Oil and gas companies must permanently plug thousands of Gulf of Mexico wells idle for five years or more under a federal order issued Wednesday.
The mandate could cost well owners billions of dollars. The U.S. Interior Department and its offshore-drilling oversight agency said companies must cement 3,500 wells that aren't producing oil or gas. Another 650 oil and gas platforms must be dismantled if they are no longer being used, the government said. The mandate becomes effective Oct. 15.
Companies will have 120 days to submit plans to decommission production facilities and wells. Under the regulation, any well that has not been used during the past five years for exploration or production must be plugged. Production platforms and pipelines must be decommissioned if no longer in use.
Owners of such wells would have to pay for the permanent sealing of the wells and abandon the opportunity of reopening them for production. This is insane. Just because Obama was humiliated by being shown to be incompetent in dealing with an oil well leak, he is going to destroy an entire industry. Next time the price of foreign oil skyrockets, this will mean we will be helpless to do anything about it.
#1
It's my understanding that depleted fields in the Gulf will sometimes refill from below. I can understand cementing the well - I assume that it's not a big deal to drill through the plug to access the well.
But what's this about "abandoning the opportunity of reopening them for production"? What's the reason for that?
If the blowout preventer is removed, and the well cemented and capped, how long before the piping corrodes to the point where re-opening is unwise?
#2
NATURALLY + ARTIFICIALLY [man-made] "LEAKY" GULF FIELDS + SPACE ROCK IMPACT = FIERY, ORBIT-DESTABILZ, GRANDDADDY/MOTHER-OF-ALL-PLANET-SIZED RAMJETS.
Just in case LUNA[Moon] + PLANET MERCURY [FATIMA's "Riderless Winged Hoss" = Uncontrolled Inner Planet] change their minds about participating in AL-GORE's MMGW APOCALYSPE.
* ION TOPIX > SUNSPOTS COULD DISAPPEAR FOR DECADES: STUDY [starting as early as 2016].
ARTIC > Pert-believed NEW MAUNDER MINIMUM = MINI-ICE AGE/NEW ICE AGE may induce not only significant, iff not destructive, years-long damage to Global Power-Informat Grids, BUT MAY ALSO LEAD TO VARIOUS KINDS OF REGIONAL.INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIES, E.G. MILITARY CONFLICTS OVER FOOD, RESOURCE SHORTAGES, ETC.
* TOPIX > SCIENTISTS: MAUNDER MAXIMUM/SOLAR FLARES TO BE STRONGER [30-50%]THAN LAST SOLAR CYCLE.
and
* DAILY TIMES.PK > ARCTIC STORMS [frequency of "Polar Low" storms] TO DECREASE WITH GLOBAL WARMING [increase]. Earth may experience an average per annum of 17-23 short-but-intense Arctic Storms by year 2100, down from an average of 36 during the 20th century.
INTEHWESTING,IIUC PERTS > are collectively saying Earth will see or experience STRONGER SOLAR FLARES THAN EVER BEFORE, YET MAY SEE NO SUNSPOTS FOR UP TO A FEW DECADES???
#3
Wells which are not economically feasible to be produced today, may very well be economically feasible to produce in the future. When oil was selling for $3.75 pbl in the late 1960's, a number of land based wells were not pumped. When it jumped to $17. pbl after the first oil embargo, things quickly changed. Formations do sometimes recover and technology such as waterflooding enables recovery of marginal production leases in land based formations.
Behold yet another ill-conceived Obama administration action designed to permanently enslave us to muslim oil production.
#4
If the wells and formations were under pressure, ie, flowing without pumps, they would quite logically still be in production. Where is the environmental danger?
#6
He feels free to do all of this SHIT because he knows the big production shortfall is going to hit in 2013 and 2014, when someone else will be president and take the blame.
IF he had the risk of having to take responsibility for a massive production shortfall or shortage or price increace _on his watch_ he wouldn't be doing this.
#8
We've been working for years towards a more logical status - call it 'storm-safe' suspension. We 'almost' abandon wells we may want to sidetrack later - properly and permanently cement off previous completions and set cement plugs in the casing to further isolate any potential fluid leaks, but we do not cut off the casing below mud line. It actually does make environmental sense to go this far on non-producing wells since a hurricane could come through and tear out the platform, leaving open wells with nothing but a packer and control valve to keep fluids in the ground. Despite being 'watered-out' these old wells can be capable of venting water with a small amount of oil or gas, and as KBK said, sometimes reservoirs do rebuild pressure after being shut in for a while - I have several such on production right now in the field I work.
#9
It all boils down to trust; I'm not certain I trust the administration that's already done so much to help Saudi profits to manage properly shutting in wells so that production could possibly be resumed in the future.
