General Discussion

cali

(114,904 posts) Thu Feb 13, 2014, 09:44 AM Feb 2014

Ain't it great to have an environmentally conscious President? Feds Approve More Fracking [View all]

off CA coast.

And in case you haven't been aware of it, the Obama administration has been a huge friend to big oil and gas, particularly when it comes to fracking.

The federal government has approved three new fracking jobs off the shores of California as state coastal regulators voiced concerns about potential environmental impacts The work in the Santa Barbara Channel, site of a 1969 oil platform blowout, has not yet begun and it was not immediately clear when it would.

<snip>

Through the Freedom of Information Act, the AP found the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, or BSEE, the federal agency in charge of offshore drilling, approved a new project last March.

The bureau on Wednesday confirmed that it greenlighted three other fracking plans by the company DCOR LLC last year on an oil platform about nine miles offshore. While new oil leases have been prohibited since the 1980s, companies can still drill from about two dozen grandfathered-in platforms.

<snip>

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-approve-fracking-off-california-coast-22486746

139 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ain't it great to have an environmentally conscious President? Feds Approve More Fracking [View all] cali Feb 2014 OP

Eventually, we'll all be living in a chemical dump. ... not too hard to see where RKP5637 Feb 2014 #1

Here is a ProSense Feb 2014 #2

this is considererd a very minor move on the part of the EPA cali Feb 2014 #4

I consider it the bare minimum that EPA might have done. Vattel Feb 2014 #15

By whom? ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #28

By me H2O Man Feb 2014 #34

He knows the truth. It's almost crazy to claim he doesn't. cali Feb 2014 #45

And rather than post/link to a poll ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #51

I don't know what it's "considered," but I can READ IT and tell it's a band-aid on a gut wound Scootaloo Feb 2014 #103

No ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #105

I agree ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #54

True, that. H2O Man Feb 2014 #74

Pedigree and resume, aside ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #89

by every enviornmental group and every industry group. cali Feb 2014 #44

Umm ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #56

Something is better than nothing. cui bono Feb 2014 #76

Yes ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #90

How arrogant of you to think you are so unique and talented. cui bono Feb 2014 #91

Please ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #92

One doesn't "deserve" arrogance. But you certainly do ooze it. cui bono Feb 2014 #94

Okay ... I will comply to binary thinking ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #98

This fails the laugh test, unfortunately Doctor_J Feb 2014 #119

I forget, why was he a better choice than Mitt? bowens43 Feb 2014 #3

Not the change I hoped (and worked) for. Scuba Feb 2014 #5

and yet we are considering blue14u Feb 2014 #110

I'm still hoping for Warren. In the meantime, we need to hold the Senate. Scuba Feb 2014 #111

Hear hear! blue14u Feb 2014 #113

It's not going to be easy to hold the Senate when the president is driving away voters Doctor_J Feb 2014 #122

Couldn't agree more. Scuba Feb 2014 #130

One of my major differences with the President is his all-of-the-above energy policy. TheMathieu Feb 2014 #6

Yes, I imagine it is quite easy to be coolly dismissive of fracking if it is not in one's back yard. djean111 Feb 2014 #8

Who would've thought that there'd be a downside to Obama's corporatist ideology? Romulox Feb 2014 #13

Energy and banks rule the world democratisphere Feb 2014 #7

Wow, how easy it must be for some folks to dismiss all that has been done for the environment okaawhatever Feb 2014 #9

Yeah, loved the part where ESA protections were pulled from the wolves. rwsanders Feb 2014 #10

a Bush policy embraced by this adminstration, now found to be based on unsettled science G_j Feb 2014 #19

I don't know if it can be blamed on Bush anymore... rwsanders Feb 2014 #38

no it certainly can't! G_j Feb 2014 #40

It was at that moment I realized we had a "Republican lite" on our hands... villager Feb 2014 #127

+1 Thank you for all of that well laid-out info! n/t countryjake Feb 2014 #68

Well said. Treatment of Democrats at DU is... berni_mccoy Feb 2014 #11

thank you for that. I genuinely believe that much of the irrational criticism here on DU comes from okaawhatever Feb 2014 #17

for fuck's sake, how is criticizing the President's record on this, "irrational"? cali Feb 2014 #46

I agree! blue14u Feb 2014 #114

North Carolina Republicans destroyed DECADES of progress in a matter of MONTHS. WorseBeforeBetter Feb 2014 #57

+1. n/t Laelth Feb 2014 #93

I am just suggesting blue14u Feb 2014 #108

Obama has no problems with decisions that wouldn't be "popular"... WorseBeforeBetter Feb 2014 #118

I agree with you blue14u Feb 2014 #123

What am I going to do about it? WorseBeforeBetter Feb 2014 #125

some of us "troll types here to divide" have been here for over 10 fucking years.. frylock Feb 2014 #72

You aren't a troll type. Sorry, you're just a regular person with an opinion who expresses it. okaawhatever Feb 2014 #73

Now anti-fracking is "trolling". Just like being against torture and war and mandatory for-profit Doctor_J Feb 2014 #78

amazing, isn't it? frylock Feb 2014 #83

If you really want to "turn this country around from Republican policies" cui bono Feb 2014 #86

It's not "irrational criticism" to be against fracking neverforget Feb 2014 #100

I was making general statements about certain types of behavior. Being against fracking, drones okaawhatever Feb 2014 #102

Then why did you use that irrational criticism in this thread? neverforget Feb 2014 #104

But you're confusing DINO's with Dems. n/t cui bono Feb 2014 #77

Humm, blue14u Feb 2014 #116

LOL. Without "the List!", your post falls flat. nt Romulox Feb 2014 #14

I think the list was included. rwsanders Feb 2014 #39

Here's "the list" ProSense Feb 2014 #42

+1000 nt okaawhatever Feb 2014 #49

Quite a low bar you set for Obama there... he's done better than nothing. cui bono Feb 2014 #80

