President Obama is the drill, baby drill! President, NOT the Environmental President

[cali]

he claims to be.

It was bad enough that last year, he opened up the part of the Atlantic Coast for drilling. It's bad enough that he's been all in on fracking and that expanding fracking on federal land took precedence over closing the Halliburton loophole-though the administration has finally taken some modest steps to regulate fracking on federal land:

<snip>

The final rule released by the Interior Department, however, would compel companies to identify the chemicals they are using on FracFocus.org, an industry-backed website where companies can post data about their fracking operations. Advocates had sought to force firms to announce chemicals before fracking begins, but under the rule released Friday, companies will be required to disclose the chemicals within 30 days of starting an operation. They will also be able to keep private certain chemicals they deem proprietary as trade secrets.

<snip>

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/03/20/obama-tightens-fracking-regs-requires-chemical-disclosure

But opening up fragile parts of the Arctic to Shell, as was announced today? That's really inexcusable. And the President's record is one of a large expansion of energy extraction. It makes a mockery of his climate change agenda.

Analysis Confirms Major Risks from Oil Drilling in the Remote and Fragile Arctic Ocean


February 12, 2015
Anchorage, AK —

Today the Department of the Interior released its final supplemental environmental impact statement for Chukchi Sea Lease Sale 193, less than two months after hundreds of thousands of public comments called its previous draft analysis flawed. The EIS isn’t the agency’s final decision about whether to end or affirm the Chukchi Sea oil leases, and Interior can still get it right. But it is a notable rushed stride toward potential environmental harm.

“The lease sale decision is a golden opportunity for the Obama administration to show leadership by deciding to keep the Chukchi Sea off limits to drilling,” said Earthjustice Staff Attorney Erik Grafe. “But Interior’s publication of the supplemental EIS for the Chukchi Sea lease today is a step in the wrong direction. The Interior is rushing through the process to cater to Shell’s drilling wishes rather than sound decision-making about an irreplaceable region already under dramatic climate stress.”

<snip>

“Today’s impact statement confirms again that drilling in the Chukchi Sea puts Arctic people and wildlife at risk from major oil spills,” Grafe said. “It concludes there is a 75 percent chance of one or more major oil spills if the Chukchi Sea is developed, and there is no way to clean or contain such a spill. Drilling for oil in the Arctic Ocean also would exacerbate climate change, adding climate insult to climate injury. The administration should end the leases.”

<snip>
http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2015/department-of-the-interior-releases-final-supplemental-eis-for-chukchi-sea-lease-sale-193

Six Reasons Why Offshore Drilling in the Arctic Cannot Be Done Safely

The Coast Guard recently wrapped up a hearing about the Shell drill rig that ran aground in December. The rig and its tow vessel were part of Shell’s reckless attempt to drill for oil in the wild and remote Arctic Ocean. Witnesses described the uncertified equipment that broke off the tow, the anchor dropped at the wrong time that could have caused a deadly crash, and the “jelly-like stuff” that killed all four engines because crew members forgot to treat the fuel lines. But when investigators asked why the rig was traveling through notoriously rough waters in the stormiest time of year, the answer had nothing to do with technical or human error: the company wanted to avoid paying taxes in Alaska.

<snip>

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/fbeinecke/six_reasons_why_offshore_drill.html

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/02/drilling-arctic-environmental-impact-greenpeace-piracy

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/how-obama-became-oil-president-gas-fracking-drill

[malthaussen]

1. I think Mr Obama has been very consistent in his support for big business

Which should come as no surprise for one who has self-characterized as a country club Republican. I can but scratch my head when people want to deny it. I'm sure he has good and sufficient reasons for his views, at least to his own satisfaction. And apparently, to the satisfaction of many others.

-- Mal

[cali]

3. I've kind of trained myself to have "tunnel vision"

I look at his actions and words, compare and contrast them, and ignore whatever his motivations are.

