Comments by greensoftshell

Previous | Page 3 of 3

Posted on July 30 at 1:32 a.m.

It is not clear to me why anyone thinks that this oil company would honor any agreement. They just got the governor to push a bill for them and then senate to pass the bill. Why wouldn't the oil company just do this again whenever they want?

On Pedro Drills Arnold

Posted on May 14 at 10:24 p.m.

First off, the original PXP deal was questionable at best. http://www.californiaprogressreport.c...
EDC and others were duped into playing pawns in the game and dragged a large contingent of people who mistakenly based their support on EDC's long history of protecting the environment. It was an unfortunate mess. Anyone who still believes in that deal should look at the state lands commission report and pay attention to the fact that the attorney general said the deal was unenforceable.
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the new proposal has no environmental concessions or end date so this story is inaccurate.

On Tranquillon Ridge Project Returns

Posted on March 12 at 7:14 p.m.

Finally, a voice of reason on these pages.

Drill here! Drill now! Drill baby drill! This was a stupid deal.
When some in congress are trying to reinstate the moratorium deluded "environmentalists" in Santa Barbara are making secret deals with oil companies. Great.

The SB enviros need to stop drinking their own kool-aid, wake up, and think about how what happens off our coast looks to the rest of the country.

On None

Posted on January 29 at 8:16 a.m.

I don't understand this. Drilling more to stop oil drilling is wrong. As a Malibu City council member said earlier this week, "I am utterly shocked that the Environmental Defense would support new oil drilling just off the coast of California. It is like giving a fix to an addict, then saying I only gave them the fix because the addict promised to get off drugs in the future."
---Flora in Goleta

On None

Previous | Page 3 of 3

event calendar sponsored by: