• Welcome!
    Logout|My Dashboard

Democrats are stalling drilling - The Galveston County Daily News: Letters To Editor

September 25, 2016

Democrats are stalling drilling

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • IHOG posted at 12:16 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    America’s economy gained $25 billion, OPEC lost $25 billion. $25 billion represents 500,000 paychecks of $50,000 a year. $12 billion worth of natural gas is heating homes and fueling power plants.
    The “trickle down” of spending $37 billion wages and $5.6 billion royalties created a retail, housing and construction boom from Texas to Canada.
    Manufacturing, shipping and retail jobs from coast to coast are supported by “trickle down“ buying of heavy equipment, trucks, cars, drilling rigs, pipe, storage tanks, pumps, constriction materials, furniture, appliances and home furnishings.
    Trickle Down is people with paychecks buying from people needing paychecks.

  • sverige1 posted at 8:03 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Well, this short letter doesn't seem to address concerns such as "fracking". I noticed in the news the other day that folks up in Azle (near Fort Worth) have experienced unexplained earthquakes in that part of Texas.

    Is all of the drilling necessary at the expense of the environment? I'm not saying I'm of the camp of unconditional opposition to drilling, but these questions remain unanswered. Anyone have any insight?

  • carlosrponce posted at 8:42 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    Insight from Jesus: Jesus said to them in reply, "See that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Messiah,' and they will deceive many. You will hear of wars and reports of wars; see that you are not alarmed, for these things must happen, but it will not yet be the end.Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be famines and EARTHQUAKES from place to place. Matthew 24:4
    The Lord has given His people many resources and dominion to use them. It is beyond time to stop using Middle East Oil . We have much more here in this country. Using them will increase employment, decrease the deficit and make us less reliant on countries that hate us. When war breaks out in the Middle East we will have no one to blame but ourselves when the price of energy skyrockets unless we use our own resources. sverige, do you blame the earth quakes in Freeport, Texas, our neighbor , on fracking too?

  • Bigjim posted at 9:53 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    "Caddo Parish, LA
    In 2009, 16 cattle were found dead at a natural gas well site after apparently drinking a mysterious fluid near a drilling rig.
    At least one worker said the fluids were used in the hydraulic fracturing process.
    More recently, in April 2010, hundreds of people were evacuated from their homes after a natural gas well blowout contaminated a drinking water aquifer.
    It was not clear what contaminants were in the water, but residents were told not to drink it or even wash their clothes in it."
    It’s important to make sure that fracking is safe. It’s also important to have are own oil supply. Can we drill in a safe manner. Of course we can.
    But are we?
    Will we?

  • IHOG posted at 10:25 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    Last December BP and Conoco/Phillips announced a big new find in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Our “liar in chief” takes credit for it but Bush issued the drilling permits before BHO was elected.
    Obama’s offshore drilling moratorium stalled it after the Deep Water Horizon blowout.
    In 2007 Pelosi unsuccessfully attempted to repeal the Bush Energy and Job laws and all Bush drilling permits. Conservative Democrats voted against her.
    Pelosi did increase royalties ( taxes ) on new and completed wells. Consumers are now paying those taxes with higher energy prices.

  • IHOG posted at 10:32 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    Many reports of harm from fracking have been made by people who don't own the mineral rights under their land. They can't profit so they bitch.
    Another group of complainers are liberals from blue states.

  • IHOG posted at 10:40 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486


    Our American energy companies are the worlds cleanest and most environmentally careful.
    The midle east version of cleaning up a spill is "BURN IT".
    If you are really concerned about the environment you should be in favor of anything that reduces OPEC imports.
    A rare problem with fracking beats importing.

  • IHOG posted at 10:51 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    The U.S. Geological survey reports there have not been more, or bigger, earthquakes than normal in that area. Before fracking people just ignored the little earthquakes they always had.
    Just as we do here in Galveston county.

  • Bigjim posted at 10:57 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    “Ex prez of Shell Oil on Glenn Beck said that the US has the lowest royalties and that a better approach would be to remove taxes and increase the royalties“.