#10
It actually does make environmental sense to go this far on non-producing wells since a hurricane could come through and tear out the platform....Glenmore
Most falsehoods contain a thread of truth. 3,500 wells? 120 days? Sorry, I smell retribution.
#11
First there was the drilling moratorium that was proved to have no legal basis. Then there was the unprecedented government strong arm on a private company for a compensation pool. Currently there is a call for legislation to raise taxes on petroleum producers for an infrastructure slush fund. And now an administrative knee jerk for oppressive regulations on idled wells. Hmmm and all this after Cap and Trade has been temporarily scrapped. Why does the word nudge keep popping into my brain?
Soros. His money in the offshore drilling of Petrobras will be vastly multiplied as the US chokes itself and becomes even more dependent upon imports while discarding domestic production.
Also, this kills the little operators, while living the big multi-nationals still going.
The US Government has destructive of the nation, and has become a tool evil. If it is not changed, we the people may end up called to take action, and possibly even to take up arms...
When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce [the people] under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security
Posted by: No I am The Other Beldar ||
09/16/2010 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#13
we the people may end up called to take action, and possibly even to take up arms...
Gee, I wonder if the Second Amendment was not about target shooting, or collecting, or hunting, or even self defense, but about .... I had better shut up now!
In which a Washington Post lib laments the fact that the impending stampede of trunks isn't going to be bipartisan. Like the current Congress has been.
Partisan Democrats are delighted about Christine O'Donnell's Republican primary victory over Rep. Mike Castle in the race for the open Delaware Senate seat. We'll see what happens in November. She wasn't supposed to win against Castle, either.
I'm despondent. Take a deep breath. Have a cigarette. It'll help you relax.
From the Democratic point of view, the defeat of the moderate, well-known Castle turns what had looked to be a lost cause into a likely win. For now. If Castle was supposed to tromp her let's see what happens next. My crystal ball's in the shop for repairs. Yesterday she was down 25 points and had $90K in the bank.
Overnight people donated a million dollars and she's trailing Coon by 11. Sounds like a lost cause to me, NOT!
Keeping the seat in Democratic hands could be the margin of control in the Senate. So the folks who focus on electing Democrats and keeping a Democratic majority can't be blamed for breaking out the champagne over O'Donnell's win. Go ahead. Get a little tipsy. It's good for you.
Not me, for two reasons. A tee-totaler, are you? What's the other reason?
First, I had thought the silver lining of this election year might be to produce a Senate with a more robust cadre of moderate Republicans. Because Publicans love sending RINOs to Congress. Tell us how conservative you are, how you're gonna get rid of the national debt. Then go sing sweet harmony with Nancy and Harry. Oh, yeah. We need more of that.
That caucus has pretty much dwindled to the two senators from Maine, with very occasional company from colleagues such as Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and departing Ohio Sen. George Voinovich. It's awfully hard for a caucus of two to break with the party. Which brings up the question of why they should break with the party, and why Dems shouldn't break with their party to support things like tax cuts and fiscal responsibility and prosecuting thugs standing outside polling places with truncheons and attitudes.
Peer pressure isn't just a phenomenon of middle school. It's alive and well in the U.S. Senate, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has done a good job of keeping party discipline. A larger number of moderates among his herd of cats might make that more difficult and enhance the prospects for bipartisan legislating. "Bipartisan" seems to equate to supporting Dem policies whether the Dems have Congress in a hammerlock or not. I think most of the country's been shocked and disgusted at the contemptuous lack of bipartisanship by the Dems. There's no reason for anybody to want the Pubs to do anything other than assert control. "Moderation" -- since it's likely the Pubs aren't going to get the hammerlock the Dems have had -- is going to consist of insisting their own side be heard and even occasionally have its way. If Boehner can't achieve that then he's going to get bounced.
There is strength in numbers, and you could imagine a bolstered group of (at least relative) moderates made up of the likes of Castle, Carly Fiorina (Calif.), Mark Kirk (Ill.) or Dino Rossi (Wash.) Yasss... Another Gang of Nine or whatever it was, more Mavericks.
Now, it's as plausible to envision a bolstered Jim DeMint caucus, following the disturbingly powerful junior senator from South Carolina: Sharron Angle (Nev.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Ken Buck (Colo.) -- plus the two other incumbent-slayers of the primary season, Mike Lee in Utah and in Joe Miller in Alaska. Scary. Very scary. I'm positively clutching myself. I'll probably put somebody's eye out with this thing...
But not as scary as reason number two: the ripple effect of victories such as O'Donnell's on other Republican lawmakers. Republican members of Congress look at races such as those in Utah, Alaska and now Delaware and think: There but for the grace of the Tea Party go I. They will be that much more watchful of protecting their right flank against a primary challenge. They will be that much less likely to take a political risk in the direction of bipartisanship. They'll be that much less likely to dump any principles they brought to Washington and go for the boodle.
