Seeking New Shores

News & Analysis
In the News Gristmill Blog Muckraker Features

Columns
Ask Umbra Victual Reality Weekly Recipes The Bottom Line From A to Green The Grist List

Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.

ADVERTISING POLICY

[Advanced]

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

House Dems fail attempt to make Big Oil drill on the land it's got

Posted at 10:15 AM on 18 Jul 2008

A bill that would have required oil companies to drill on leased land they already hold before seeking new conquests failed in the House of Representatives Thursday. The legislation's "use it or lose it" provision would have required that oil companies exhaust oil exploration on already-leased land before acquiring new acreage. The legislation also would have required a yearly auction of leases in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve. Democrats introduced the bill under rules that disallowed any additional amendments but required a two-thirds majority in the chamber. The vote was 244 to 173, split largely along party lines; many Republicans said they would have given the thumbs-up if the bill had included a provision to open coastal areas to offshore drilling.

sources: Reuters, The New York Times

ADVERTISING POLICY

< Previous | Next >

Comments: (5 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Drill, Drill, Drill!

I don't understand why environmentalists would support forcing of ANY oil drilling ANYWHERE. Is this really what you want in National Forests and other public lands? As if there isn't far too much of it already. Environmentalists' position should be "no more drilling anywhere, let's learn to live more simply in a more natural way." Merely choosing which drilling is going to take place is like choosing which innocent group of people you're going to kill.

by Wolverine at 3:07 PM on 18 Jul 2008

drilling

isn't the petroleum age supposed to be ending? oil prices will not go down no matter how much new oil is found. let's nationalize oil companies so the transition to renewables is more orderly.

by earlysnows at 5:09 PM on 18 Jul 2008

Live as simply as you like

People in some of the world have that luxury because so many before them have chosen to progress our society to this point.

Oil and other resources need to be used to get us where I would like to be. Green, abundant, affordable energy to fuel humankind's progress and increase our standards of living.

That will afford you even greater opportunities to contribute little and live simply.

The idea that anyone has the right to impose their desire to live simply (produce little) on others is crazy. The option to be a net consumer is only possible because of the vast wealth others produce.

Instead of looking down on those who make it possible for others to live simply, why not try being grateful? The irony here is that those who demand "simplicity" from others are, in fact, killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

"...a 90 percent chance that the US has contributed .2 degrees F of temperature increase in the last 50 years..." The IPCC Consensus in perspective

by Paleocon at 7:53 PM on 18 Jul 2008
[ Parent ]

The best argument yet for no new drilling

The best argument yet for postponing drilling on OCS and Anwar is - we need to save some oil for our grandchildren.

The pro-drilling pols really don't have an answer to that argument.

by JeffB at 10:08 AM on 19 Jul 2008

I don't want my children facing an oily future

Let alone my grandchildren.

We need a "Manhattan Project". A Kennedyesque, Cold-War Moon-race.

The goal is clean, green, abundant, affordable energy.

We need to use what we can to get there. Wind turbines, and PV panels can't be woven from hemp.

Oil and coal and nuclear can get us where we want to be.

Unless your goal is cold, dark, tiny apartments for everyone.

"Saving the oil" is not a good idea when we can use it to save ourselves.

"...a 90 percent chance that the US has contributed .2 degrees F of temperature increase in the last 50 years..." The IPCC Consensus in perspective

by Paleocon at 9:48 PM on 19 Jul 2008
[ Parent ]

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?