[malthaussen]

5. Probably a good idea with as apt a rhetoritician as Mr Obama.

Actions, after all, do speak thunderous loud... or should.

-- Mal

[Fred Sanders]

35. Sure, country club Republicans were also all minority group community organizers raised by a single mom once.

The litany of complaints about Obama flooding forth from the left wing, with faint praise for the much longer and more accomplished litany of accomplishments, is making the right wing sleep soundly- looks like Obama's own party has it covered.

Is the message we want to send to the right wing that the Democratic Party is at civil war, with it's own twice elected President?....what's up with that?

Get Obama's back or we will all see the front side of a Clown Car driver peddling into the Oval
Office.

[malthaussen]

37. It's the man's own characterization of himself.

How much of that characterization is aspiration, and how much reality... there's a question.

-- Mal

[delrem]

53. Did you join in the DU laughter at Palin's asinine "drill baby drill" motif?

Did you think the whole issue was just a pre-election charade, the pro-oil outcome predetermined?
Or did you have SOME belief, that decisions on how to vote, based on positions taken in these debates, had meaning?

[cali]

2. Shell - Chukchi Sea Exploration Plan

http://www.boem.gov/shell-chukchi/

[arcane1]

17. What the hell does THIS mean? From your link:

Shell has applied for a Letter of Authorization (LOA) from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for non-lethal incidental take and intentional take of polar bears and walrus under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). They have also applied for an incidental harassment authorization from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the MMPA for the incidental take of whales and seals.1


I never knew they were allowed to run off with creatures. Would that be some sort of relocation?

[cali]

18. I found this:

What are Incidental Take Regulations?

The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA), as amended, prohibits, with certain exceptions, the take of marine mammals in U.S. waters. Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), to authorize the incidental, but not intentional taking of small numbers of certain marine mammals species (including polar bears, walruses, and sea otters) associated with specified activities, provided that, the total of such taking will have no more than a negligible impact on these marine mammal species and does not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of these species for subsistence uses. The Service may issue ITRs for a period of up to five years.

What are Letters of Authorization?

If ITRs are promulgated for a specified activity in a specified geographical region U.S. citizens can request a Letter of Authorization (LOA) from the Service to carry out these activities under an exemption of the MMPA. LOAs are issued on a project specific basis and include operating restrictions and other mitigation measures designed to minimize interactions with, and impacts to marine mammals. LOAs also specify monitoring and reporting requirements to evaluate the level and impact of any resulting takes. Depending upon the nature, location and timing of the proposed activity, applicants may be required to consult with potentially effected subsistence communities, and develop additional mitigation measures to address potential impacts to subsistence users. More information on applying for and receiving an LOA can be found at 50 CFR 18.27(f).

http://www.fws.gov/alaska/fisheries/mmm/itr.htm

grrr.

[arcane1]

4. Surely we can resolve this dilemma by electing another centrist to replace him.

Right?

[cali]

7. sure. seeing as that's what we're headed for.

and then the people who practice the politics of personality and adoration can seamlessly transfer their sweet affections from one centrist to an even more center right centrist.

[rhett o rick]

26. It's a very strong case of denial. People are afraid to make the Oligarch Gods upset. Stay

with the status quo.

[cali]

27. I don't think it's that.

I think some people are just oriented that way. that's the prism through which they view politics and when they find a politician to affix their affections to, they're largely unwavering.

[rhett o rick]

34. Those two ideas are not mutually exclusive. When things get rough, some people

want to ignore it. Tell us that there isn't anything wrong that a couple of incremental changes can't fix. They are in denial and forget that candidate Obama promised change but the incremental changes were in the wrong direction for a lot of problems. The denial comes from fear. Fear that if we ask for too much the Oligarch-Gods will get mad. In the mean time, they ignore the growing poverty all around us. They ignore the crumbling infrastructure. They instead vent their frustrations via hate against whistle-blowers, journalists, and protestors.

