Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Fit Me For A Pair Of Sponge Shoes...
I'm goin' to Alaska!

There's so much friggin' oil in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of California, it's bubbling to the surface. And not just a little bit, but a whole shit-pot-full. And for those of you who've been in the Marine Corps already know, that's much, much more than an ass-load.

And just how much is said shit-pot-full of oil that's leaking to the surface? How about 190,000 metric tons... a year. That's right, a year. Says who? The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, that's who. Well, dip me in sheep shit and call me stinky! That's how much Mother Nature is just pissin' away? DAYUM! Just how much exactly is under the ground!!?? I'd bet it's a damn sight greater than a shit-pot-full AND an ass-load combined!

Here's some of the article from the AAPG;
(The entire article can be found here)
“Near-Surface Hydrocarbon Migration: Mechanisms and Seepage Rates”
April 6-10, 2002, VANCOUVER, BC, CANADA

Revised Assessment of the Rate at Which Crude Oil Seeps Naturally into the Ocean
Keith A. KVENVOLDEN , U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Cortis K. Cooper, Chevron Petroleum Technology Company, San Ramon, CA 94583

Three times during the past 30 years, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has commissioned studies of the sources, fates, and effects of crude oil and crude-oil products in the marine environment. One component of these studies has been an assessment of the rate that crude oil reaches the ocean through natural seepage from geological sources.

Studies in parts of the Gulf of Mexico, using these new technologies, have resulted in an estimated seepage rate for the entire Gulf of Mexico of 150,000 mt/a (metric tones/annually). For offshore southern California, a new estimate of annual rate of oil seepage is 20,000 mt. The annual rate of oil seepage for offshore Alaska is also estimated to be about 20,000 mt.

Thus the new North American estimate of 190,000 mt/a is only 10,000 mt less than the 1985 global estimate of 200,000 mt/a, suggesting that the 1985 value was underestimated.
And this ain't nothing new. Oil Surface Seepage was already old news when the first Europeans first set foot in Alaska. Says who? The State of Alaska, that's who. Early exploration and oil prospecting in Alaska was driven by surface oil seeps noted on the Alaska Peninsula, Western Cook Inlet and on the North Slope. Historically, oil seeps were observed by Inupiat Eskimos, and according to archaeological evidence, oil shale was used for fuel by the indigenous peoples of the Arctic. So allow me to point out a few things --

1. It was the Democrats who've blocked every effort to drill not only in Alaska, but aggressive drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and new drilling off the coasts of California and Florida. Should I even bring up new refineries and nuclear plants that have been shot down by the Dems for a few decades now?

2. Not one Marine, soldier, sailor, airman or Coast Guardsmen will die if we drill for more oil either on or offshore of Alaska, California, or Florida. I thought you Dems were all about "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!". Well, put up or shut up.

3. Just this morning, I saw some Dem Drone on TV babbling on concerning how the price of gas will come down under President Obama. The knee-jerk answer was oh, so predictable --- "TAX THE OIL COMPANIES!". Doesn't this mook understand that NO COMPANIES pay taxes? Oil companies, soap companies, brick companies, turd polish companies... hell, all of 'em.... if they get hit by a government tax increase, they just smile and say "OK!!", then they pass the tax increase onto the consumers. So in essence, the government hasn't done a damn thing except double the amount of taxes on gasoline that WE PAY!


Blogger Alli said...

I think that morons like Ted Kennedy, who had to fly all the way down here to Duke from Massachusetts to get that brain tumor operated on (LET IT GROW!!!!!!!!!!), should have to pay out of pocket for all the people they screw over by not allowing the drilling in Alaska.

Also, can we talk about the fact that installing pipelines in Alaska to help the drilling process is GOOD for animal fertility rates? It's been shown that reindeer and other big mammals are actually FRISKIER when (get this) their ability to survive the cold is increased.

PETA should join OUR side.

10:22 PM  
Blogger she said...


11:05 PM  
Blogger M. Simon said...

No Blood For Oil or No Drilling For Oil?

About sums it up.

If we lower the profits from oil the wars we are currently in will be cheaper to fight.

Of course there is always:

Easy Low Cost No Radiation Fusion

Which is right now being tested by our very own US Navy.

10:04 AM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Orthodoxae said...

Amen and Amen!

10:52 AM  
Blogger Kit Brookside said...

"Not one Marine, soldier, sailor, airman or Coast Guardsmen will die if we drill for more oil either on or offshore of Alaska, California, or Florida. I thought you Dems were all about "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!". Well, put up or shut up."



11:25 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

And now it's starting to come out that the recent jacking of oil prices is not because of the war, or environmentalists, or even Dems, but the speculative futures trading of investment funds (such as retirement funds)! So 60% of the price you are paying, you can thank the speculators for.

No president will be able to undo it, so get used to it.

11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To say that gas prices would decrease with President Obama (shiver) is ludicrous! Has anyone noticed that when the congressional majority was held by Republicans the gas prices rose a little but stayed fairly even but as soon as the Democrats gained the majority, gas prices have soared? Look at the Bush presidency's gas prices and the last few years (under a Democrat congress, with Obama as a member) is where the huge price increases have been seen? Or are we supposed to believe that is some huge coincidence?

12:43 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home