It’s almost like people don’t forget when they lose their loved ones far too soon, or their daily lives and finances are negatively impacted because the leader of their country doesn’t take a pandemic, the likes of which was last seen in America more than 100 years ago, seriously. Crazy, right? I voted in Texas last week for every Democratic candidate on the ballot. Oh, and here’s a message for Greg Abbott: You can try to spin Joe Biden’s stance on oil and gas to try and motivate more Texans to vote for Trump all you want, but I most certainly will not forget that you refused to allow all Texans to vote by mail during the middle of a pandemic. When you are up for reelection, I will vote for your Democratic challenger.
You first said "commodities war". Quoting you now, see the difference? 0 substance tweet-like BS. If you're pointing something out, be specific. What picture are you painting? Take your position now, then -- are you saying Obama and Biden did a great job for O&G? Better than the impact Shale has had? "That was me." -Obama I read them -- they're shitty links. Did you not see the chart I posted? COVID is the biggest impact in 2020, prior to that was the oil price war with OPEC. Those things are massively bigger impacts to the oil price than the trade war w/ China. Here's a link that proves that it was a dip in oil demand in 2018. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...-happened-to-oil-prices-in-2018/#7e9b80886d83 You claim to have worked in O&G, you seem to know the keywords, but holy **** do you selectively choose how you think. Trump is a dumbass, he does things that he thinks is correct with not much impact analysis. So when he goes into a trade war w/ China, he wants to do exactly that. He's not doing that thinking that it's going to destroy oil demand. Now lets compare that to Biden -- "I would transition from the oil industry, yes." With nothing but target dates set that he got from websites of Big Oil like BP/Shell because he has no ****ing clue about the industry. But sure, lets just chalk it up to Biden knows what he's doing because of Obama's approval of refineries 6 years ago, export terminals along the gulf coast. Here's what I'll concede outright -- Obama did some things yes. Do Dems now get to claim that they support O&G? Not at all. Absolutely not. Even during those eras, Obama pushed policies that echoes Biden's ideas today -- reduce carbon footprint. He mandated that we create more fuel-efficient vehicles by certain target dates or suffer a gas guzzler tax. He started subsidizing fuel-efficient vehicles by giving tax breaks. These are all contributors to a shitty oil price and a shattering oil demand. Net negative if you ask me. Then lets get to today... Obama era Dems are moderate compared to today's Dems. So much so that AOC and Biden get to trash O&G openly and change their position on it like days leading up to election day. And you're over here to try and validate Biden's position like it makes sense. It completely does not. That's insane, first of all, that you'd lead people to believe Obama/Biden was such a big impact. You didn't "insist" it was ALL due to Obama. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/11/obamas-misleading-oil-boast/ There's plenty of evidence in that link that Obama misled the people to think he did everything. Fine, you didn't claim he did everything -- but you certainly left a LOT of room for interpretation. So much so I googled it and got all the supporting evidence. And you've accused ME of being partisan. I'm over here trying to make sure people understand where the political interests align for each of the parties. I'm not trying to win more votes for the Republicans, it's just that you really shouldn't leave room for misinformation like you're doing. It's irresponsible, and it's wrong, no matter how shitty Trump is.
It’s inevitable either way. If it’s not a source of “renewable” energy then it is finite. Finite means that it will run out. That point aside, fossil fuels also ruin the environment so moving away from depleting sources of energy that causes irreparable harm to our world is the correct course of action. The US should be leading the cause instead of sticking their head in the sand. It is just another example that shows how tone deaf Trump and his supporters are when it comes to the most basic topics.
When it comes to an ethical dilemma like fossil fuels vs environment, people should decide what is correct and not incorrect. This is not an absolute. It's misinformation at this point to think oil is a depleting source of energy. There is no peak oil when so many proven reserves and so much production is enabled by technology. Hence the cheap oil price today. Fossil fuel production ruins the environment, sure. But I've also posted, building construction account for 1/3 of all greenhouse gases emitted in the US. Are you going to stop making people? No? Then, we're really blanketing the situation. Just like the video of the turtle that had the straw up it's nose that convinced Starbucks to replace plastic straws with paper straws that requires trees instead of oil. This is the dumbest PR move ever. It solves nothing. Do we want road transportation? 7 gallons of oil in every tire. Do we want shipping industries that gets us clean water and food? All powered by diesel engines. Do we want to travel, flying by air? Jet fuel. Do you want local farms? Pesticides and fertilizers produced and utilized by O&G products and engines. We're not ready for an energy transition. In fact, we're dumbing down people when we tell them that we can -- we've made so little progress in science towards using other forms of energy that the best we can do is rely on an electric grid and hope that some genius finds a way to get us to a clean source of energy that can be readily found everywhere. This just simply doesn't exist.
Looks like I finally found one person I can relate to about Houston! Too bad nobody else gives a ****. Truth be told, graduated HS there and AFAIK most people I knew never went back. And the people stuck in Houston are living the life of a fish in an aquarium. I guess there's healthcare/IT workers I'm forgetting about -- they'll be fine. But they're going to have a lot of shitty days watching all the people they love get screwed. It's exactly how it happened to me.