In this sense, it matters less whether O'Donnell will win the general election -- that doesn't seem likely -- than that she won the primary. Welcome to the Revolution, toots.
The Delaware result might be good news for both Tea Partyers and Democrats. It is not good news for the cause of good government. Like we've had for the past couple years...
Posted by: Fred ||
09/16/2010 11:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
keep whistling past the graveyard
Posted by: Frank G on the road ||
09/16/2010 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Any Republican that talks about "bipartisanship" and "moderation" needs thrown out at this point. It has brought our country nothing but ruin and until the progressive-communist-socialist agenda is destroyed, it is not welcome.
#3
I'm all for bipartisanship if it means fiscal responsibility. If it means more of the same spending like drunken sailors than we are better off without it. Hopefully a few of the survivors after November will realize this and show a new spirit of restraint because although the Tea Party term might go away at some point I think the attitude is here for a long time.
#4
O'Donnell just finished an ugly primary. Coons sailed through unopposed. The numbers reflect that. Give Christine a chance to start running against Coons and lets see what happens.
#5
She currently has 107% of the $1 million she was asking for. A number which is still subject to change, in a good way.
Importantly, her opponent also has about $1m for his campaign, but as his support is "normal", he probably won't get much more. All she has to do is ask for more.
#6
Boys and girls, there is nothing inherently wrong with bipartisanship. In fact, it can do a lot of good. If some Democrats want to join with the Republicans to repeal Obamacare and cut the budget and stuff like that, I say we let the groovy love vibrations flow.
Posted by: Mike ||
09/16/2010 16:43 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Here's the MTV video of a 1996 young evangelicals interview (including O'Donnell) on abstinence and masturbation:
#8
I'd recommend this lovely young lady's future husband discreetly place a copy of the above video in a safe deposit box. It might just come in handy at some distant, future date.
#9
Goodness, Ruth Marcus must be on the A list for all the DC cocktail parties. She is the rare breed that can flit from a conversation about health care on to another about the virtues of fiscal responsibility. All without missing a puffed shrimp. You see, she is post-modern and loves the paradoxical. Ruth will suggest that she really believes in something and yet she has that innate ability to see the intrinsic value in the opposite. She is proud of her liberal courage even though she knows most view her as simply shallow. All of which makes her the non-threatening sap you can ask to help clean up afterwards. Best yet, she will then thank you for giving her a sense of duty.
#10
Zhang Fei: Suddenly, I think this is the reason that she is eliciting such blind hatred from the elites of both parties, because she is a "real" Evangelical, and thinks like they do, and the elites hate and fear that.
Comparing masturbation to adultery is a purely moral, not ethical stance. That is, Evangelicals would never think of codifying it into law--it is a personal ethos, part and parcel with real Evangelicals.
And other things she has said are pure Evangelical. So what is it about Evangelicals that "makes the heathen rage?"
#11
Evangelicals actually believe in the triune God and try to follow the moral pathway of the 10 Commandments. All of which is anathema to modern pseudo-liberalism -- which is actually a neo-Marxist philosophy that ignores Locke, Smith, and Paine.
Posted by: Martini ||
09/16/2010 2:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Doesn't this sound like a classic case of extortion? Demanding money in payment for "protection"?
Posted by: Alan Cramer ||
09/16/2010 10:16 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This is what all that hopey changey stuff smells like.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/16/2010 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Now let me get this straight: She's using our tax dollars to bribe a lobbyist so he can turn around and bribe...er...contribute to her election campaign? Isn't that what it boils down to?
And so we see that the trillion dollar "stimulus" really was the biggest heist in history, the purpose of which was to create a Democrat Party slush fund to be used for the sole purpose of keeping Democrats in power.
When you add the money raised in her name by Senator Jim DeMint's "Take Back America" website ($122,000), O'Donnell's total for the first day of the Senatorial election campaign is $972,000.
See the DeMint website to help Conservative Senate candidates at the link. This is probably putting Mensch McConnell's and John Boner's panties in a knot.
Demint was asked today if he was getting the cold shoulder in the cloak room, one gets the idea he has to use the broom closet.
On another note both Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell were on the Fox channel tonight. Sharron did well, but from an interview standpoint Christine did better.
#4
The ship is turning here. First, the supreme court judge that said Koran burning was not free speech recanted his comments. At first blush no big deal. But looking closer it seems the typical answers they give, based on political leaning and not law, are getting blasted and the court realizes they are out there. I do hope this to be the case. We will see as SB 1070 heads to the SC.
