It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama rejects new Atlantic Ocean oil drilling

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Not sure if this is being discussed already

I Notice that after ok'ing Atlantic Oil Drilling last year Obama is now back tracking and will not allow Atlantic Oil drilling.

The immediate result two days ago when this story broke Gas increased another 10 cents over night.

Seems Obama would rather help the Middle east Monarchies and Tyrants than help the people of the US. The Middle class has been getting the finger from Obama evr since he got into office.

www.usatoday.com...




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

There are things happening and its really hard to put a finger on what is in the pipe line .You might be interested in this little piece .

March 15, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Gulf Business"- Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki Al Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud has launched a stinging attack on the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama. In a 615-word open letter published in local media, the former ambassador to the United States slammed the President for labelling Saudi Arabia as "free riders" during a series of interviews with The Atlantic magazine. Obama is reported as saying that a number of American allies in the Gulf and in Europe are "free riders" who are keen to draw the United States into regional conflicts that sometimes have little to do with American interests.
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

And this one too .

Saudi Arabia’s ever increasingly hostile stance toward neighbors may not be as secular as some have suggested. Given the nature of the country’s oil reserves, and almost unlimited production for decades, it’s possible the Saudis could simply be running out of gas. journal-neo.org...
journal-neo.org...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Oh, he'll spin it or the media will spin it as a green initiative as usual. Just like the pipeline, had little to do with the going green like they try to pass it off as when it had more to do with something else green in color.
edit on 16-3-2016 by misterhistory because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


The immediate result two days ago when this story broke Gas increased another 10 cents over night.

If true, thats blackmail, and shows the dangers of Monopolies. In a true free market, competition from other companies would prevent price gouging.

As far as 'Presiders' telling these Oligarchs what to do, since when has that stopped them? I wonder what the fine is for business as usual.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn
The article also states that

Meanwhile, the Obama administration said it would consider the sale of drilling rights in three spots in the Arctic — the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea and Cook Inlet — from 2017 to 2022. The decision comes nearly six months after the president canceled Arctic leases, including with Royal Dutch Shell.


One can only assume the Atlantic decision is likewise a temporary one. You assume this comes as a means of helping the middle east, but with oil dropping it may be a wise decision. Save resources for when the value rebounds.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: SargonThrall

There seems to be a lot happening politically and economically that is not a done deal as yet . When we look at the if's and buts to the future ,we are left a bit unsure .I think there is lots of oil and gas but with the prices the way they are now and the markets the way they are now ,getting to the front of the line will be the big challenges . It kind of sheds some light on the whole pricing thing though .I think we were at 110$ and now at 30$ ..that is a lot of money in between that was going somewhere .Maybe that is what happened when the Rothschild's divested their oil/gas portfolio last year . Heirs to Rockefeller oil fortune divest from fossil fuels over climate change
Heirs to Standard Oil fortune join campaign that will withdraw a total of $50bn from fossil fuels, including from tar sands funds www.theguardian.com...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: SargonThrall
a reply to: ChesterJohn
The article also states that

Meanwhile, the Obama administration said it would consider the sale of drilling rights in three spots in the Arctic — the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea and Cook Inlet — from 2017 to 2022. The decision comes nearly six months after the president canceled Arctic leases, including with Royal Dutch Shell.


One can only assume the Atlantic decision is likewise a temporary one. You assume this comes as a means of helping the middle east, but with oil dropping it may be a wise decision. Save resources for when the value rebounds.

Sounds green , too.

"W'ere protecting the environment", but really, it just doesn't pay right now.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: SargonThrall
a reply to: ChesterJohn
The article also states that

Meanwhile, the Obama administration said it would consider the sale of drilling rights in three spots in the Arctic — the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea and Cook Inlet — from 2017 to 2022. The decision comes nearly six months after the president canceled Arctic leases, including with Royal Dutch Shell.


One can only assume the Atlantic decision is likewise a temporary one. You assume this comes as a means of helping the middle east, but with oil dropping it may be a wise decision. Save resources for when the value rebounds.


Great point! I hope that is his intention behind this move



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Longtime lurker, new member, first posting -- As a resident of Virginia Beach, avid fisherwoman, and small business owner - I'd identify myself as tree hugging conservative - in that I believe we need a healthy planet for ourselves and our children, while maintaining a strong economy where all people can fairly make a good living. Offering a local perspective here --The Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic coast region is under enough pressure from upriver pollution, adding the risk of a major oil spill is ridiculous. The process of exploring for oil uses sonic technology proven to harm dolphin and whale. The regional opposition to Atlantic offshore drilling includes a wide and inclusive group. This region is home to Navy, Army, Marine Corps bases -- all of whom would have their operations put in jeopardy should a spill occur, and at a minimum would have to alter activities to work around oil platforms. Commercial and sport fishing is a million dollar industry, as well as Virgina/Norh Carolina beach vacation businesses. The promise of more jobs would not nearly equal the jobs put at risk by this and the profit made by the oil and gas companies would not be given back to anyone in the region. I understand that there may a bigger game afoot for why this decision has come down for now. But, frankly, how would it ever make sense for a handful of oil executives to have the right to make billions off of this natural resource while making a permanent mess that they will not be around to clean up?



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1
Well now that is curious - divestment in late 2014, long form low January 2015. Perhaps they shattered the market with rumours to create an artificial low, a la the Great Depression banker buyouts?

Perhaps in the same way, they will buy all the oil stocks back when they reach bottom, and reap billions more.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Look at the long term picture America has always imported large amounts of oil from abroad but when these countries run out of oil America will still have massive reserves.

At the moment a friend of mine constantly points out to me oil wins wars.

but there is a problem with this strategy it is a well known fact oil isn't needed to power homes or cars any more but all new technology is either bought by very wealthy and powerful individuals or taken by force to keep oil as the most important commodity on the market.

Someone somewhere is controlling future development damaging the planet at the same time for the sake unthinkable wealth.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Bigcid

Hey Big Cid - not sure if this thread is done for, but I happened to re-read this one and wanted to respond to your post.

I agree with you, big money tied to big oil has no interest in seeing true energy independence. Going back to the origination of our electric system -- Tesla vs Edison. Tesla believed electricity could and should be free to everyone. Edison and his investors figured out how to corner that market. Wacky Tesla was shut down, but not before his inventions were seized by government and corporate entities.

Renewable energy technologies of all sorts have indeed been invented - some very high tech, some not so complex --- but, again, when individuals can buy/build independent means of generating energy (sun is free, wind is free, geothermal is free, plus other more sophisticated tech - hydrogen fuel cells, etc,..).

But golly gee - no more profit for oil and gas...and yes the jobs jobs jobs will be lost, but isn't it time to let the change happen, let people get cross trained for other work? Profiteers of the current system are holding on tooth and nail to squeeze every dirty penny out of us they can (using political buy-outs, war, and economic fear). I believe we will soon wake up to the fraud, and take our own power back.

It can be done, and it is being done:

www.renewableenergyworld.com...

National Renewable Energy Lab: www.nrel.gov...

Rocky Mountain Institute: www.rmi.org...

www.ases.org...




top topics



 
4

log in

join