Snik wrote:I've been a petroleum geologist for almost 30 yrs. Ludi, what are you doing?
Not much. Gardening, posting a bit here at PO.com.
Am I getting in the way of your drilling?
Snik wrote:I've been a petroleum geologist for almost 30 yrs. Ludi, what are you doing?
Snik wrote:
All I have to say is JUST GET THE HECK OUT OF OUR WAY!. That's all we are asking.
MonteQuest wrote:You seem hell bent to discredit me and don't even know what I am about.
Reducing the existing population is not an attempt to avoid a die-off by other means.
The whole goal is to try and reduce the decimation that a die-off has upon the carrying capacity.
MrBean wrote:The goal of "helping" nature by reducing our numbers (before we can do more damage on numerical scale and so helping also more of our numbers survive) may seem noble at first, but it's not radical enough, it still repeats the assumption that we are somehow above nature, "supernatural", treating nature as object of human subject.
That is what 'civilization' is short for, putting man above nature, reflected in languages of civilizations, so shouldn't we accept the lesson of failure of civilization and learn from it instead of repeating this hubris of 'man above nature' ad nauseam?
MrBean wrote: The goal of "helping" nature by reducing our numbers (before we can do more damage on numerical scale and so helping also more of our numbers survive) may seem noble at first, but it's not radical enough, it still repeats the assumption that we are somehow above nature, "supernatural", treating nature as object of human subject.
Snik wrote:Will drilling alone solve this problem? No. But why would we leave those reserves in the ground? For what purpose? They are doing no one any good underground.
BigTex wrote:What is the purpose of this proposed drilling? So that we can find ourselves in exactly the same position, except maybe five or ten years farther into our unsustainable lifestyle?
Snik wrote:Back on track here. Whether we're all going to die from a terrible disease, or starve to death or whatever, we'll still want to be able to drive to work over the next few decades without having to mortgage our homes to do it.
Montequest wrote:We want to focus on short-term, short-sighted, selfish technofix solutions that allows us, (those living right now) to avoid "unpleasant" changes, with no lasting solutions for those generations to follow.
Ludi wrote:Message to Snik from my husband:
"I'm f**cking sick of the oilman's sense of entitlement to other people's land."
So I guess he might be getting in the way of your drilling.
Snik wrote:He needs a petroleum exploration 101 course if he thinks there is any "entitlement".
Ludi wrote:Snik wrote:He needs a petroleum exploration 101 course if he thinks there is any "entitlement".
Then who are you talking about getting in the way of your drilling? If all these folks want you drilling, why are you demanding folks get the heck out of your way?
You don't make any sense.
Snik wrote:The people that are in the way are those that don't want our federal mineral wealth developed because of a misguided fear of environmental catastrophe caused by that development.
seahorse wrote:snik,
All in good time. You know as well as I that, when PO sets in, really sets in, and people realize that buying hybrids and gardening just won't do the trick, everything will be drilled, every piece of coal that can be mined and converted via CTL will be mined, every nuke plant will be built. Maslow's hierchy of hunger trumps all. People just aren't hungry yet. All in good time.
BigTex wrote:To Snik's point about people in the energy business being big, smart and rugged, I wonder if he is referring to the 60 year olds or the 30 year olds? I thought there was a huge shortage of the big and rugged drilling types.
I thought there was also a shortage of drilling equipment due to many years of under-investment in energy infrastructure.
BigTex wrote:So let's say that the drillers got the green light to do their best (or their worst, as Churchill might say) on the U.S. coasts. Are we talking about a bunch of 60 year olds with rusty rigs out there? Where will the additional infrastructure and expertise come from, since presumably all of the currently available bandwidth is being utilized?
BigTex wrote:Has anyone been to a Texas beach near offshore rigs? It's amazing to see the things that wash ashore. You definitely want to keep your shoes on.
BigTex wrote:Maybe, just maybe, our problem is not too little oil but too much consumption.
BigTex wrote:As Aaron said, the solution to crack addiction is not more crack.
BigTex wrote:What is the purpose of this proposed drilling? So that we can find ourselves in exactly the same position, except maybe five or ten years farther into our unsustainable lifestyle?
BigTex wrote:It seems like we have been drilling for oil like crazy for 100 years and it has gotten us to a place we have less oil than ever based upon supply relative to demand. If the plan thus far has created the current conditions, maybe a plan more creative than "let's do the same thing we've always done, just MORE" ought to be developed.
Snik wrote: Are you saying that this captured carbon was in the atmosphere previously?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests