The intellectual honesty of the environmental movement

[brenthutch 444]

From Van Jones, Obama's Green Jobs Czar:

“I’m critical of myself, first, and the environmentalists. When the oil spill had happened in the spring of 2010, there was another moment to say, ‘Hold on a second, let’s relook at energy policy in America. Should we be subsidizing companies who are risking our health immediately and in the long-term?’” We didn’t do it. You’ve never seen the environmental movement more quiet during an oil spill. I guarantee you, if John McCain had been President, with that oil spill, or George Bush had been President with that oil spill, I’d have been out there with a sign protesting. I didn’t, because of who the President was.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/van-jones-cops-a-plea.php

[masterblaster72 0]

Do you work in the energy sector? I ask because I see you post these threads with the same theme repeatedly.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[tkhayes 348]

And maybe that is also partly because the issue is being handled in a 'reasonable' way in the opinion of the general public.

BP paid for the coastal cleanup and they paid restitution to businesses that were affected. They will probably pay $20B in fines, and criminal charges against at least some people are likely coming down to pipe as well.

Environmental groups are suing to stop future oil wells in the gulf, and pretty much every oceanic-related industry/business/university/etc in Florida and along the Gulf cost is monitoring the ongoing situation with new data arriving daily.

They are also suing BP, and the EPA.

Natural gas is being explored all over the continent, wind farms are being built, solar in getting investment.....what's the problem? Sounds to me like it is being 'handled'

[marks2065 0]

Quote

And maybe that is also partly because the issue is being handled in a 'reasonable' way in the opinion of the general public.

BP paid for the coastal cleanup and they paid restitution to businesses that were affected. They will probably pay $20B in fines, and criminal charges against at least some people are likely coming down to pipe as well.

Environmental groups are suing to stop future oil wells in the gulf, and pretty much every oceanic-related industry/business/university/etc in Florida and along the Gulf cost is monitoring the ongoing situation with new data arriving daily.

They are also suing BP, and the EPA.

Natural gas is being explored all over the continent, wind farms are being built, solar in getting investment.....what's the problem? Sounds to me like it is being 'handled'

The gulf oil spill was handled poorly and everyone knows it. If another president sat back and watched like this one did he would have been front and center in a congressional hearing. Obama did nothing to help and used the spill to increase our dependancy on foriegn oil. Van jones and the the enviromental groups knew that Obama was going to use the spill to cut reduce oil drilling in the gulf so they sat back and watched with him. They did not want to hurt Obama's image so he would be able to stop approving permits to drill.

[wmw999 2,457]

Quote

If another president sat back and watched like this one did he would have been front and center in a congressional hearing.

Somehow I think that if Obama had gone to the Gulf and licked the spill up himself you'd've said that he should be focusing on something else.
The Exxon Valdez spill (second largest) cleanup was handled in large part by Exxon, I believe.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

If another president sat back and watched like this one did he would have been front and center in a congressional hearing.

Somehow I think that if Obama had gone to the Gulf and licked the spill up himself you'd've said that he should be focusing on something else.
The Exxon Valdez spill (second largest) cleanup was handled in large part by Exxon, I believe.

Wendy P.

the government has many tools to combat stuff like this and it should have been used to stop the spill sooner. I have been critical of many things all of the presidents have or have not done, unfortunately dropzone.com was not available for me to express myself on until recently. The last president I truly liked was Reagan, but even he did some dumbshit stuff. Everyone thinks I liked Bush, but the last 4 years he was president was pretty dissapointing, but he was much better than what we have now.

[wmw999 2,457]

What do you think the government could have done to combat the spill and its effects, that wouldn't have been seen as encroaching on the rights of the businesses involved?

Nuking it from space ("it's the only way") isn't really a good option

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[marks2065 0]

Quote

What do you think the government could have done to combat the spill and its effects, that wouldn't have been seen as encroaching on the rights of the businesses involved?

Nuking it from space ("it's the only way") isn't really a good option

Wendy P.

the capping of the well could have been speeded up with the recourses and knowlege of the navy. they could have helped in the containment and cleanup and sent the bill to BP.