    I bet that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would find it interesting that she was able to pass it all by herself. Just like no President can do it by themselves. To give credit, or blame to a President for passing bills , gives them credit for more power then they have

  • kevjlang posted at 11:02 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    Let's not ignore the fact that much of the NA production increases are in a sector that is very economically sensitive to the geo-political price drivers of oil. If, by chance, political stability could be obtained in the Middle East, and production were restored in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Iran's oil were widely available, and if the Western Hemisphere issues with Venezuela were also resolved, large amounts of OPEC oil would hit the market, and, because that oil tends to be much cheaper to produce, it would price much of the US oil off the market.

    I'm not sure where the break-even price point is, but we'd probably be at or below it if world prices dropped to $60/bbl or less. So, while it's good that we are making use of some of our own resources, let's not forget about the cyclic drivers that could turn in an instant and take $25 billion back out of our economy.

    Let's also not ignore the fact that $25 billion could easily have been much more, except that a lot of the increased production of oil also brought a bunch of Natural Gas out of the ground, much of which cannot be marketed because of lack of demand domestically and inabiltiy to transport it where it is needed.

    Right now, the situation may look good. However, even beyond the geo-political issues, another big question is whether our domestic production can keep up with demand should the ecomomy start cranking along again like it did in the mid-2000's. If not, we may again see huge spikes in the price of oil. And, it could lead again to some constraints on economic growth.

  • kevjlang posted at 11:08 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    Many are legitimate complaints. Some of them have been paid by the companies leading the drilling, and some are being fought. Just because there are people out there making weak or unfounded claims doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate ones, and the legitimate ones do not deserve to be discounted merely because others cried wolf.

    People lodging legitimate claims should be dealt with properly--regardless of whether they're from Red or Blue states, or whether they are liberals or conservatives.

  • IHOG posted at 11:12 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    The Canadiens are producing 830,000 barrels of oil a day. Without the use of the Keystone pipeline they deliver it by rail or store it in above ground tanks. If they could use the pipeline they could add more jobs in Canada than the U.S.
    A million jobs in Canada and 100,000 in the U.S. is good for both. The trickle down would add more jobs in both countries.

  • sverige1 posted at 12:25 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Response to carlosrponce posted at 8:42 am on Wed, Jan 8, 2014:

    Yes, carlosponce, the regular practice of fracking in the interior regions can have a trickle down effect onto the coastal regions. Fracking in the midwest plains could have a geophysicial effect on, let's say, the Rocky Mountains to the West, down to the coastal regions of Texas.

    This is similar to the polar ice melt that indeed has affect on the rest of the world. We've all heard that resulting warmer weather in the polar regions can cause desert conditions in otherwise humid regions and vice versa.

  • Bigjim posted at 12:42 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    IHOG You said
    "Many reports of harm from fracking have been made by people who don't own the mineral rights under their land. They can't profit so they bitch.
    Another group of complainers are liberals from blue states".

    Can you give link about this, would love to read it.

  • sverige1 posted at 1:21 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    "complainers are liberals from blue states" ? ?

    Most folks from that community near Ft. Worth to which I referred are conservative. I know, b/c I had relatives living in Azle. Very "red". Whether you're conservative or liberal, you likely want clean air/water and a stable land mass to live on.

  • IHOG posted at 2:28 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    The American jobs we could have from energy independence are why Democrats oppose increases of energy productions.
    Those jobs would reduce the need for their most loyal voters. The clients of the welfare state would go to work if, as BHO claims, they really want jobs. It would be harder for them to buy voters.

  • IHOG posted at 2:44 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    Quite correct.
    She didn't increase Royalties ( a tax ) by herself. She led the house Democrats who passed it and Harry Reid, leader of Democrats in the Senate, went along with it.
    Only Congress can Amend a law passed by congress.
    But BHO has illegally "amended the ACA" over 20 times by himself. Something Senate Democrats let him get away with.
    Objections by the House Republicans are ignored by Senate Democrats..

