Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy

Another promise is being kept by Trump!
He has started things in motion to set the US on a path towards energy independence.

Presidential Executive Order Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy

America must put the energy needs of American families and businesses first and continue implementing a plan that ensures energy security and economic vitality for decades to come. The energy and minerals produced from lands and waters under Federal management are important to a vibrant economy and to our national security. Increased domestic energy production on Federal lands and waters strengthens the Nation's security and reduces reliance on imported energy. Moreover, low energy prices, driven by an increased American energy supply, will benefit American families and help reinvigorate American manufacturing and job growth. Finally, because the Department of Defense is one of the largest consumers of energy in the United States, domestic energy production also improves our Nation's military readiness.

This order goes on to detail how to meet the above goals.
There are specifics to expand drilling in the Arctic and Atlantic oceans, the Outer Continental Shelf.
He also asks for reviews of all areas where drilling is currently prohibited, to see if the prohibitions are necessary and cost effective.


In this EO, Trump also revokes Obama's Executive Order 13754 of December 9, 2016 Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience
When Obama took that action it seemed like a direct attack on Trump's plan for energy independence, so I am glad it was revoked.
If Obama had done that because he actually cared about anything else, he would have done it long before the end months of his presidency.

a reply to: BlueAjah

One oil spill on the east coast drilling will destroy billions of dollars of tourist money. Atlantic shelf drilling may be a dumb idea. The cost benefit may not be there when an oil spill occurs. I think special insurance should be needed by law for any drilling that might be a threat to such a huge amount of commerce.

Yet another case of Trump not understanding the legal system.

Legal experts say the law has never been used by a president to remove protections, just to create them.

"The statute doesn't allow that. It allows the president to put land within a protected zone but says nothing about allowing president to take it out," said Rob Verchick, an environmental law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans.

Verchick, a policy administrator at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Obama, added: "I suspect it will be fought in the courts."

www.timesunion.com...

a reply to: Phage

Everything in the EO says as allowed by law, and that action will be taken to change regulations and laws based on the findings of the analyses.

This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

... as repeated in multiple sections of the EO.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Everything in the EO says as allowed by law,

Yes. So what?
The law does not say that a president can remove land from protection.

Once again, Trump fails to understand the legal system. Once again, he proclaims that he did something important.

a reply to: Phage

Congress made the law that gave the president the power, and Congress can change the law.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Sure they can. Along with repeal and replace and tax "reform" and the wall and infrastructure. Why, just look how much they've accomplished already!

a reply to: BlueAjah

Might be better to use a new fuel substance that looks liek crystal. I think its ODB or something like that. One gallon could give a regular car 40,000 estimated miles. the gallon cost 50 bucks a gallon.(which i bet will go to 200 a gallon prolly)

a reply to: Phage

Those things are coming soon.

a reply to: BlueAjah

So is Jesus.


I hear.

a reply to: Phage

The Obamacare replacement might be coming as early as next week.
Soon!

a reply to: BlueAjah

Or, it might not.

I'm thinking the latter.

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think we would be far better served if he'd invested in wind and solar energy.

Remember, he just removed a lot of the worker protections (and whistleblower protection) from these same companies.

In just the first 100 days, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have already made it easier for companies to steal workers’ wages and cut comers on safety (they repealed the regulations on Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces). They also made it easier for companies that maim and injure workers to hide these injuries (they repealed the OSHA regulations clarifying 45-year-old recordkeeping obligations)
source

You may remember that a lot of these ... I don't know that you'll scan the article I linked, but you probably should before celebrating. There'll be fewer people now handling any complaints that workers have.

And do you remember the Deepwater Horizon oill spill on the Texas coast 7 years ago?

I don't think the impact of this will be good in any way.

a reply to: Byrd

I am pretty sure Obama tried the solar idea, and failed.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Byrd

I am pretty sure Obama tried the solar idea, and failed.

Trump touts his skills as a businessman. So why isn't he taking up the banner? There's actually more business there than in oil and it's safer.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Energy independence is not going to come through fossil fuels. Energy independence will only happen through renewable sources of energy.

The fossil fuels that are left are declining in both quantity and cost effectiveness now and there isn't any going back to the good old days of fossil fuel usage. What is left we should be conserving while we transition into renewable sources.

There are new markets there that need to be explored and expanded. Plus the effect on the environment is far less that just burning dirty ass fossil fuel energy sources.

There is also the cost of spills and the harm it creates.

This isn't making the US energy independent at all. That is just more BS to get you to agree with raping the earth of it's natural resources to enrich the already filthy rich elite.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: BlueAjah

Might be better to use a new fuel substance that looks liek crystal. I think its ODB or something like that. One gallon could give a regular car 40,000 estimated miles. the gallon cost 50 bucks a gallon.(which i bet will go to 200 a gallon prolly)

LOL. sorry this IS a HOAX apparently. Its actually a mineral used in Batteries. Now IF this is used in the new batteries with GLASS in them it might actually be great to use but as of no wits a SCAM as a fuel like that currently goes in a car.

Those are actually real though.(though in dev right now by the inventor of the lithium battery)

a reply to: mOjOm

That was covered in a March Trump EO.

Presidential Executive Order on Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth

It is further in the national interest to ensure that the Nation's electricity is affordable, reliable, safe, secure, and clean, and that it can be produced from coal, natural gas, nuclear material, flowing water, and other domestic sources, including renewable sources.

a reply to: BlueAjah

But drilling more oil isn't renewable though.

How is he promoting the renewable energy industry?? Going back to coal and oil isn't helping renewable energy industries.

a reply to: mOjOm

Yup, nothing in that EO about promoting the use of renewables. It's about reviewing and rescinding regulations.