[wmw999 2,457]

I'm not so sure about that; the navy doesn't specialize in deep well capping technology (which is reasonably specialized), while oil companies do.

The navy would definitely have been able to bomb it very quickly, but I'm not sure that the residents of the gulf coast would have been in favor of that particular option.

We should have taken offers of help from other countries; we turned away help that was offered, and I think that was a mistake.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[marks2065 0]

Quote

I'm not so sure about that; the navy doesn't specialize in deep well capping technology (which is reasonably specialized), while oil companies do.

The navy would definitely have been able to bomb it very quickly, but I'm not sure that the residents of the gulf coast would have been in favor of that particular option.

We should have taken offers of help from other countries; we turned away help that was offered, and I think that was a mistake.

Wendy P.

Anything would have or could have helped, but the severity and duration of the leak made it simpler to achieve the goal of the left. this is the issue with politics, politicians will shoot themselves in the foot to further their agenda while completely ignoring the needs of the people that elected them.

[wmw999 2,457]

What do you think was the goal of the left that was achieved by letting the spill run? More controls of the type that might have prevented it in the first place? Or just greater dependence on foreign oil (to what end? That particular "goal of the left" is one of the most moronic things I've ever heard).

Both sides/parties/chasms/whatever want the people of the US to succeed. They have different ideas of how to go about doing it, and different ideas of what groups of individuals can contribute. Neither is completely right.

Completely unfettered capitalism can, in fact, lead to tyranny of the majority; when money can buy anything, it can buy votes and officeholders and people. We have laws against some of those things (slavery, e.g.).

But neither party wants the people of the US to be miserable. Really.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Do you work in the energy sector? I ask because I see you post these threads with the same theme repeatedly.

No I am a Banker/Army Ranger/Tandem, IAD Instructor by trade. A few years ago I had a conversation with Mr. Global Warming (Michael Mann). And it became very obvious that the whole global warming thing had no legs to stand on. After that epiphany I made it one of my hobbies to educate myself on the AGW/Green movement, and expose it for the fraud it is. I have nothing against being green, (I support the clear water conversancy here in central PA and one of my additional duties as a bank officer was to manage our "adopt a highway" effort). I have a problem with taxpayers footing the bill with billions for green boondoggles. There is real harm being done to this country, and the world with these naive and misguided policies.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Anything would have or could have helped,...

OK, name something....

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

Anything would have or could have helped,...

OK, name something....

As wendy stated, not turning down help containing and cleaning the spill. The navy has many deep water capabilities along with knowlege. maybe it would not have helped but a try is better than not trying. The navy could at least assist in the cleanup of the spill. We have all the ships and personal that don't actually do much exept train while here in the US. What would it actually cost to move them to the gulf and aid in cleanup? The miliyary is costing money even when dormant, the cost would be the fuel to move them to the area.

[marks2065 0]

Quote

What do you think was the goal of the left that was achieved by letting the spill run? More controls of the type that might have prevented it in the first place? Or just greater dependence on foreign oil (to what end? That particular "goal of the left" is one of the most moronic things I've ever heard).

Both sides/parties/chasms/whatever want the people of the US to succeed. They have different ideas of how to go about doing it, and different ideas of what groups of individuals can contribute. Neither is completely right.

Completely unfettered capitalism can, in fact, lead to tyranny of the majority; when money can buy anything, it can buy votes and officeholders and people. We have laws against some of those things (slavery, e.g.).

But neither party wants the people of the US to be miserable. Really.

Wendy P.

I agree that niether side wants us to fail, just that they both have different Ideas of what is good for the country, and both are different to what the founders and the people believe. And both will at times let dissasters become exagerated to push forward their idea of what a good country is. David Axlerods comments about never lettinga crisses....

[fasted3 0]

Quote

Obama did nothing to help and used the spill to increase our dependancy on foriegn oil.

Why would Obama want us to be more dependant on foreign oil?

But what do I know?

[tkhayes 348]

why would we waste tax dollars on clean-up when we already pretty much had BP confessing and agreeing to do it all?

