Obama Bans Drilling in Parts of the Atlantic and the Arctic

[Homerboy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/20/us/obama-drilling-ban-arctic-atlantic.html

Very glad this step was taken. Sounds like Canada is following suit too. Who else has a large, immediate geographic access to the Arctic? Are they going to ban it too?

President Obama announced on Tuesday what he called a permanent ban on offshore oil and gas drilling along wide areas of the Arctic and the Atlantic Seaboard as he tried to nail down an environmental legacy that cannot quickly be reversed by Donald J. Trump.

Mr. Obama invoked an obscure provision of a 1953 law, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which he said gives him the authority to act unilaterally. While some presidents have used that law to temporarily protect smaller portions of federal waters, Mr. Obama’s declaration of a permanent drilling ban on portions of the ocean floor from Virginia to Maine and along much of Alaska’s coast is breaking new ground. The declaration’s fate will almost certainly be decided by the federal courts.

“It’s never been done before,” said Patrick Parenteau, a professor of environmental law at Vermont Law School. “There is no case law on this. It’s uncharted waters.”

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Was a smart way to do it. It can't just be undone without going through numerous legal challenges first.

 

[Homerboy]

Was a smart way to do it. It can't just be undone without going through numerous legal challenges first.

Problem is it will find it way to the SCOTUS. And that will soon be eating out of billionaires' hands.
Some hurdles are better than no hurdles tough

 

[NesuD]

Problem is it will find it way to the SCOTUS. And that will soon be eating out of billionaires' hands.
Some hurdles are better than no hurdles tough

Well once it does it should be overturned regardless. It was a clear distortion of the laws intent. Obama has once again attempted to rule by decree and basing it on a law whose intent was clearly not this. Courts will shoot it down just like they have done with so many of his majesty's decrees.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Was a smart way to do it. It can't just be undone without going through numerous legal challenges first.

Lol, why would you think an executive order can't just be overturned by another executive order? Because Obama said so ? Please.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Lol, why would you think an executive order can't just be overturned by another executive order? Because Obama said so ? Please.

Executive order not found. He invoked a provision of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (1953).

btw, it only helps your case when you actually know what your opponent has done rather than what you imagine he's done.

 

[pcgeek11]

Anything can be undone. Permanent not found.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Anything can be undone. Permanent not found.

Congratulations. There have been no claims that it was permanent.

 

[pcgeek11]

Congratulations. There have been no claims that it was permanent.

Well from the QUOTE in the Original Post:

President Obama announced on Tuesday what he called a permanent ban on offshore oil and gas drilling along wide areas of the Arctic and the Atlantic Seaboard as he tried to nail down an environmental legacy that cannot quickly be reversed by Donald J. Trump.

Mr. Obama invoked an obscure provision of a 1953 law, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which he said gives him the authority to act unilaterally. While some presidents have used that law to temporarily protect smaller portions of federal waters, Mr. Obama’s declaration of a permanent drilling ban on portions of the ocean floor from Virginia to Maine and along much of Alaska’s coast is breaking new ground. The declaration’s fate will almost certainly be decided by the federal courts.

“It’s never been done before,” said Patrick Parenteau, a professor of environmental law at Vermont Law School. “There is no case law on this. It’s uncharted waters.”

Reading is fundamental.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Well from the QUOTE in the Original Post:

Well excuse me. I missed the word. Anyway, my main point stands. It's not an executive order, it's applying an existing government act.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Now Trump doesn't even need an excuse if oil prices suddenly rise during his term.

 

[pcgeek11]

Well excuse me. I missed the word. Anyway, my main point stands. It's not an executive order, it's applying an existing government act.

You are excused.

But it appears that your main intent was to correct me on my post.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Lol, why would you think an executive order can't just be overturned by another executive order? Because Obama said so ? Please.

Learn what you're talking about before engaging with the grown ups.

 

[Homerboy]

Lol, why would you think an executive order can't just be overturned by another executive order? Because Obama said so ? Please.

See, ignorant comments like this just undermine all your other comments' credibility.

 

[brandonbull]

The sooner people wake up and a accept the fact that we need to move away from conventional sources of energy, the better we will be in the future. Take away a primary source of funding for countries that wish to export their religious views with state sponsored terror, and creating a future revenue stream for the country. Green/clean/alternate fuels should be the next great industry for the US.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

See, ignorant comments like this just undermine all your other comments' credibility.

What, that when Obama invokes an order to take action on some obscure Act that President Trump can't issue an order to revoke it? That because Obama says "Kings's X no takee backs" that everyone has to obey him?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Executive order not found. He invoked a provision of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (1953).

btw, it only helps your case when you actually know what your opponent has done rather than what you imagine he's done.