No, you want it to be an ethical dilemma because you don’t like the fact that fossil fuels are literally bad in every way. It is not misinformation that fossil fuels are not renewable and are finite. They will run out unless you want to wait several million years for more. So because we cannot eliminate all greenhouse gases we shouldn’t do anything at all. Makes sense. Single use plastics are terrible for the environment in many ways and eliminating their production and use is a good thing. There should be investment in finding ways to solve these and other problems where an industry’s legacy business processes rely on dying infrastructures and resources. New solutions bring jobs and boost the economy. “We’ve always done it this way” or “Dis is hard, lulz” are not plans. No, YOU aren’t ready for energy transition and are sticking your head in the sand hoping that the problem will just solve itself.
It's not bad in every way, unfortunately. I'm not even going to bother, linking you to things, this is easily google-able, I've checked. I'm also quite sure you're using plenty of O&G products right now, most notably plastics in the device you're using to communicate on this very forum. Do I have the right to remove all those things from you? I'd imagine that'd piss you off. You said "Depleting", I'm not refuting that it's finite. You made it seem like we're going to run out. Unfortunately for you, technology keeps extending that runway. I didn't say that -- I said we're masking issues. If you want to get to the root of the problem, construction of buildings is the literal mass producer of greenhouse gases that we need to eliminate as it produces 1/3 of them, and is the biggest portion of greenhouse gases in US. This is your idea, not mine. And if we want to do that, we should limit human population. That's the only logical transitive property here. Really you should just answer yes. I don't see the problem. Do you want to skirt around the issue or solve it? Eliminating plastic straws doesn't do enough, says other environmentalists. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...will-not-be-enough-fight-clean-oceans-n951141 I thought you wanted to save the world, not sure what you're getting towards here. ... I thought it was very obvious that people have been trying to solve this very problem for a long long time. There are other sources of fuel that have been developed after the discovery of fossil fuels, there's just massive problems with other options that can't fulfill the requirements that fossil fuels can. Solar has problems with the cost associated as it's a linear production of energy based on the solar farm. You don't break a threshold and all of the sudden have enough energy to feed a whole city. There's also solar panel lifespans. Wind has the problem of being unpredictable, and the high upfront cost of putting it there. Then the two sources mentioned here just simply can't be transported by anything other than hard wires and batteries, which means the city closest to the source will deplete it the moment the energy is generated. Hydro is a great source of energy -- but not every city is near a body of water -- and it costs enormous amount of resources to build a hydroelectric source. Once made, it's awesome. Look at Brazil. But again, geography of the world limits the supply of these. Nuclear power is also great -- but it's extremely dangerous (Fukushima, Chernobyl) and thus has tons of regulations that make it difficult for these to be mass produced in a timely manner. Not only that it has to avoid areas with frequent natural disasters for obvious reasons -- that means it's also limited to where you can build a nuclear plant. Geothermal power is possibly the greatest source of energy -- Iceland has the cheapest cost of electricity and it's because they're right next to an enormous geothermal vent. But how often do we come across it? Seldom. Also, for us that would be Yellowstone and I'm not sure we're permitted to get in there to use the park for an energy source. If you want more insight, take it from an environmentalist whistleblower:
It's not even "this is going to be real expensive" anymore when it comes to solar or wind. Instead you get to the heart of the matter... "it's gonna take away oil jobs." Well yeah. No one wants to wipe away all oil jobs, but we do want to replace them with something that doesn't poison everyone around it with future generations footing the bill.
lol we are at the part where trump is shi**tty and wrong ( accepted fact) yet lets hold biden to a higher standard and talk through the gymnastics of biden bad.. its comical. they dont even try.. "well yeah 2 wrongs dont make a right... but" i wish repugs or concern trolls were better at masking this.. what a joke
Abbot is not a member here so you may want to write a letter. Cruz is probably a member, do you have a message for him?
the most interesting exchange was when character came up and biden made the appeal to look at them both closely and vote knowing this. these are moments of truth that resonate and show that biden doesnt believe the people are stupid like trump does. that was huge win for biden everyone knows what a slimeball trump is. trump cant escape that and a miscalculation by trump. this whole hunter angle will lose trump votes as much as it gain. people want to see solutions and covid solution like all else with trump is a punt and complain strategy. this election really is a referendum on the usa and how dumb or not its people are. i happen to think that people are slightly smarter than given credit for. maybe im overly optimistic? there was apathy for hilary clinton and trump slipped in. good for trump.. it worked then.. but way too many angry voters now..voters that I believe feel like we are better than this. thats where the "smarter" part and we are "smarter" than gop hopes * i think * haha
Speaking directly to the Houston and surrounding areas O&G workforce is smart. There’s a lot of fear and anxiety about what comes next, and many are just worried about the next 24 months of their careers. But there is one obvious thing everyone from Houston knows right now... there is no job security right now in O&G, and it’s a pretty rough time for many... especially those over 50 who don’t believe they have transferable skills (which they all do). I think there is real opportunity for Biden to win Texas and for the Democratic Party to never look back with Texas... but they need to focus hard on speaking directly to the over 50 O&G community that has a lot of career fear that leads them to think that it’s in their best interest in the short term to vote Republican because they’ll let they’re employer pollute enough to save a couple bucks which might save their job which is hanging by a thread.
I think we can all agree oil and gas is not going to go away quickly no matter what even with a New Green Deal. But it will be reduced as the world's primary energy source and more rapidly as climate change becomes undeniable in real time. Houston's O&G economy will be affected. There probably won't be any more heady days of rapid expansion. We need to use the transition period to reshape our economy. We could become America's corporate center for renewable energies. Or we can deny it, be a pariah in the fight over climate change, and wither in the inevitable changes. Short term thinking vs. long term thinking