[George II]

56. With posts like the OP, we won't elect a centrist, we'll wind up electing a rightwinger.

[Maedhros]

29. It's the "incremental progress" strategy:

Keep electing conservatives with "Ds" next to their name, and we will incrementally lose all the things Liberals have fought so hard for.

"Progress" for the corporate agenda, that is.

[Broward]

6. So, we voted for a Democrat (at least in name), but we got a Republican, disgraceful.

[TBF]

8. This is what is known as "working together" ~

You'll need to be more reasonable.

[cali]

9. and stop being so mean to the President-

I get that bullshit a lot from the personality posters.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

10. I have long since stopped seeing him as an environmentalist.

Opening up the Arctic area to Shell is the nail in the (environmental) coffin.

And Hillary is leading in the polls. Therefore, we can expect more of the same, if she's elected.

[TBF]

13. I'm voting for Bernie -

I don't care if he's 100 years old. That man has experience fighting corporate interests and he is consistent with it. I'll take that any day over a corporate sell-out who is 40, 50, 60 ...

[cali]

14. yes, it's maddening and oh so sad. The government's own assessment

predicts disaster and yet they give the go ahead- and Shell has had previous recent accidents in the arctic:

<snip>

On February 12, BOEM released its updated EIS on oil extraction in the Chukchi. The report offers a grim assessment of the environmental risks, including a 75 percent chance of a major oil spill and disastrous devastation of local wildlife. While acknowledging these potential dangers, BOEM still gives the go-ahead for drilling, stating that the original plan represents “a reasonable balance between environmental, economic, and technical considerations.”

<snip>

http://www.audubon.org/news/shell-could-drill-chukchi-summer

[KamaAina]

11. That's "Oilbama" to you

[cali]

12. Audubon, WWF, Sierra Club, NRDC, Earth Justice, etc. There isn't one single environmental

org that doesn't have scathing words for this.

When you repeatedly find yourself at the opposite side of the most respected environmental groups in the world, you just might be doing something wrong.

Environmentalists fighting to preserve the Chukchi Sea were dealt some bad news this month—a long-anticipated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) gives the go-ahead for drilling in the area, 80 miles off the northwest coast of Alaska. Unfortunately for the birds and other wildlife that call the Chukchi home, this part of the Arctic Ocean also shelters hidden treasure—an estimated 4 billion barrels worth of oil.

When Shell bought oil and gas leases for the Chukchi in 2008 for $2.1 billion, a coalition of environmental groups, including the National Audubon Society, criticized the decision, faulting an old EIS that relied on an unrealistic best-case scenario. The coalition appealed, forcing the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to redo the EIS.

On February 12, BOEM released its updated EIS on oil extraction in the Chukchi. The report offers a grim assessment of the environmental risks, including a 75 percent chance of a major oil spill and disastrous devastation of local wildlife. While acknowledging these potential dangers, BOEM still gives the go-ahead for drilling, stating that the original plan represents “a reasonable balance between environmental, economic, and technical considerations.”

Drilling in the area has never been banned outright, but it has already caused problems. While attempting to drill in 2012, two drill ships suffered crippling accidents that left Shell no choice but to take time off from the project and reconsider its safety protocols.

"There are no signs that Shell is better equipped now than they were three years ago to drill safely in the Arctic Ocean, “ says Jim Adams, policy director of Audubon Alaska.

http://www.audubon.org/news/shell-could-drill-chukchi-summer

[MisterP]

24. I suppose it'll be the usual dodge of "it's X because Y supports it"

or polls that say that the more environmentalist someone is the more they approve of Obama

[cali]

33. it's always the same bullshit- denial, excuses, trust, you're a racist

blah fucking blah blah blah.

[n2doc]

15. Hey, by the time a spill happens he will likely be out of office

Someone else's problem to fix...

[cali]

16. The riskiest place in the nation for drilling with the worst outcomes when there's an

accident:

<snip>

Both industry and environmental groups say that the Chukchi Sea is one of the most dangerous places in the world to drill. The area is extremely remote, with no roads connecting to major cities or deep water ports within hundreds of miles — which makes it difficult for clean-up and rescue workers to get to the site in case of an

The closest Coast Guard station with equipment for responding to a spill is over 1,000 miles away. The weather is extreme, with major storms, icy waters, and waves up to 50 feet high.

