"Drill, Baby, Drill" Remix Contest at Wired Science

In recognition of the baffling popularity of the chant "Drill, baby, drill" at the Republican National Convention, Wired Science has put out a call for creatively remixed videos involving the chant:

In the spirit of a thousand "Don't taze me, bro!" remixes, Wired Science is proud to announce the "Drill, baby, drill!" remix contest.

The phrase was coined by Republican operative Michael Steele on Wednesday night at the Republican National Convention, and -- in perhaps the convention's only spontaneous development -- chanted during the speeches of Rudy Giuliani and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

What's totally amazing -- I mean, one part of what's totally amazing -- is that if you bought into the idea that more oil would help the country, the chant should be directed at oil companies, rather than politicians. The politicians seem to have done everything they can do to help oil companies find and divvy up oil. Why, not so long ago, the western Gulf of Mexico was divvied up into I don't know how many tracts, but fewer than a quarter were bid for by oil companies.

So you might ask yourself, why wouldn't an oil company that owns land (or has the chance to own land) drill it? And the answer, as told recently to a crowd in Denver by none other than T. Boone Pickens, was that there's just not much oil in there. Not enough, anyway, to justify all the logistical things that have to happen before the drilling, baby, drilling.

And if you care to get into the real stuff, but nobody's holding their breath for this, what about conservation? (Shout-out to reader/commenter KTM on that one.)

But I digress. Go and make your remix videos and send them in to Wired. Also, a quick thank-you to our HuffPost Green commenters, who very frequently have some of the more civil back-and-forth discussions around the Internet and often post useful links for other readers and for me!

So: Thanks, and have a nice weekend.

Comments

[isis]

Maybe the equivalent is people urging someone to jump from a sky scraper into a thimble of liquid or a mirage. jump, baby, Jump. oops. Sorry. Nothing there.

[JONNYMinesota]

DId you see this clip from the RNC?
The craziest thing yet.
it's a must!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWuuXpeqNNw

[KenGirard]

"Drill, Baby, Drill, Global inferno"
Disco burnt up, and drilling more oil will help the Earth heat up.

[jane47]

McCain and Palin, rather than drill baby drill, may prefer to look into why we are not able to have the privilege of free energy

I have included the website of a Utube video as shown on Sky news Australia. The inventors on this website are not the only people who have managed to realise Nikola Tesla's invention. If you are interested in the zero point energy I reccommend Thomas Reardon USA (often maligned in the internet- however in my opinion he has the intregrity of Paul Skinner as I have observed in the BBC interviews) to enlighten the relaity of this reality.

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/free-energy-home-generator-zero-point-energy-off-the-grid/

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/

Australian race car driver, Peter Brock, who died from a freak accident has developed a polarisor which enables a huge reduction in G force on vehicles cornering and stopping... information GMH has secured...

http://forums.thescene.com.au/forums/t/33313.aspx

I have also sent this information to Al Fayed and Mahindra Motors in India, Rio Tinto Chairman Paul Skinner and Prince Charles and if I could find Carlos Ghosn (Nissan Motors ) I would also send this to him

I am only hopeful that someone will be able to investigate why and how we are not able to be afforded this amazing energy source.

Warm regards and many thanks
Jane

[KillTheMessenger]

Go back to school, Jane. You failed science class.

[Nodnarb]

What a JOKE! The reason they are chanting DRILL BABY DRILL to politicians instead of oil companies is because domestic drilling is a strictly regulated industry. We all hate paying more at the pump. The below oil drum link does not take into account the increase in natural gas production and the technological advances we have made in drilling. It works out very simply:

Oil/NG is worth more money therefore it is worth spending more money to find it and drill for it.

[greendig]

I've decided to force myself to read Newt's new book, Drill Here, Drill Now, Save Money. I think its a historic feat to have a title that is itself 2/3 incorrect. How many pseudo-scientific lies will be contained within its big-type pages?

1. "Drill Now" - "Now " is a lie. According to Al Gore, who we heard from at the Netroots conference, it will take 8-10 years to complete construction and engineer the incredibly difficult pipeline that will ship the off-shore oil. It's also only conjecture at this point that the oil is there.