It was an executive act. whoop de doo i am undone! I was sooo wrong about it.

 

[FIVR]

The sooner people wake up and a accept the fact that we need to move away from conventional sources of energy, the better we will be in the future. Take away a primary source of funding for countries that wish to export their religious views with state sponsored terror, and creating a future revenue stream for the country. Green/clean/alternate fuels should be the next great industry for the US.

A focus on renewable energy is about as far from Trump energy policy as you can get. More renewables means lower oil prices which means Rex Tillerson loses lots of money and so does Vladimir Putin and Russia... there is zero chance Trump will go against his secretary of state and his idol simultaneously.


Whether or not renewable energy would be a huge boon to American economy and the world's safety as a whole is irrelevant. As a 70+ yr old fat man who by his own admission eats only fast food, in all likelihood Trump will be long dead before any of his policies have serious consequences on the rest of the country and world. He just does not care. And if the actions of Exxon while he was CEO are any indication, Tillerson doesn't care either.


Putin is smart and understands that climate change damages his enemies much more than it does Russia, so he is probably OK with it to a point.

 

[thraashman]

What, that when Obama invokes an order to take action on some obscure Act that President Trump can't issue an order to revoke it? That because Obama says "Kings's X no takee backs" that everyone has to obey him?

Since you're clearly ignorant of what happened here (and pretty much anything else you've ever posted about), let me learn ya something buddy. From the article

Mr. Obama’s legal experts say they are confident that the ban will withstand legal challenge. They point to the specific language of the law: “The president of the United States may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the Outer Continental Shelf.”

Nowhere does the law say that a future president can reinstate those areas, a senior administration official told reporters on the condition of anonymity.

So basically the President can use the act to issue an order revoking access, but the act does NOT give the President the power to reinstate. Even if Obama himself wanted to reinstate those areas now, he doesn't have the legal authority. A Trump administration would either have to attempt to challenge this in the courts, and if the courts actually followed the Constitution he would lose. Or the Republican Congress will have to attempt to change the law to grant Trump the legal authority, which is more likely but still not a guarantee to happen.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

A couple of questions what amount of destruction to the environment is okay to produce green/clean/ alternate fuels? What is the carbon footprint/destruction of the environment that occurs during the production of component for wind turbines and solar panels?

 

[thraashman]

A couple of questions what amount of destruction to the environment is okay to produce green/clean/ alternate fuels? What is the carbon footprint/destruction of the environment that occurs during the production of component for wind turbines and solar panels?

In that situation you'd also want to compare it to the carbon footprint of producing oil extracting equipment and fossil fuel burning implements like engines. I do wonder if that's something anyone has ever even attempted to quantify

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Since you're clearly ignorant of what happened here (and pretty much anything else you've ever posted about), let me learn ya something buddy. From the article

So basically the President can use the act to issue an order revoking access, but the act does NOT give the President the power to reinstate. Even if Obama himself wanted to reinstate those areas now, he doesn't have the legal authority. A Trump administration would either have to attempt to challenge this in the courts, and if the courts actually followed the Constitution he would lose. Or the Republican Congress will have to attempt to change the law to grant Trump the legal authority, which is more likely but still not a guarantee to happen.

There is certainly disagreement. It doesn't take long for other views to look into the situation and find ways around Obama's action. The only question is which route President Trump will take to rescind it.

"On July 14, 2008, President George W. Bush issued an executive memorandum that rescinded the executive moratorium on offshore drilling created by the 1990 order of President George H. W. Bush and renewed by President Bill Clinton in 1998. The memorandum revised the language of the previous memorandum so that only areas designated as marine sanctuaries are withdrawn from disposition. The withdrawal has no expiration date."

https://cei.org/blog/can-trump-or-congress-rescind-obamas-arctic-drilling-ban

 

[Londo_Jowo]

In that situation you'd also want to compare it to the carbon footprint of producing oil extracting equipment and fossil fuel burning implements like engines. I do wonder if that's something anyone has ever even attempted to quantify

You would have to add in the carbon footprint for transporting these green/alternate power sources as well.

 

[thraashman]

You would have to add in the carbon footprint for transporting these green/alternate power sources as well.

There is definitely a large amount of things to consider to do a true and complete comparison. Probably why it's not something we see listed like ever.

 

[K1052]

There is definitely a large amount of things to consider to do a true and complete comparison. Probably why it's not something we see listed like ever.

There was an article recently in the Economist about a study of the carbon debt incurred by solar power, the gist was that it has or will be shortly repaid.

A lot of the environmental and health costs of fossil resource exploitation has been obfuscated from the public view as well. Like how coal power in the US probably has 300-500B of annual externalities.