The sea is also a major migration route and feeding area for marine mammals, including bowhead whales and walruses.


“Once again, our government has rushed to approve risky and ill-conceived exploration in one of the most remote and important places on Earth,” said Susan Murray, a vice president of Oceana, an environmental group. “Shell’s need to validate its poorly planned investment in the U.S. Arctic Ocean is not a good reason for the government to allow the company to put our ocean resources at risk. Shell has not shown that it is prepared to operate responsibly in the Arctic Ocean, and neither the company nor our government has been willing to fully and fairly evaluate the risks of Shell’s proposal.”

<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/us/white-house-gives-conditional-approval-for-shell-to-drill-in-arctic.html?_r=0

[neverforget]

19. What could possibly go wrong? Severe storms, extreme cold, high winds and more carbon in the

atmosphere but they ain't got nothing on profits for big oil.

[cali]

20. what I keep shaking my head over is that the government assessment

predicts that there is a 75% chance of a MAJOR accident.

And they still gave Shell the go ahead.

Asswipes.

[cui bono]

22. +1

[HassleCat]

21. Propietary Loophole

Yes, that "proprietary" business is often BS, and we need to close that loophole. Manufacturers of chemical products are supposed to list the ingredients individually on the MSDS - Material Safety Data Sheet. If they have a formulation they are afraid the competition might copy, they can avoid listing the ingredients by citing the proprietary exemption, but they are still supposed to list all the dangers of the product and include precautions, safe handling instructions, etc. In the case of fracking, they have no legitimate concern about anybody copying the recipe and brewing up some discount fracking liquid. They're just trying to avoid publicly admitting to a mixture containing benzene and other stuff people don't want in the groundwater.

What we need to do is give EPA and OSHA the power to determine whether or not the chemical company has a legitimate concern about business competition that justifies the proprietary exemption. In the case of fracking chemicals, there is no such concern, because the chemical manufacturers all know the recipe and there is nothing secret or magic or mysterious about mixing up fracking liquid. Unfortunately, our Republican friends have cut the budgets of federal regulators to the point where they have almost no power to pursue anything.

[Doctor_J]

23. he's on that liberal rampage we were warned about after the November massacre

I'll be pleasantly surprised if he doesn't pass a chained cpi before he leaves office

[cali]

25. thankfully, he's given up on a "grand deal". He has other priorities.

[geek tragedy]

28. he's neither. he's a president of a country that has an unquenchable thirst for oil. nt

[cali]

31. `And that thirst has grown under his Presidency. When it comes to

conservation efforts, Jimmy Carter he ain't. He has never used his megaphone.

There are many things he could have done. He did not.

[geek tragedy]

38. you're grossly oversimplifying and distorting the admin's record.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/a-siegel/pres-obamas-truck-efficie_b_4817605.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/new-mileage-standards-obama_n_1836546.html

http://grist.org/politics/obamas-stimulus-package-was-a-ginormous-clean-energy-bill-says-michael-grunwald/

http://grist.org/climate-energy/obamas-deal-with-china-is-a-big-win-for-solar-nuclear-and-clean-coal/


And, if you think people were going to stop driving cars because he gave a speech . . .

The tendency on DU for people to ignore everything that contradicts the narrative du jour (in this case, claiming Obama is the third Koch Brother or something) is one reason why intelligent discussion remains elusive.

[cali]

46. I'm not claiming that he hasn't taken some positive steps I'm certainly

not saying anything about people not driving cars. I am saying he hasn't used his bully pulpit to persuade people to move toward conservation or initiated conservation programs like winterization.

I haven't claimed that he's a republican or the third Koch brother or any other of hysterical defensive hyperbolic charges you're madly flinging about.