This ODonnell reaction is two fold. The Republican party in Delaware has spoken. The national party told them to get fucked. What the national party really said was, Follow us and vote, but your vote does not count because you can only vote for who we want or we will cut the partys funding. The old cronies running the party are more than willing to lose a seat before they listen to the people of their own party. Simply amazing. Now once they realize what happened they are back peddling. It was made clear, even to the loons at MSNBC, that the party is in the middle of its own little civil war. The old guard, Rove and his cronies, have got to go. The proof of this is the radical outpouring of cash to her campaign yesterday. The people have spoken. In the biggest recession in 60 years she raised a million dollars in 24 hours. Take note Washington, the game is changing.
I have sent a letter to the republican leaders in my state. I informed them that they need to publicly support her, help her with the campaign by speaking out for her in the media and supporting her with fundraisers. I told them that if they stuck by the old guard and remained passive that our family will vote democrat against them in the next elections no matter who runs.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
09/16/2010 10:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Right about now the collective political classs sphincter is so tight it could crush a peach pit.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
09/16/2010 10:45 Comments ||
Top||
#9
DepotGuy, it could be worse for them. However, given the historical record of those in power doing just about anything, no matter how stupid, to hang on to it, the worse for them can not be precluded.
#13
Tancredo, Crist, and possibly Castle and Murkowski, does anyone doubt that the Mainstream Republican elders have more entitlement than service in their personal ethos?
When the people tell them they are done, they balk, hardly a servants attitude. The Castle dismissal is a healthy wakeup to entrenched Republicans who have drifted into cooperation over commitment, and preservation over principle.
I'm not abandoning the Republican Party, in fact I see this as very healthy and long overdue, returning the party to a more genuine conservative perspective.
#14
Please clarify for me - I thought Tom Tancredo was fairly conservative - was that just a marketing ploy some yrs ago when he was more in the lime light? I thought he was one of the few that was really against illegal immigration, etc.
#19
OK I looked at her website. What exactly does she stand for? Or do tea party candidates not need ANY kind of info about them?
Posted by: European Conservative ||
09/16/2010 18:38 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden! Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter! spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered, a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises! Ride now, ride now! Ride to Washington!
Best way to understand it is like this. Republican voters have been voting all along for candidates who promise lower taxes and smaller government. But once those candidates get elected they never deliver. The voters are now completely, utterly and irredeemably feed up and will vote for anyone who might actually make good on those promises. That's the Tea Party. They are not slick, polished pros. They are not looking for perfect. They are looking for anyone willing to go to Washington and start dismantling the damn thing.
#22
"Is it just Christine O'Donnell or is the whole Tea Party against masturbation?"
The fact that the left is dredging up things like that old video proves they're desperate. What does her thinking 20 years ago (or even now) on such a subject have to do with being a Senator? Are they implying the Senate will pass some sort of bill banning the behaviour? They won't, but even if they did, how would anyone know you're doing it? (Penguin excepted, of course. ;-p )
The Dems and the MSM (but I repeat myself) are pathetic. The only thing sane voters (I admit that leaves out the Dems) should care about is whether a candidate is for less spending and smaller government. Is far as I can tell, O'Donnell is.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/16/2010 19:48 Comments ||
Top||
#23
What does her thinking 20 years ago (or even now) on such a subject have to do with being a Senator?
Because that's how the left thinks and does. Severe case of arrested adolescent development. It's inconceivable to them that someone may actually mature and think and act like an adult. That's why they see racism as the answer for anything that appears to oppose their will.
I understand that. But still I'd expect a bit more than a photo an a donation button.
And when I google her I'd expect a bit more than this:
"The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. You can't masturbate without lust!"
Seriously folks. We do live in the 21st century. This sounds like a Christian Taliban.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
09/16/2010 22:24 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Anyone whose been unfortunate enough to be in the Primate house at the Zoo at the wrong time would not contemplate that was lust in the critters hands. More like something to do with the lower brain stem group. Which for some members of the higher primates is probably just the same.
#27
I'm far more interested in O'Donnell's views on the Commerce Clause than Having One Off The Wrist. The other side seems far more interested in her views on the latter topic. That seems to sum up the problem right there.
As for a Christian Taliban, call me when someone proposes lopping off the hand that feeds the happy sock. Till then I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.
#28
EC: Seriously folks. We do live in the 21st century. This sounds like a Christian Taliban.
What I found objectionable about the Taliban wasn't that they were prudes, or even that they exhorted everyone to be just as prudish as they were. What made them so objectionable was that they tortured and killed both people who weren't as prudish as they were, as well as people who criticized them for being prudes. The difference between libertines and O'Donnell is that they are on opposite sides - one preaches that masturbation and casual sex are good, whereas O'Donnell preaches that restraint of our appetites is what makes us better than animals. Like the Nazis, the Taliban went from exhortation to mass murder. Why is EC unable to see this? Perhaps it's a way of diminishing the crimes of the Taliban, if O'Donnell is just as bad as the Taliban, how was Talibanism such a bad thing?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