Yup, and just think, he's a step up above his predecessors. ProSense Feb 2014 #81

Not on everything. cui bono Feb 2014 #84

On everything, including ProSense Feb 2014 #85

And spying on American citizens, prosecuting whistleblowers, drone strikes, free trade... cui bono Feb 2014 #87

Oh, that ProSense Feb 2014 #88

So you don't refute those issues then? When you resort to petty name calling you've clearly lost. cui bono Feb 2014 #95

So ProSense Feb 2014 #96

consulting the internet medical dictionary - truedelphi Feb 2014 #99

+1. Gotta agree. n/t FSogol Feb 2014 #59

What has he done that is positive for the environment? n/t cui bono Feb 2014 #79

The ProSense Feb 2014 #106

I like the federal regulations on coal. cui bono Feb 2014 #115

Hasn't one of his talking points been to "pursue clean coal"? Doctor_J Feb 2014 #121

I don't see pointing blue14u Feb 2014 #112

Orders from on-high.... NorthCarolina Feb 2014 #12

Like we ever had a choice n2doc Feb 2014 #16

Yeah... "great" Fearless Feb 2014 #18

Actually, it ain't great.. fadedrose Feb 2014 #20

PS You got a lot of hearts...people here have great judgment fadedrose Feb 2014 #21

And the destruction of the environment continues.... blackspade Feb 2014 #22

Anybody have information on how fracking is adding to his portfolio? DhhD Feb 2014 #23

Today West Virginia, tomorrow the whole country. Brigid Feb 2014 #24

Sad thing is that we can't keep using traditional forms of energy and expect a clean environment. L0oniX Feb 2014 #25

Here's a ProSense Feb 2014 #29

Talk like Bobby Kennedy, govern like Dick Cheney. QC Feb 2014 #26

... 840high Feb 2014 #33

Yeah, he's JUST like Dick Cheney. Chorophyll Feb 2014 #55

Yep, party has become mainly a tool of the One Percent in both parties woo me with science Feb 2014 #62

yeah and if your for Hillary PatrynXX Feb 2014 #27

lol. not for Hillary as most everyone here knows. cali Feb 2014 #47

Fracking is not going away. It's time to accept that badtoworse Feb 2014 #30

Fracking cannot be "done safely" bread_and_roses Feb 2014 #37

I like the idea of having gasoline, reasonably priced electricity and natural gas to heat with. badtoworse Feb 2014 #48

by the time your "decades" roll around .... bread_and_roses Feb 2014 #58

Gas now for no water later, fucking stupid and anti - stewardship. FUCK THE FUTURE! TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #133

I have confidence that technology will be developed to provide us with both badtoworse Feb 2014 #134

Supporters of fracking have no solutions for the damage done in the here and now or in the future TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #137

If people followed your line of thinking, we'd still be living in caves. badtoworse Feb 2014 #138

Many of us have taken a small step this fall when natural gas prices went sky high. We stopped jwirr Feb 2014 #31

What other sources did you change to? hugo_from_TN Feb 2014 #63

Good guestion. I do not own the home I live in and they changed to using their electrical heat and jwirr Feb 2014 #65

ain't it great!!!!! heaven05 Feb 2014 #32

Yeah, it's grand. I'm one of those "one issue" voters nowadays. Climate Change being it. raouldukelives Feb 2014 #35

another reason I think climate change stupidicus Feb 2014 #36

Add these into the leases OK'd - Hell Hath No Fury Feb 2014 #41

Spiking the EPA's own report connecting fracking to water contamination was big clue. pa28 Feb 2014 #43

Did you comment on these permit applications when they were submitted? struggle4progress Feb 2014 #50

Would that hinder or lessen her comments here? NCTraveler Feb 2014 #64

Democracy isn't a spectator sport struggle4progress Feb 2014 #66

And Cali appears to not be a spectator. NCTraveler Feb 2014 #67

To have any impact on agency actions, it's necessary to comment on proposed agency actions struggle4progress Feb 2014 #69

So what does that have to do with posting a thread on DU? n/t cui bono Feb 2014 #82

the President was criticized that's what. neverforget Feb 2014 #101

You can't influence agency decisions without commenting on agency actions struggle4progress Feb 2014 #120

It's public policy from the administration. neverforget Feb 2014 #132

"The President was criticized, that's what." woo me with science Feb 2014 #126

What are the legal standards for approving these jobs? treestar Feb 2014 #52

Ain't it great having Bush/Cheney environmental laws and an obstructionist GOP House Coyotl Feb 2014 #53

Why did AP have to go throught FOIA to get the information? Was it secret? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2014 #60

I warned folks about these kinds of issues years ago... theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #61

but but but... progressoid Feb 2014 #70

why not? we've got water to burn here in california. frylock Feb 2014 #71

You don't understand chess Doctor_J Feb 2014 #75

And in California, no less. A state well-known for its geologic stability. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #97

Droughts everywhere and aquifers are drying out, but hey, let's allow more fracking!!!!!111111 Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #107

recommend frwrfpos Feb 2014 #109

And don't look to the EPA for help theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #117

This is a very blue14u Feb 2014 #124

no defenders of this policy? bobduca Feb 2014 #128

Nope, just the usual. JoeyT Feb 2014 #129

PO will be in California today, as a matter of fact. Le Taz Hot Feb 2014 #131

and now every Californian will have to pay for 5,000 gal/year MisterP Feb 2014 #135

Your headline overstates what is taking place Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #136

"new oil leases have been prohibited since the 1980s" "grandfathered-in platforms. " Sunlei Feb 2014 #139