And in the same breath you're so cog-dis that you chide others for the dearth of intelligent conversation.

You can't push energy extraction the way this admin has and simultaneously make real headway on climate change.

[geek tragedy]

48. you certainly were claiming--you said he was "Drill baby drill" which means

focusing exclusively on extraction. As did your subsequent comments, none of which allowed that he had done anything of merit on the issue, let alone enough to make it more nuanced than "Obama BAD."

You also chose the worst possible week to make this spurious (absolutely false) claim:

I am saying he hasn't used his bully pulpit to persuade people to move toward conservation or initiated conservation programs like winterization.

Let's roll the tape to the 2013 State of the Union (which you will agree is the gold standard for using the bully pulpit)


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/13/obama-wants-to-double-u-s-energy-efficiency-by-2030-how-is-that-possible/

The U.S. economy squanders too much energy. And the government can help wring out all that waste. That was one of President Obama's big ideas in his State of the Union last night.

"I’m also issuing a new goal for America: Let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next 20 years," Obama said. The White House's fact sheet went even further, laying out a proposal to double the energy efficiency of the entire U.S. economy over that time frame.
...
So how, exactly, would this plan work? One clue is to look at the Alliance to Save Energy's big report (pdf) on how to double U.S. energy productivity by 2030. The report notes that the U.S. economy is far less energy-efficient than many other industrialized nations, including Japan, France and Germany. Boosting efficiency could save money and curtail the carbon emissions that are warming the planet.

But that raises an obvious question: If efficiency is so wonderful, why don't consumers and businesses already do more of it? Why does the government need to step in? The report lists a whole slew of barriers getting in the way of efficiency, from poor information about its benefits to actual structural hurdles (such as the fact that landlords often have little incentive to buy efficient appliances for tenants).

Fast-forward to last week


http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2015/04/30/obama-energy-efficiency-improvement-act/26651103/

President Obama saluted both bipartisanship and conservation Thursday as he signed the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015.

"It is a great pleasure to welcome some outstanding legislators and advocates on behalf of an issue that should always be bipartisan, and that is making sure that we have the most energy efficient economy," Obama said as he signed the bill while surrounded by lawmakers.

The law is designed to provide incentives to cut energy use in commercial buildings, manufacturing plants and homes.

"We're going to save money for consumers, we're going to save money for businesses, and we're going to deal with issues like climate change that have an enormous economic and health impact on Americans as a whole," Obama said.

Here's the bill's text.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s535/text

And you can probably guess where this is going

Sec. 102. Energy efficiency in Federal and other buildings.

Sec. 103. Separate spaces with high-performance energy efficiency measures.

Sec. 104. Tenant Star program.

TITLE II—Grid-enabled water heaters

Sec. 201. Grid-enabled water heaters.

TITLE III—Energy information for commercial buildings

Sec. 301. Energy information for commercial buildings.


...


(b)Tenant Star.—

The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, shall develop a voluntary program within the Energy Star program established by section 324A of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6294a), which may be known as “Tenant Star”, to promote energy efficiency in separate spaces leased by tenants or otherwise occupied within commercial buildings.

[geek tragedy]

54. more from that bully pulpit he's never used for energy efficiency

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/29/fact-sheet-administration-and-california-partner-drive-renewable-energy-

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/05/09/fact-sheet-president-obama-announces-commitments-and-executive-actions-a

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/03/15/fact-sheet-president-obama-s-blueprint-clean-and-secure-energy-future

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/05/fact-sheet-presidential-memorandum-federal-leadership-energy-management

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/fact-sheet-homestar-energy-efficiency-retrofit-program&target=blank

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/04/fact-sheet-united-states-and-sweden-global-leaders-clean-energy-and-clim

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/04/21/fact-sheet-administration-announces-new-agenda-modernize-energy-infrastr

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/05/28/fact-sheet-harnessing-power-data-clean-secure-and-reliable-energy-future

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Improving-Energy-Efficiency/

[geek tragedy]

43. see his budget for this year (only fair for people who harped on a past budget's inclusion of

chained CPI to acknowledge the good stuff):

http://grist.org/politics/obamas-budget-calls-for-billions-to-fight-climate-change/

. Increased spending on renewable energy research and development

The budget proposes $7.4 billion for programs designed to stimulate the development of clean energy technology, mainly through the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Agriculture, and the National Science Foundation. That number is an increase from the $6.5 billion Congress enacted for this year, according to Reuters.