  • IHOG posted at 3:03 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    Are you talking about the Ice that trapped two ice breakers, one Russian and one Chinese, in the Antartic because it hadn't melted?

  • kevjlang posted at 3:49 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    IHOG, what do you think would happen to all of those American and Canadian jobs if oil were to drop below $50/barrel? I imagine that the wells that could return profits at that price would be left to produce, while those that wouldn't make money would be capped. I guess if they could figure out how to get the people and machinery to do it cheaper, they might keep those wells operational, but I'd guess that a lot of them would be left idle, much like a lot of the West Texas fields back in the 80s.

    Alternatively, the oil producers could lobby for government subsidies in order to continue operations.

  • Bigjim posted at 7:24 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    Royalties and tax's are not the same.

  • Bigjim posted at 7:40 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    Oil Shale brake point is about $55 . Below this cost they will lose money. This is based on 2010 cost which may have come down some.

  • Bigjim posted at 8:04 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    Do You think no Democrats work in the oil industry?
    Just as I believe that not all Republicans are bad stewards’ of the earth, no one can really think that all Democrats’ do not want energy independence . To paint any group as if all think the same is short sighted.
    When we start talking about fracking or other process’s in oil industry we must be careful. If we get it wrong such as fracking we may not be able to recover from what we have done.
    Remember bp‘s, blow out in the gulf, no one could put the oil back into the earth. Once we make a mistake it may be to late!

  • carlosrponce posted at 8:06 pm on Wed, Jan 8, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    "I feel the earth move under my feet
    I feel the sky tumbling down, tumbling down
    I feel the earth move under my feet
    I feel the sky tumbling down, tumbling down"
    Carole King 1971

  • IHOG posted at 10:16 am on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    You know many Democrats work in the oil industry. Unions in the oil patch are doing better than any other place in America.
    A lot more of them could have oil patch jobs if Democrat leadership would let them.

  • IHOG posted at 10:29 am on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486


    Not to worry!
    The Canadiens claim they can produce for $35 per barrel. OPEC will not let global oil prices fall so low. They have already cut production to keep prices high. There willl be a point when OPEC can't control comodity oil prices. If the cost of energy falls the cost of producing energy will also fall.

  • IHOG posted at 10:58 am on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    In the 80's OPEC flooded the world with cheep oil.
    Forcing global prices to less than $10 a barrel. Not enough to pay state and county taxes. 1.2 million low producing American wells were capped and abandoned. OPEC then cut production and drove prices above $80 PB.
    States learned they could have saved tax paying jobs by cutting taxes on low producing wells. They learned jobs pay more taxes than oil wells.
    If the price of oil ever falls below the tax rate again those states will cut taxes and keep their people working.

  • kevjlang posted at 1:33 pm on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    If oil from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran gets back to full capacity, those economies will be hungry to move it, It could create a lot of pressure on OPEC's ability to restrict output. After all, do you think that Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, for example, will volunteer to cut production enough to offset the oil returning to the market knowing that it will significantly reduce their revenues?

  • Bigjim posted at 2:57 pm on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    USA Now Number One Oil and Gas Producer in the World. America can't become energy independent on it's own. It needs Canada and together, N America will become energy independent
    Hopefully US will be able to take a more responsible approach to oil production.
    "Presently a third of the Bakken field natural gas is burning for nothing but lighting up the sky. All in the name of profitability and bottom line mentality.
    With more than 266,000 million cubic feet flared each day in North Dakota, that's roughly $3.6 million in lost revenue, more than $100 million per month.
    Yet production of natural gas likely will double by 2025, increasing flaring, according to state forecasts"

  • IHOG posted at 5:20 pm on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    None of you liberals seem to notice that the oil patch has added more jobs than BHO claimes he created. Not just jobs for red state residents but all over America where the oil patch earnings are buying from blue state workers. It's a national economic boost.
    You also don't seem to understand millions of Americans are unemployed becaause of Democrat energy policies. Their policies have driven energy prices up so much it's strangling the U.S. economy.