2. "Save Money" - huge lie. The aforementioned will cost a FORTUNE, possibly more than the Iraq war, to get any substantial supply of oil (guess who's gonna pay - certainly not the oil industry)! Consumers will get hit twice. Once through taxes that will go to subsidize the oil company's investment in offshore drilling. Twice at the pump. That oil will come at a very high premium, and it is ludicrous to assume consumers will not pay the price at the pump.

Great post on Grist:
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/7/10/142042/915

[mjt218]

Great idea about reading Newt's book. I'm kind of wondering myself how Newt can lie through his teeth and smile so much while doing it. I'm hoping I can pick up a second hand copy.

1. Clarification so you have your facts straight in case you run into Newt . . . Pipeline engineering and construction is a difficult task, but the vast majority of the 8-10 year timeline is wrapped up in exploratory drilling and appraisal, and production facility design and construction. Pipelines are almost independent (also usually designed and constructed by an independent third party from oil producer).

2. The key subsidy that most folks have issue with is one that reduces tax burdens on revenue generated for oil produced and sold. The initial investment in offshore drilling is extremely costly to oil companies and risky as Grist points out. I have not seen any evidence that this initial investment is subsidized in any way (unless you count capital investment depreciation, which not many businesses would care to loose, not just oil).

[Wilburrr]

Libraries are great things, as are librarians. Perhaps your local library has a downloadable copy?

[worldsforgottenboy]

Communists come in various flavors, but all share a few common traits. Here are a few:

1. They have a tendency to worship government workers, especially those who carry firearms.

2. They believe it is the government's job to preach and export their ideology, preferably with public financial and military resources.

3. They like more government spending.

4. They often fall in love with a particular magic solution and believe it can overcome any obstacle, in this case geology.

So, right now the Republicans are acting very much like a conventional communist party, which explains why they believe more domestic drilling will save us, despite the clear evidence that it won't happen. See KTM's post below for a good reference.

[JEANSIMMV]

Isn"t one of George Bush"s reasons for going to war with Iraq because of the oil?
Isn"t the specific reason John McCain chose Sarah Palin because of the oil in Alaska?
Change, baby, change.

[KillTheMessenger]

This is what happened the last time "we drilled, oh, baby, did we drill":

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4415

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Now, someone wants to give me a logical explanation why it is going to be better this time?

[mjt218]

KTM, 1980's drilling was rampant over-drilling in already explored areas (shallow Gulf of Mexico, Permian Basin in Texas, etc.). Opening up entirely new OCS tracts for investment requires substantially more significant investment since there is no oil transportation infrastructure in place like there already was in the 1980's. As a result, drill now is not really a reality.

I agree with you that more drilling is not the answer to our energy price costs. However, I think your argument which you've repeated over and over again (is that trolling?) is really just smoke and mirrors. You're comparing apples to oranges. Stick to conservation.

[KillTheMessenger]

"KTM, 1980's drilling was rampant over-drilling in already explored areas (shallow Gulf of Mexico, Permian Basin in Texas, etc.)."

Which makes it more intelligent HOW? So according to your argument we knowingly sunk billions into what essentially amounted to dry-holes. Smart. Not. Let's call that for what it was: actionism.

Now we are going to sink billions into drilling in areas which will be very expensive to drill (deep off-shore) and which will return little additional oil. Which is intelligent HOW, when we at the same time keeping the illusion alive that we can drill our way out of this situation? Offshore drilling will not solve the problem but we will keep exporting hundreds of billions of dollars a year for foreign oil while people will be waiting to see the "results".

Let's be honest here, the US energy policy is that of an addict. We are not willing to confront our addiction, so we are coming up with ever more magical explanations how the next hole we drill will solve our problem.

I will make a prediction: with all the drilling going on, conventional US oil production will not increase by more than a couple million barrels a day over the expected baseline decay and after five years we will be exactly where we started. During that time we will have exported over two trillion dollars on foreign oil that we could have saved with a simple device called a gas tax.