The budget outlines some of these activities, including fixing the energy grid to be able to use more renewable energy, reducing the costs of clean energy, finding cheaper solutions for carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels, and doing research to measure methane emissions that leak from natural gas operations.

2. Extended tax credits for wind and solar

The budget also calls for the permanent extension of tax incentives used by the solar and wind industries. Supporters of the wind industry say the Production Tax Credit is an important lifeline to help wind compete against heavily subsidized fossil fuel power sources; when it was in effect, it provided developers a tax break of 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour of energy their turbines produce for the first 10 years of operation. But the credit expired, and the Senate recently voted down a nonbinding measure calling for a five-year extension, continuing a kind of boom-and-bust cycle in the fortunes of the wind industry dictated by whether the tax credit is currently in effect.

A separate provision, the Investment Tax Credit, provides an important incentive for solar development. It offers a 30 percent federal tax credit for solar systems on residential and commercial properties. The ITC is set to expire at the end of 2016.

3. A new fund to help states cut emissions

The budget calls for a $4 billion fund designed to encourage states to make faster and deeper cuts to power plant emissions than would be required under the rules proposed by Obama’s EPA last year. In other words, the budget would give states a financial incentive to do even more to clean up their energy sectors. States can get these incentives by, among other things, working together in regional partnerships to cut greenhouse gases. There’s unlikely to be much love for this measure in Congress: The EPA’s proposed regulations have been met by intense opposition in coal-producing states, and Republicans have labeled them a job-killer.

4. Being more prepared for natural disasters

The budget contains a range of proposals designed to help vulnerable parts of America prepare for natural disasters, including an increase of $184 million in the National Flood Insurance Program Risk Mapping efforts — historically beleaguered by debt and deficit — to $400 million. There is also additional money to tackle drought, wildfires, and coastal flooding.

5. International efforts to fight climate change

The White House wants to provide $1.29 billion to advance its Global Climate Change Initiative, which includes $500 million for U.S. contributions to the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund — the first installment of the $3 billion pledged by the US last November. “The United States expects that the GCF will become a preeminent, effective, and efficient channel for climate finance,” the budget states. But the measure is likely to hit stiff opposition in Congress, where Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), now chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, has vowed to fight it. “The president’s climate change agenda has only siphoned precious taxpayer dollars away from the real problems facing the American people,” he said in November.

[rhett o rick]

42. So you mean he can't help himself? It's not his fault? The buck stops somewhere else?

He really would like to be an environmental president but the Republcons won't let him. Or was that Gitmo.

[NRaleighLiberal]

30. sadly I expect to be lied to and disappointed by politicians. when one

Doesn't I am shocked and pleasantly surprised.

[cwydro]

32. He also allowed BP

to use horrendous chemicals to hide their oil spill.

I never trusted him after that.

[luvspeas]

36. The pendulum of opinion SWINGS!!!!! Both are so far off the mark that it's impossible

to take either side seriously. Chew on that for a while.

[cali]

39. as President Obama has long touted his environmentalism

I see no need to consult the murky well of public opinion. I view it this way: all the positive steps he takes on climate change are largely negated by the increase in energy extraction he has overseen.

And this decision is particularly onerous- not to mention entirely unnecessary.

[hatrack]

40. Oh, and the rig in question? The one that grounded on the way back from its futile first trip?

It failed a Coast Guard inspection. But it's ready for the Arctic, no problem! Shell said so!!