  • IHOG posted at 5:33 pm on Thu, Jan 9, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    Bigjim is correct.
    There needs to be pipelines built to deliver Natural Gas to the people who could use it.
    The Keystone XL pipeline is oil only. The 830,000 a day Canada could deliver to gulf coast refineries won't make N. America energy independent. Oil from other states like Pensilvania, West Texas, West Virgina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kansas, Montana, Colorado and New Mexico may when pipelines to deliver it are built. A pipeline for Colorado, New Mexico and West Texas oil are under construction.
    The oil patch is growing production so fast the pipeline builders can't keep up.

  • sverige1 posted at 7:14 am on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Response to IHOG posted at 5:20 pm on Thu, Jan 9, 2014:

    Well, ! IHOG !, I think your comment touched on a basic ethical concept in which just because a society CAN do something doesn't necessarily mean it SHOULD. With unbridled drilling, fracking, bulldozing, piledriving (or whichever method undertaken) - those measures, if left unchecked, can and have done great damage to our Mother Earth. So, to conclude that unwise and un-earth-friendly measures to obtain natural resources is a "good thing" simply because it adds jobs is a quite unethical stance.

    Another similar example of ethical quandry in our US history is the concept of slavery. After all, many parts of the South amassed great wealth through the methodologies and value systems of the slavery concept. Although great in its utility sense, we all would agree today that use of slaves was and is an unjust, nonethical, and sometimes downright dangerous ideology.

  • carlosrponce posted at 8:04 am on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    sverige, do you live in a forest, living off the land with what only your "Mother Nature" provides? Build a house- not good for Ma Nature. Build a road, not good for the old gal also. Drive a car- you're hurting nature even if its an Al Gore Special. You grew up watching " Captain Planet" where every business entrepreneur was an evil, greedy, destroy mother nature if it gets you a buck person. That's not the way it is. The people who are fracking are responsible individuals who take precaution to do as little damage as possible. To do otherwise would be bad for business as well as nature. You remind me of the villager who blamed his crop failure on the people who just moved in. He accused them using witchcraft to hurt his crops. You see a few earthquakes -must be those nature hurtin' frackers. You feel a cold snap - must be those money hungry industrialists. Believing in "Mother Nature" is a religion, your choice, but not mine. I put my trust in the God mentioned on our money "In God we trust".

  • sverige1 posted at 9:32 am on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Response to carlosrponce posted at 8:04 am on Fri, Jan 10, 2014:

    From Richard White, historian who writes about Indians - referencing "Dances With Wolves". It starts out saying that he can't find anything redeeming in the white society portrayed in the film. His quote -

    "In their sordidness, greed, gluttony and self-destructiveness, White says, the conquering whites become `a metaphor for the fouling of the planet.'

    So, you see, carlosponce, you and I need to look further than our narrow anglo-saxon/christian view and come to the realization that the white man has - for centuries - been damaging our Mother Earth.

  • Bigjim posted at 10:41 am on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    You have to think about could happen if something is not done right. The reason the flaring is happening in North Dakota is they didn’t want to delay the production of oil. The infrastructure is not in place so they just burn the gas. This is gas that could have been used, but instead they didn’t want to wait. This add’s to the pollution in the air.
    Fracking fluid has what in it? Most people don’t know because they will not say. If the fluid get’s into someone’s well water that’s bad. If it gets into the aquifer system that could be a event that we could not take back and could make a nuclear event look small . As a country we have to make sure that what ever we do we are sure about, and not just thinking of making money.

  • carlosrponce posted at 12:08 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    sverige, you need to brush up on your Pre-Columbian American history! I bet you will frown upon some of the practices of the indigenous Americans - the slavery, the human sacrifices, the harm to your "Mother Earth". Movies have portrayed them as being one with nature but no more than we. They made use of the resources of this land just as we do.

  • kevjlang posted at 12:23 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    The problem is that MOST of the people that could use it don't live on our continent. Despite the burning of that natural gas in North Dakota, the US produces a lot more natural gas each year than it uses. If they were to build the pipelines and storage facilities to contain the Bakken Gas, you'd see the natural gas commodity prices go down a lot in the US, unless they can figure out how not to produce gas out of these wells while they're producing oil.

    Building pipelines is only part of the answer. You either have to have users for it, someway and someplace to store it until you do have a user, and/or some way to transport it to users that pipelines can't reach.

    Domestic Natural Gas prices are currently breaking the long-held BOE pricing models. That's why that Bakken gas is being flared. If domestic prices were anywhere close to where they should be relative to oil prices, they'd be finding ways to capture, store, and transport it.

  • sverige1 posted at 1:55 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Response to carlosrponce posted at 12:08 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014:

    Saying that the "Indians were worse then than WE are now" is an elementary school type excuse. "They are more bad than WE are. Na na na!"

    Regardless of whichever centuries-past mistakes the pre-Colombians have made to our Americas, we can (as modern-day US citizens) can make the moves to be wiser and cleaner. With the technological advances/knowledge and the practices we've done since, let's say, the 70s - we've come a long way in knowing how to acknowledge, then ameliorate the earth damage we do.

  • kevjlang posted at 2:35 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    Exactly. The early settlers in this country had lots of problems finding good places to dump their trash because the Native Americans had filled all the good dump sites with their Huggies, Hefty's, Hardee's, and Heaters. They avoided Wyoming because the Native Americans had strip-mined it all.

    I think the point that needs to be considered here, and the one that I think sverige1 was trying to get across is that good stewardship does not mean no jobs, no using of resources, etc. You can extract oil or minerals, or whatever else out of the ground without spoiling it for generations to come. It doesn't even have to cost more to incorporate stewardship into the process. It's not either/or.

  • carlosrponce posted at 2:39 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    Read my post, I never said that any group was worse or "more bad" than another group. My point was that the Pre-Columbian indigenous Americans made use of their resources just like we do. It is you in quoting Richard White that wants to paint a highly skewed picture of those people and blame "white" men as the only ones who have "damaged your mother earth". The indigenous Americans are not as pure or perfect as you portray them. And yes I do have some ancestry in that race.

  • carlosrponce posted at 4:28 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    Ask any archeologist- the Native inhabitants of this continent left tons of trash out in the open: animal bones, pottery shards, arrow heads, other tools and weapons, etc. Sometimes entire homes were abandoned and they are still there after centuries- the Pueblos and Navaho homes. They even left their graffiti on natural structures. Archeologists call it "pictographs." Iron Eyes Cody, the Indian pictured crying in a "Keep America Beautiful" commercial was really an actor named Espera Oscar de Corti. He was not a Native American Indian. He just played one in movies and the commercial.

  • Bigjim posted at 4:33 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    “Companies frequently use a dilution of hydrochloric or muriatic acid to dissolve debris in the well and help open fractures. That's followed by biocides such as glutaraldehyde (used in disinfecting dental equipment); more acids and scale inhibitors, such as ethylene glycol (antifreeze), to help stabilize the mixture; friction-reducing agents, such as potassium chloride (used in everything from fertilizer to food processing to heart-stopping lethal injections); corrosion inhibitors (including industrial solvents); gelling agents, primarily guar gum (a thickener found in many soups and condiments); and perhaps a dash more ethylene glycol as a cross-linking agent to enhance other solutions.
    A well operated by Noble Energy close to I-25 north of Fort Collins Colorado
    uses more than fifty chemicals in its fracking fluid, in amounts so small they're calculated in fractions of a single percentage point — even in ten-thousandths or less of 1 percent“.
    This is why we must be careful on how we use fracking fluid. Some of the chemicals are unknown to most as they claim trade secrets.

  • carlosrponce posted at 4:59 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    And I put gasoline, oil, battery acid, antifreeze and other lubricants in my car. All are lethal if ingested and dangerous to the environment. I think I am careful when using them.Couldn't drive without them!

