Fracking destroying Gazprom and Putin

The affects of shale gas is having more world-wide reach. Gazprom and Putin are weakened, eastern Europe set free.  Are the anti-fractivists Putin's best ally?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/01/an_incomparable_strateg...

From the article;

The only thing that can save them is a political movement in the United States, headed by the environmentalist groups, that could cripple this strategic weapon. That central fact must be understood in evaluating the funding and activities of environmentalists.



Views: 2775

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Charles Randolph on January 11, 2014 at 10:24am

Thank you, Peacer, for posting facts to this site, rather than biased political lambasting.

Permalink Reply by Peacer on January 11, 2014 at 10:28am
:)
Permalink Reply by Peacer on January 13, 2014 at 2:46am
Ummm, Mr. Smith if you bothered to read the article that I posted. It wasn't the Obama administration that cut the NASA space program. It was the republicans, the democrats fought to prevent the cuts... :(. Please do not say things that you do not know, or can not prove with facts. I am tired of propaganda on here. Thank you. I hope you have a happy day.

Peace.
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on January 13, 2014 at 3:11am

Ummmm; the last shuttle flight SST 135, was launched on July 8th 2011. The current Pres was sworn in in January of 2009 and the Dems controlled the Senate, the House, and the White House. They could have easily funded future shuttle flights had they wanted to do so.

The truth is that the shuttle system never achieved its objective of cheap and reliable space travel. Further the system was outdated since it was designed in the 1970s and built in the 1980s.  Both parties decided it was time to terminate the program and concentrate on developing a new system.

Permalink Reply by Peacer on January 13, 2014 at 7:32am
It looks to me like the administration tried to add funding, but were denied. Whether, that was a good decision or not was not mine, however, President Obama was asking for more..

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/story/2011-11-15/...

Who controlled the House of Representatives in 2011..?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/us/politics/06cong.html?pagewante...


http://uspolitics.about.com/od/thecongress/tp/Party-In-Power.them

Peace..
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on January 13, 2014 at 12:06pm

By 2011 it was too late.  They needed money at least a year prior to keep the system up. Both parties wanted it over, thats why it failed.  The people that voted for more funding are the ones that had space shuttle jobs in their districts.

Ever hear how the shuttle was first funded?  A story that shows how corrupt our Congress really is.

Permalink Reply by Peacer on January 13, 2014 at 12:29pm
Jim, I just showed you a article. (Fact) stating that the president tried to get more funding for nasa. You stated that the Demi's controlled both house and senate 2011 (fiction). Do you have any facts that can back up your statement about both parties wanting it cancelled? If you can I will happily debate you further or I will admit I am wrong. Either way we can still be friends.. :)

Now I do agree with you 100% that our congress sucks ass. But that is just my opinion. It is not a fact, it is just a opinion! Personally, I really think the House of Representatives sucks right now, but once again that is just a opinion. As they say opinions are like assholes we all have them.. :).
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on January 13, 2014 at 1:53pm

Peacer. Read the article again, there was no funding for shuttle flights asked for. There was funding for a new heavy lift rocket system to replace the shuttle. To save the shuttle would have taken action at least a year before the last launch in July of 2011.....when the Ds controlled both houses.

So how was the shuttle originally funded you ask (or didn't)? They presented a program to Congress that they thought was very convincing. When it failed to pass, they asked each Congressman that voted against it why they didn't support it. the answer? Because it "didn't create any jobs in my district"  Thats all they cared about, showing people back home that they can bring home the pork and thus get re-elected.

So NASA spent a year adapting their proposal.  They didn't change a thing in design. They didn't change the program. They didn't change the flight schedule or use.  They just changed how it would be built. Build one piece here, another there. yet another there. Put two pieces together here, add some more there. They made sure jobs were created in at least 75% of the Congressional districts.

Lo and behold, it passed easily Even though it cost about 30% more to do it this way. Congress didn't care about costs as long as it helped them get re-elected.

BTW, this was in the 1970s when the Ds had full control of both houses. Not saying that Rs wouldn't have done the same if they had the same power.

Permalink Reply by Peacer on January 14, 2014 at 1:31pm
Jim, I think we ended up on two different pages of the same story. When I posted the original article, I was just trying to show that it was the republicans versus the current administration that cut funding for NASA. I was not looking at the funding for the space shuttle, but rather overall funding for NASA. Then you mentioned that the democrats controlling all three houses in 2011, (unless I misunderstood you) stating they could easily have funded it if they wanted to. That is why I posted the second article, which stated that the president asked for additional funding, but he was not granted all of the monies that he asked for. I then proceeded to post references to the fact that the D's didn't control the house as of the beginning of 2011. At this point, I was still speaking about the funding of NASA as a whole. Not to the space shuttle in particular. (My bad, raises hand). I misunderstood the discussion.

I am still confused about a bunch of things though, in regards to the actual cancellation of funding for the shuttle. So I did a little digging, and I'll admit, I don't quite understand what it all means. I am not a historian of the space shuttle. However, I did find a interesting article dated prior to 2011. http://spaceksc.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-bush-cancelled-space-shutt.... And. http://spaceksc.blogspot.com/2010/11/after-bush-cancelled-space-shu...

I'm still not sure what this all means and how it relates to the current budget, I am still trying to wrap my head around it all, but I at least wanted to share what I found. That is what this forum is about. Sharing and learning. :). Check it out. You seem to understand the space program better than me, maybe you can help me understand. :)

May your day be happy..

Peace friend..
Permalink Reply by jason smith on January 13, 2014 at 6:27pm
Let's hope the next administrations full focus will be space exploration instead of global warming and Muslim outreach. A former NASA employee conveyed to a group of us about the wrong direction NASA is taking .
Permalink Reply by Trapper on January 13, 2014 at 2:14pm

The TROLL ALARM is really getting a work out lately!

Permalink Reply by Brian Powers on January 14, 2014 at 12:41am

Shell JV Russian Shale Oil

Jim -

The introduction of fracing for conventional reservoirs by BP about 12-15 years ago in Siberia helped Russia reclaim the world's leading oil producing country from Saudi Arabia.

A Shell JV is about to begin fracing shale oil:

Shell JV Russian Shale Oil

Neither Putin nor the Evil Empire is at risk from this technology

The poster who believes that the U.S. "begs" astronaut rides to/from the ISS is sadly mis-informed, a simple web search shows that we taxpayers pay from $40 to $70 million USD per seat for the ride, not too dissimilar to what we pay for the first family and their friends'/extended families' annual vacation travel/security costs.

Brian

  

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service