In today’s HOLY SH*T WTF!? news: The Noble Discoverer, Royal Dutch Shell’s oil drilling rig, already failed a routine Coast Guard inspection — months before it is even scheduled to leave for the Arctic. VICE News reports that inspectors found malfunctioning anti-pollution machinery aboard the rig last month.

This is one hell of a bad omen for everyone.

Why? Here’s a little history: In 2012, Shell stationed the Kulluk, an oil drilling barge, and two tug boats off the coast of Alaska to drill five oil wells in the Chukchi Sea. After multiple failed drilling attempts, the Kulluk ended up wrecked in the Aleutian Islands. The disastrous oil “exploration” mission ended with the rig’s handlers pleading guilty to eight felonies for marine crimes.

With that kind of track record, it’s no surprise environmentalists and concerned citizens are up in arms about the company’s plan to return to the Arctic this July.

Naturally, Shell officials assure us that everything’s JUST DANDY. From VICE:

Shell spokesman Curtis Smith told VICE News that the oil company still has full confidence in the vessel and its contractor.

“This system has since been upgraded and passed inspections prior,” Smith wrote in an e-mailed response to questions. “This is a case of mechanical repairs, which from time to time are required on any equipment.”

This isn’t the first “repair” the company has had to make, however. In December, the Noble Discoverer’s handlers reported that an oil separator and other instruments were out of commission, VICE reports. “Noble Discoverer’s crew struggled to deal with a buildup of water below decks and rigged up a makeshift system to discharge water from the engine room straight overboard — then tried to hide that system from the Coast Guard, federal investigators concluded.”

But despite the glitches, the rig continues to make its way to Seattle, which would be the home base for the Arctic drilling operation.

EDIT

http://grist.org/list/shell-oil-noble-discoverer-arctic-rig-has-already-broken-down-but-its-on-its-way-to-seattle/

[jalan48]

41. Looks like Obama is angling for a big paycheck down the road.

[RufusTFirefly]

44. Don't worry. When a Democrat does it, that means it's OK!

Because Obama!

https://m.

[gvstn]

45. It's time for a change to responsible environmental policy. Right Mr. President?

[bhikkhu]

47. Every US president (aside from Carter) has been a drill-baby-drill president

necessarily, as the US uses more oil per capita than any other nation. Supply follows demand, and I've always thought it disingenuous to condemn the suppliers and exonerate the consumers. Which would be all of us.

[bbgrunt]

49. it's beyond fking unbelievable...and it's like the whole country has been mentalized. K and R!

[maindawg]

50. Even Obama has his masters

[Rafale]

51. Budget

Just because it's in the budget doesn't mean the cash will be spent. Actual outlays on environmental policy is what you should consider. This president is not an environmental president. He is controlled by the same donors on Bush: Goldman et al. Exon et al. I regret many of you fell for the rhetoric during the presidential campaign. Hopefully, you've learned something.

[geek tragedy]

55. "actual outlays on environmental policy is what you should consider."

Says someone who doesn't understand how the US government works.

In the United States, the President does not determine the amount of outlays. Only Congress has that power.

[Firepig]

52. BO has again flipped off the base!

This is the last straw. I just scraped off the 2008 & 2012 Obama/Biden bumper stickers from my old car. (That'll show him! ) I'm not ready for Hillary either. What's an old hippy to do??

[GP6971]

58. Well, you could come to WA or go to

CO where MJ is legal

[TeamPooka]

60. First post, attacks the President and Hillary. Makes no Pro Dem statement. Hmmmm. nt

[bloomington-lib]

57. The ol' switch-a-roo

The Republicns yell "drill baby drill", so we vote for the other guy, who then starts drill baby drilling. We end up with the same shit either way. It's completely rigged. Yeah we might get gay marriage faster. Or we talk about opening the borders with Cuba. But when it comes to money, which can come in the form a deregulation, war, education, taxes, THEY always win.

[RiverLover]

59. Big, huge R & K!!

Thank you!!

[Scuba]

61. K&R