  • sverige1 posted at 5:29 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Response to carlosrponce posted at 4:28 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014:

    Interesting how carlos "let's waste 'em" ponce delineates how the indigenous/native Americans primarily left natural carbon footprints (their abandoned houses, arrowheads, pictographs). What did the European settlers who overtook their lands do?? Much much more! Virtually eradicated the buffalo back then.

    In the latter part of the 20th century, humans managed to do the most damage...and that was far from the Indians' time epoch.

    From Wikipedia: "Since 1971, 90% of the warming has occurred in the oceans."

  • carlosrponce posted at 5:48 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    And what happened to the Pre-Columbian horses? They were virtually eradicated by the native Americans before the Spanish re-introduced them in the 1500s. The Plains Indians would ritually kill dozens of horses when an important chief died. Maybe they ate the rest to near extinction. Source: www.missouri.edu

    You are using Wikipedia as a source, really?

  • Bigjim posted at 6:37 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    Bigjim Posts: 1211

    The unknown components should worry most people. I know You don't drink gasoline battery acid, antifreeze, as you would if they get into water systems.
    No one is suggesting not to use chemicals, but do you dispose of them the right way? I’m sure you do and if you don’t it will impact a small number of people.
    But fracking fluid or other poisons get into aquifers we could be looking at millions of peoples life’s being turned upside down.
    Look at
    “A tap water ban for as many as 300,000 people is in effect in West Virginia after a chemical spill along a local river on Thursday“. The spill of 4-Methylcyclohexane Methanol.People can use city water to flush toilets .
    This is a surface leak and not underground contamination that would be almost be impossible to clean. We all use chemicals and do a good job doing the right thing. Some times good is not good enough.
    Just remember the bp gulf oil blow out. .

  • kevjlang posted at 6:56 pm on Fri, Jan 10, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 4036

    No one is saying that previous inhabitants or even other species didn't do things with lasting effects. However, you certainly can't say that we "civilized" folks haven't been known to exceed the call of duty, perhaps to greater extents and with greater frequency. The native Americans didn't have the science to realize they were eradicating species, nor the impacts of it. We, supposedly, do.

  • Sweet Sue LaRue posted at 1:28 pm on Sat, Jan 11, 2014.

    Sweet Sue LaRue Posts: 97

    Democrats are stalling drilling, yes they are. Warren Buffett is now making money off of rail cars and XOM. Buffett said, "Thanks!"

    Have noticed two separate, 100+ tank cars strings traveling through LC with 1267 crude oil, DOT plackards. Going back and forth to Texas City. It feels so good.

  • sverige1 posted at 10:56 pm on Sat, Jan 11, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    carlos ponce -
    If the source is correct and accurate, then ipso facto the concept holds true. You don't really think folks believed, for example, ex-Pres Ronnie Reagan when he said, "A tree is a tree, how many do you need to look at."

    As an educator, I am somewhat aghast that you didn't come to appreciate the need for us to leave to our children our earth in a better state of condition, especially knowing the advances in science that now can help us ameliorate some of these damages our fathers/grandfathers did decades ago.

  • carlosrponce posted at 1:23 pm on Sun, Jan 12, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 6187

    I am all for conserving and preserving, just don't put a plant or creature above man. If "Earth Worship" is your thing, good for you, but not for me.

    On school research papers, Wikipedia is not recognized as a reliable source since anyone can post anything without proof. You can , however look at the sources they used in the footnotes, references and external links, evaluate them and if reliable, cite them. I know this forum is not a school paper but citing Wikipedia weakens your argument.

  • sverige1 posted at 3:46 pm on Sun, Jan 12, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 4054

    Dang, ponce...glad you weren't my teacher. I'd ask for a transfer, LOL. Wouldn't Wikipedia be an acceptable reference, as long as a book, an encyclopedia, and a magazine article were also included in the Endnotes?

    Sources of factual information can come from anywhere. Even my grandmother knows more about saving the environment than the "rightys".