And I disagree that it would only cost fuel. It would cost room and board, transportation, hazmat suits and equipment and outsourcing of tons of supplies and needs/equipment that perhaps the military does not have on hand.

The military & Coast Guard have weapons, not environmental clean-up supplies. And if they do have environmental cleanup supplies, then i expect that is a waste of money.

Any involvement by the govt would have been seen as a HUGE waste of money by most people, especially the right-wing, which would have done nothing but bitch about the cost.

Instead you bitch about the inaction. I did not see inaction - I saw thousands of people employed by BP to do clean-up. sounds about right to me.

Since when do we have a dormant military? From what I hear in Congress, every last one of the branches of the military is an ABSOLUTE necessity and any budget that reduces their budget will be devastating.....

As a taxpayer, if we have any dormant military, then we need to retire them out or lay them off.

[skinnay 0]

Quote

Quote

Do you work in the energy sector? I ask because I see you post these threads with the same theme repeatedly.

No I am a Banker/Army Ranger/Tandem, IAD Instructor by trade. A few years ago I had a conversation with Mr. Global Warming (Michael Mann). And it became very obvious that the whole global warming thing had no legs to stand on. After that epiphany I made it one of my hobbies to educate myself on the AGW/Green movement, and expose it for the fraud it is. I have nothing against being green, (I support the clear water conversancy here in central PA and one of my additional duties as a bank officer was to manage our "adopt a highway" effort). I have a problem with taxpayers footing the bill with billions for green boondoggles. There is real harm being done to this country, and the world with these naive and misguided policies.

You seem awfully butt hurt by the whole green thing. I'm gonna take a wild guess that there's more to the story than that

[Marinus 0]

I think there should be a compromise: no more fossil fuels or green hippy stuff but 4th generation (?) nuclear power based on thorium. No green house gasses but there's radiation, there's abundant thorium reserves (example: the USA can run on its own thorium for the next 1000 years) but it's no permanent solution, there's no chance of nuclear meltdowns but everyone has to drive faggotty electric cars. The perfect solution: the energy crisis is solved for the next 100 generations or so and everyone has still something to bitch about.

[wmw999 2,457]

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 3,006]

>but 4th generation (?) nuclear power based on thorium.

Thorium is really not much different than conventional nuclear power. You still need uranium to start the reaction (although you need a lot less of it) you still have nuclear waste, you still have decay heat problems during LOCA accidents etc.

I'm all for research into thorium reactors but for mid term power conventional designs like the AP600 are a much better solution. More refined, more experience with the fuel cycle etc. We have enough fuel from refined uranium (LEU) for around 80 years; with reprocessing we'd have enough for centuries.

>but everyone has to drive faggotty electric cars.

We'd need a "faggoty car czar" so no one tripped up and designed any cool ones.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Obama did nothing to help and used the spill to increase our dependancy on foriegn oil.

Why would Obama want us to be more dependant on foreign oil?

Higher gas prices

Which in turn

Helps government motors sell the Volt

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you work in the energy sector? I ask because I see you post these threads with the same theme repeatedly.

No I am a Banker/Army Ranger/Tandem, IAD Instructor by trade. A few years ago I had a conversation with Mr. Global Warming (Michael Mann). And it became very obvious that the whole global warming thing had no legs to stand on. After that epiphany I made it one of my hobbies to educate myself on the AGW/Green movement, and expose it for the fraud it is. I have nothing against being green, (I support the clear water conversancy here in central PA and one of my additional duties as a bank officer was to manage our "adopt a highway" effort). I have a problem with taxpayers footing the bill with billions for green boondoggles. There is real harm being done to this country, and the world with these naive and misguided policies.

You seem awfully butt hurt by the whole green thing. I'm gonna take a wild guess that there's more to the story than that

Stay on the sidelines junior. This is your one warning.

[rushmc 23]

97%




Science by consensus



Another hack exposed

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[fasted3 0]

So you ignore my post.
Why would you state thtat Obama wants us to be depentant on foregn oil. Stiill waiting?

But what do I know?