Quote:
Originally Posted by CompuDude
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReefHound
Quote:
Originally Posted by CompuDude
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReefHound
There have been hundreds of rigs in the gulf off Texas for over 30 years. Mexico gets most of it's oil from the gulf in Campeche Bay. Tell me how many bad spills you can remember. Tell me why the coasts of California or Florida are going to be any different than Texas.
|
Easy. We vote to protect the environment, nearly every time. And we have never had a governor with the last name of "Bush". |
You either misinterpreted the question or ducked it. I meant if the oil companies can drill off the coast of Texas for 30 years and not ruin the coast with big oil spills, then what is different with Florida and California that makes you think they won't have the same spill-free results? Do you have anything to support your position other than paranoia?
BTW, we don't elect movie stars as governors or have rolling blackouts. |
Dumb luck? There ARE safety protocols. Odds are odds for a reason. That doesn't mean accidents can't happen. Oh, that is, unless the rigs aren't there in the first place. Do you actually have a way to counter that simple fact?
Supertankers carrying vast amounts of oil will be cruising the same waters either way... those odds don't change. Again, there's really no disputing this simple fact, either.
As for movie stars... well, I didn't vote for any of them. And Deregulation is responsible for the rolling blackouts... completely unrelated to the topic at hand though that may be.
I'm done with this though. I don't come to the ST site for political discussion. |
You probably should check your facts. The only reason super tankers exist, is for trans ocean transport. your argument actually supports offshore drilling, in that it would reduce the use of super tankers. the less oil we bring in from across any ocean the less tankers we use.