oil fields used in the world are declining. The ocean is becoming the place to look for more oil. This problem of oil (and to some extent, coal and natural gas) running our entire economy, our way of lives and no way to stop it quickly is bigger then any President, though to get us off of it, it takes leadership. Drilling won't stop under Obama but if he puts some things in place now and gets cooperation from Congress, then the framework to switch over to alternatives can be there after he leaves office. Two key things are his willingness and the willingness of Congress. It is a shame that we didn't start sooner but Reagan was elected in 1980 and the oil crisis of the 70's faded in people's minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. My take is that the President
was going to allow the offshore drillng(with safety regulations) to ease over into alternative energy sources..to lessen dependence on MidEast OIL.

http://change.gov/agenda/energy_and_environment_agenda/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #13
27. And there's an argument for more domestic drilling with strict regulations.
Oil companies have even greater dominance over desperate, impoverished nations with oil supplies. Do we allow drilling off the US Coast with the best regulations or do we allow it off the coast of a brown-skinned country with weaker regulations and let them deal with the next spill? That would only shift the negative consequences of our oil consumption off onto some other country. The only real answer is to use less oil from ALL sources and Obama is already taking steps to make that happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #27
38. Yes, and I don't have a car
anymore and feel quite good about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. Yes. Real leadership will reduce our use of all oil, long term.
The most important responses are promoting alternative vehicles, improving auto fuel efficiency, building a real high speed rail system, and making the country less car-dependent. Obama was already huge steps on all of these things before the spill.

CAFE standards are taken care of. We need several more rounds of major funding for high-speed rail beyond what was included in the stimulus bill. Additional consumer incentives for plug-in hybrids would help once there are more models on the market.
Sec. Hood made some encouraging comments about promoting bicycles and alternative transportation to move beyond the dominance of cars. The trouble is that these ideas take years to saturate at the local and state level where people like to keep doing things the way they've always been done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. Increasing methadone production
You don't stop heroine addiction by increasing methadone production in the long run, and increasing heroin production in the interem. You cut/stop heroin production, and increase the availability of methadone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. And that has what to do with anything?
The small amount of oil we might get from off-shore drills years into the future isn't going to increase our overall oil supply. Especially since we don't know what will happen with Middle East supplies and peak oil down the road. No one is increasing net production.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. So if it doesn't make a difference, stop
Really, you can't have it both ways. Either we have to keep drilling, or we don't. If we don't, stop. If we do, stop the things that make us need to keep drilling. But just keeping the drilling going isn't going to help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smashcut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
16. Are you an oil geologist?
I didn't know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
25. Why not just kick our oil habit now before we destroy what is left of our environment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. That'll take twenty years
Carter tried to start it, but Reagan shut it down and it has never taken off again since then.

But I'm all for moving in that direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #26
45. We need to put a stake thru the moldering corpse that is Reagonomics and all things CONserveYOURSELF
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
46. Bullshit. Wells at this depth cannot be secure from accidents.
And, we know the ability to deal with the inevitable accident is not there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Yeah, I question whether deep-water drilling can be made safe
The CEOs all said they could not guarantee another blowout - that's all the proof I need. We can't afford another one of these disasters. Period. It's not worth the wasted resources that could be used developing alternate power sources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #14
28. You've got to develop the alternate power sources first
before you can stop the off shore drilling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #28
33. Why?
What would be the consequence of stopping offshore drilling in the US?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. Global economic disaster within 6 months
Runaway inflation and unemployment.

The worst economic calamity in US history.

That pretty much sums it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. Where do you get that?
There isn't that much new drilling in the "pipeline" excuse the pun. Stopping new drilling would only delay in the short term. There isn't THAT much oil coming from there to begin with. We already stop drilling up and down our coasts as it is. So these apocaliptic predictions seem a tad self serving.

These gushers on the other hand are having very tangible, and long term, consequences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Stop the drilling and the oil futures market will go nuts.
The price of a barrel of oil will increase threefold overnight if you shut down new exploration in the Gulf.

That will eat through the economy faster than a colony of termites could eat through a twelve inch long 2X4.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Where do you get that?
Futures markets are based upon the next 6 months. How would a sesation of drilling for oil that wouldn't even come on the markets for 7 - 10 YEARS influence the oil futures markets?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. Have you ever watched the oil futures market? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Yes
have you? Because anyone that had wouldn't suggest that problems 7 YEARS OUT would affect them at all. In finacial markets 5 years is FOREVER. 6 months is roughly what the market looks at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smashcut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. You're an economist too?
You have a very impressive resume!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #28
39. We've been saying that since Jimmy Carter
Nothing will ever change without government driving it. We would have never made it to the moon without a firm commitment. This isn't a critique of any administration in particular, it's a problem we've been putting off for 40 years. If not now, when?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #28
47. You have it backwards.
Reduce oil production. It will force the innovation.

We are going to have to get off oil at some point in the near future. We can be proactive and make the changes needed now. Or, we can do it when the changes will be very painful.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. That's a ridiculous assertion
Edited on Wed May-26-10 07:25 PM by WeDidIt
There is no way possible to reduce oil production without an adverse effect on an already weak economy.

It's suicidal to suggest it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. It is going to happen, whether you choose to admit it or not.
The question is, will we change before we are forced to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
4. So they are still allowing
drilling?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
10. They've got a long, long way to go to make drilling "safe" for the environment.
Watching the 60 Minutes episode and reading other articles on the status of "inspections" now, it's as if there are no inspections. They allow people to build rigs with unsigned plans - or, the builders "pencil-in" the inspection comments and the actual inspectors WRITE OVER THEIR COMMENTS IN PEN! Then, when auditors arrive, they buddy up to them with gifts and reminisce over old football games (because they all grew up together). And when the only priority is get it done faster and cheaper, corners are cut even from the "approved" plans.

All this shows is that deepwater drilling should be halted indefinitely until REAL plans can be reviewed, REAL failsafes created and implemented, and all regulatory agencies can be cleaned out of cronyism and backdoor dealing. Anything else further imperils our country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
12. do we know how to plug this kind of hole?
if not, maybe we shouldn't be drilling until we figure it out. Make sense?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
15. But did he put on his Aquaman suite?! No?! Well there it is then
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
20. Wow. If these regulations are as comparatively "tough" as the recent HRC ...
Edited on Wed May-26-10 11:11 AM by ShortnFiery
and Bankster regulations, I think we're better off with FULLING ENFORCING the status quo. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #20
30. That was my reaction too....more spineless posturing
Toothless solutions that include all republican, 'ideas,' with a couple of token crumbs for Obama's base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. We get crumbs?
Heck, no one told me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
40. About 14 months too late - woohoo! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC