Oil Exploration Off Koh Samui Will Continue

[webfact]

ENVIRONMENT

Oil exploration off Samui 'will continue'

By Watcharapong Thongrung

The Nation

Energy Minister Wannarat Charnnukul said yesterday the ministry could not terminate the four oil exploration concessions off the resort island of Samui as the concession-holders are not conducting any practices that breach the law or cause serious environmental damage.

His remarks came after Samui residents protested against the concessions out of concern about the economic and environmental damage they could cause. They earlier had also asked Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to terminate the exploration concessions of the four companies: Chevron Petroleum (Thailand), Salamander Energy (Bualuang), NuCoastal (Thailand) and Pearl Oil (Amata).

The four firms have concessions to explore for petroleum at sites 42 km-110 km off Koh Samui in Surat Thani.

Wannarat recently said that of these four blocks, awarded in 1996, only one would start to pump oil while the rest are under the environmental impact assessment and public hearing process. He also said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

He added that if all four concessions were terminated, the country would suffer a loss of 120,000 barrels of oil, making the country that more dependent on imports.

The Mineral Fuels Department awarded the G4/50 plot to Chevron, the B3/38 plot to Salamander, the G6/48 plot to Pearl Oil and the G5/50 plot to NuCoastal. The G5 plot of NuCoastal is the closest to Samui Island at 42 kilometres offshore.

The department' director-general, Kurujit Nakantap, said it had already discussed with NuCoastal about ways to solve the residents' concerns. It asked the company if it could move the exploration site by between three and five kilometres while still remaining in the concession area.

-- The Nation 2010-08-07

[brahmburgers]

Wannarat ......said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

That's like saying 'this car won't ever crash because it's a different style than the car that crashed last week.'

[chantorn]

Wannarat ......said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

That's like saying 'this car won't ever crash because it's a different style than the car that crashed last week.'

I like it.

Operators in Samui (some of them are ultra low cost operators like NuC*** & Sala*** & Pear***) have strict safety procedure. BP do not.

[PhilHarries]

Wannarat ......said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

That's like saying 'this car won't ever crash because it's a different style than the car that crashed last week.'

I like it.

Operators in Samui (some of them are ultra low cost operators like NuC*** & Sala*** & Pear***) have strict safety procedure. BP do not.

How do you know that? You got any sources to back up your claim?

Oil exploration is a risky business and no matter what safety procedures are in place it is homo sapiens that implements them.

[draftvader]

This must go into the same league as "Melting ice-caps WON'T affect the Gulf of Thailand as we are so far away". Why do we even bother getting our knickers in a twist over this kind of statement from our hosts. "You don't know anything, you are farang!!" Haven't you ever had it explained to you? Please don't get me wrong, on a day to day basis I couldn't be happier with the Thai people (I wouldn't feel safe using a footbridge in London at night), but when it comes to the bigger picture....

[ronz28]

BP was written up 700+ times for violations at the same time Exxon had one violation yet BP was allowed to continue until their blowout polluted a good part of the Gulf of Mexico. I think exploration can be done safely but BP and US government oversight were the worst examples of safe operations and review. I think some good self disclosure by the oil companies and some investigative reporting needs to be done to prove up how safe the drilling around Thailand is and to make sure they aren't dumping their trash and sewage into the Gulf so that it washes up onto the beaches.

[chainarong]

Watch the well cap, chaps , watch that cap. Any problems contact your nearest B.P Distributor.

[chainarong]

Wannarat ......said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

That's like saying 'this car won't ever crash because it's a different style than the car that crashed last week.'

I like it.

Operators in Samui (some of them are ultra low cost operators like NuC*** & Sala*** & Pear***) have strict safety procedure. BP do not.

What about Above the geology point, like a rig fire, what then, the problem started in the Gulf that way , PTT had a big rig fire in the timor sea (in Aust waters) they are not the most popular oil explorers at the moment, never say never.

[BSJ]

Energy Minister Wannarat Charnnukul said yesterday the ministry could not terminate the four oil exploration concessions off the resort island of Samui as the concession-holders are not conducting any practices that breach the law or cause serious environmental damage.

Replace the word could with would. I am sure if it suited the government the concessions would be shut down in a heart beat.

[SomTumTiger]

Not gonna stop Big Oil - no matter how many human chains you make, until NYC is underwater.

[PhilHarries]

^you're not gonna stop big oil, if such an entity exists beyond the fertile imaginations of a few, until YOU stop using it. No demand, no supply. Simples.

[SomTumTiger]

^you're not gonna stop big oil, if such an entity exists beyond the fertile imaginations of a few, until YOU stop using it. No demand, no supply. Simples.

Big Oil is a myth? Thanks for that Phil :jap:

[NanLaew]

Wannarat ......said there would be no catastrophe like what happened in the Gulf of Mexico, given the different geographical features of the Gulf of Thailand.

That's like saying 'this car won't ever crash because it's a different style than the car that crashed last week.'

I like it.

Operators in Samui (some of them are ultra low cost operators like NuC*** & Sala*** & Pear***) have strict safety procedure. BP do not.

How do you know that? You got any sources to back up your claim?

Oil exploration is a risky business and no matter what safety procedures are in place it is homo sapiens that implements them.

Try this then Phil. I worked for BP on several frontier deep-water programs in the Gulf of Mexico, all with reams of safety paperwork and audits and checks but an overwhelming sense of HSE management that was delegated to contract employees. There was no ingrained company safety culture. I also did some work offshore Nigeria for Chevron where their local management were way too comfortable and relaxed with HSE within their traditional domains of expertise (offshore construction) but were unbelievably silly about anything that made them think outside the box. For example, banning our Zodiac inflatables from the oilfield as they considered that the skin may be punctured by a carelessly extinguished cigarette. I kid thee not!

Subsequently, I have worked for all three of the 'minnows' that are currently being tarred with the BP brush by the clueless Samuian NIMBY brigade. Since 2007, I have supervised 4 projects in Gulf of Thailand and 1 onshore; all completed without mishap. These are small, focused energy companies where employees have a more personal stake in what they do in the water or on land, with much better communications and a less compartmentalized structure where anyone can proffer operational and HSE suggestions. Generally a much safer and responsive attitude to the job at hand and so much more fun to work for than 'Big Oil'.

It's well known that in the oil patch, being the biggest has never, ever meant being the safest or most socially or environmentally responsible.

[Soutpeel]

I think exploration can be done safely but BP and US government oversight were the worst examples of safe operations and review. I think some good self disclosure by the oil companies and some investigative reporting needs to be done to prove up how safe the drilling around Thailand is and to make sure they aren't dumping their trash and sewage into the Gulf so that it washes up onto the beaches.

another f8kcing expert....!!!.....the Gulf of Mexico has some of the biggest cowboys in the industry operating there, not just BP.

In comparison with the Gulf of Thailand, the Gulf of mexico is like operating in the stone age.....so before you start slagging off what you THINK is happening here, go write to your congressman in the US and get them to clean up their act in the gulf of Mexico first.

Operations in the GOT are so far ahead of Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to safety etc etc....in fact in comparison with most other places I have worked, O&G in the Gulf of Thailand comes out just about on top in almost all catagories.

Could there be a disaster in the GOT ?...yes of course....its a high risk industry we are in......if all the tree huggers want to stop O&G exploration, they can..... its easy....go and convince people to stop using oil and gas..!!!....Oil Companies, like drug dealers are giving consumers what they want, thats all...

The US wants cheap oil, to get cheap oil, corners are cut to reduce costs..this is exactly what happening in the Gulf of Mexico

[geriatrickid]

^you're not gonna stop big oil, if such an entity exists beyond the fertile imaginations of a few, until YOU stop using it. No demand, no supply. Simples.

I understand your point and you were 100% correct up until 5 years ago. The game changed when India and China went into high gear. These are 2 countries that don't care how the oil is obtained, nor do they have any concern for concepts such as environmental damage or impact upon local communities. The USA's selfish lust for cheap petrol for its drivers while still a major motive behind oil demand, is now surpassed by India and China's need for oil to power their economic growth. It is India and China that are in the driver's seat now.

[animatic]

I think exploration can be done safely but BP and US government oversight were the worst examples of safe operations and review. I think some good self disclosure by the oil companies and some investigative reporting needs to be done to prove up how safe the drilling around Thailand is and to make sure they aren't dumping their trash and sewage into the Gulf so that it washes up onto the beaches.

another f8kcing expert....!!!.....the Gulf of Mexico has some of the biggest cowboys in the industry operating there, not just BP.

In comparison with the Gulf of Thailand, the Gulf of mexico is like operating in the stone age.....so before you start slagging off what you THINK is happening here, go write to your congressman in the US and get them to clean up their act in the gulf of Mexico first.

Operations in the GOT are so far ahead of Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to safety etc etc....in fact in comparison with most other places I have worked, O&G in the Gulf of Thailand comes out just about on top in almost all catagories.

Could there be a disaster in the GOT ?...yes of course....its a high risk industry we are in......if all the tree huggers want to stop O&G exploration, they can..... its easy....go and convince people to stop using oil and gas..!!!....Oil Companies, like drug dealers are giving consumers what they want, thats all...

The US wants cheap oil, to get cheap oil, corners are cut to reduce costs..this is exactly what happening in the Gulf of Mexico

And no one would think about cutting corners in Thailand to make more money would they?

[LaoPo]

^you're not gonna stop big oil, if such an entity exists beyond the fertile imaginations of a few, until YOU stop using it. No demand, no supply. Simples.

I understand your point and you were 100% correct up until 5 years ago. The game changed when India and China went into high gear. These are 2 countries that don't care how the oil is obtained, nor do they have any concern for concepts such as environmental damage or impact upon local communities. The USA's selfish lust for cheap petrol for its drivers while still a major motive behind oil demand, is now surpassed by India and China's need for oil to power their economic growth. It is India and China that are in the driver's seat now.

I wonder what you're trying to say here...?

India nor China didn't start wars to "free" the world from WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) when in fact it was all about (protecting their own interests in) oil in the Middle East.

Apart from that there's the fact that a high number of countries, with the US on top, possess the highest number of petrol swallowing cars per capita: 800-850 cars per 1000 people while the number of cars per capita in India and China is still extremely low.

It will be at least another 40-60 years before India and China will reach 50% of the -present- number of cars in the US.

And, why would anyone deny the people in Asia to possess the same "assets" as their fellow citizens in other parts of the world consider normal ?

Also, Thailand could learn something from the traffic pollution controls in Chinese cities where polluting Tuk-Tuks and motorbikes are forbidden; just bikes, electrical bikes, electrical scooters and cars. It would be a good step in Thailand too.

China is also leading in the manufacturing of electrical cars.

Many Japanese, European and US car builders could learn something from them.

Warren Buffett understood so and took a substantial share of around 10% in BYD* in 2008, the leading manufacturer in the world of batteries and battery technology in China, and a (electrical) car manufacturer also, including starting export to the US and Europe.

Buffett paid some $ 230 million at a share price of HK$ 8....now at ca. HK$ 52 making a profit of more than 650% on his investment, worth now $ 1,5 Billion.

* BYD started just 15 years ago, in February 1995 with a capital of less than $ 400,000; now a listed company with more than 200,000 employees.

Meaning:

there's more to oil and pollution and a rapidly changing environment and usage of oil; in one or two generations from now people will only buy vehicles, powered by engines, other than powered by petrol/oil/gas.

It's a matter of time, also for Samui, and let's hope there will NEVER be any pollution on it's shores and/or Gulf of Thailand.

LaoPo

[ronz28]

^you're not gonna stop big oil, if such an entity exists beyond the fertile imaginations of a few, until YOU stop using it. No demand, no supply. Simples.

I understand your point and you were 100% correct up until 5 years ago. The game changed when India and China went into high gear. These are 2 countries that don't care how the oil is obtained, nor do they have any concern for concepts such as environmental damage or impact upon local communities. The USA's selfish lust for cheap petrol for its drivers while still a major motive behind oil demand, is now surpassed by India and China's need for oil to power their economic growth. It is India and China that are in the driver's seat now.

I wonder what you're trying to say here...?

India nor China didn't start wars to "free" the world from WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) when in fact it was all about (protecting their own interests in) oil in the Middle East.

Apart from that there's the fact that a high number of countries, with the US on top, possess the highest number of petrol swallowing cars per capita: 800-850 cars per 1000 people while the number of cars per capita in India and China is still extremely low.

It will be at least another 40-60 years before India and China will reach 50% of the -present- number of cars in the US.

And, why would anyone deny the people in Asia to possess the same "assets" as their fellow citizens in other parts of the world consider normal ?

Also, Thailand could learn something from the traffic pollution controls in Chinese cities where polluting Tuk-Tuks and motorbikes are forbidden; just bikes, electrical bikes, electrical scooters and cars. It would be a good step in Thailand too.

China is also leading in the manufacturing of electrical cars.

Many Japanese, European and US car builders could learn something from them.

Warren Buffett understood so and took a substantial share of around 10% in BYD* in 2008, the leading manufacturer in the world of batteries and battery technology in China, and a (electrical) car manufacturer also, including starting export to the US and Europe.

Buffett paid some $ 230 million at a share price of HK$ 8....now at ca. HK$ 52 making a profit of more than 650% on his investment, worth now $ 1,5 Billion.

* BYD started just 15 years ago, in February 1995 with a capital of less than $ 400,000; now a listed company with more than 200,000 employees.

Meaning:

there's more to oil and pollution and a rapidly changing environment and usage of oil; in one or two generations from now people will only buy vehicles, powered by engines, other than powered by petrol/oil/gas.

It's a matter of time, also for Samui, and let's hope there will NEVER be any pollution on it's shores and/or Gulf of Thailand.

LaoPo

Don't rewrite history here. Iraq was invaded for its invasion of Kuwait and then the job had to be finished later because of Sadam's continued threats against others including WMD (even though he apparently didn't have it at the time) and for harboring of terrorists. He ended up in a hole in the ground in Iraq and was later executed by his own people.

Payback for terrorists murdering thousands of innocent people and knocking down our buildings in New York and Washington D.C., etc takes time. The world will continue the war against terrorism until the Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been sufficiently punished for their crimes against humanity and terrorism has been neutralized.

Asia is far more polluted than the U.S. but these actions by BP to cut costs and corners without regard to safety, the lives of its own people, the millions of people who rely on the Gulf of Mexico and the environment are unconscionable. Thailand must not make the same mistakes the U.S. did regarding BP or it will surely happen in the Gulf of Siam too.

[chantorn]

I think exploration can be done safely but BP and US government oversight were the worst examples of safe operations and review. I think some good self disclosure by the oil companies and some investigative reporting needs to be done to prove up how safe the drilling around Thailand is and to make sure they aren't dumping their trash and sewage into the Gulf so that it washes up onto the beaches.

another f8kcing expert....!!!.....the Gulf of Mexico has some of the biggest cowboys in the industry operating there, not just BP.

In comparison with the Gulf of Thailand, the Gulf of mexico is like operating in the stone age.....so before you start slagging off what you THINK is happening here, go write to your congressman in the US and get them to clean up their act in the gulf of Mexico first.

Operations in the GOT are so far ahead of Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to safety etc etc....in fact in comparison with most other places I have worked, O&G in the Gulf of Thailand comes out just about on top in almost all catagories.

Could there be a disaster in the GOT ?...yes of course....its a high risk industry we are in......if all the tree huggers want to stop O&G exploration, they can..... its easy....go and convince people to stop using oil and gas..!!!....Oil Companies, like drug dealers are giving consumers what they want, thats all...

The US wants cheap oil, to get cheap oil, corners are cut to reduce costs..this is exactly what happening in the Gulf of Mexico

And no one would think about cutting corners in Thailand to make more money would they?

If Asian O&G is so darn good, wht PTTEP mess up in Australia big time.

And guess what, it only appears as a small column for 2 days in Thai papers; while elsewhere it is making head line news.

http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/damage-claims-in-timor-oil-spill-keep-spreading/388488

[LaoPo]

Don't rewrite history here. Iraq was invaded for its invasion of Kuwait and then the job had to be finished later because of Sadam's continued threats against others including WMD (even though he apparently didn't have it at the time) and for harboring of terrorists. He ended up in a hole in the ground in Iraq and was later executed by his own people.

I didn't.

Kuwait and Iraq was and is about oil. If there wouldn't have been oil in both countries, Saudi Arabia + UAE- nobody would have given a darn.

Nobody.

LaoPo

[needforspeed]

I think exploration can be done safely but BP and US government oversight were the worst examples of safe operations and review. I think some good self disclosure by the oil companies and some investigative reporting needs to be done to prove up how safe the drilling around Thailand is and to make sure they aren't dumping their trash and sewage into the Gulf so that it washes up onto the beaches.

another f8kcing expert....!!!.....the Gulf of Mexico has some of the biggest cowboys in the industry operating there, not just BP.

In comparison with the Gulf of Thailand, the Gulf of mexico is like operating in the stone age.....so before you start slagging off what you THINK is happening here, go write to your congressman in the US and get them to clean up their act in the gulf of Mexico first.

Operations in the GOT are so far ahead of Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to safety etc etc....in fact in comparison with most other places I have worked, O&G in the Gulf of Thailand comes out just about on top in almost all catagories.

Could there be a disaster in the GOT ?...yes of course....its a high risk industry we are in......if all the tree huggers want to stop O&G exploration, they can..... its easy....go and convince people to stop using oil and gas..!!!....Oil Companies, like drug dealers are giving consumers what they want, thats all...

The US wants cheap oil, to get cheap oil, corners are cut to reduce costs..this is exactly what happening in the Gulf of Mexico

Procedures and regulation are all in placed at the most sites around the world.

Human error is the main problem here, lack of management skills, as many offshore supervisors are came from roustabout within a few year to AD and on to Tool P and OIM without any communication and people skills.

There been no training in places by any drilling company for supervisors to learn how to communicate, interact and get the best out of your crew.

NOT IMPORTANT in this business.

And then with all paperwork in placed, accidents happening 95% human errors. And after a incident or accident, just look if all the papers been in placed and signed, just to cover their asses.

NFS

[ronz28]

Lao Po, we are leaving Iraq now and we are not taking their oil with us or destroying it as Sadam attempted to do with Kuwait's oil fields. It's not about oil, its about terrorism and the murders and destruction on 911 which you seem to belittle by ignoring those events. Sadam's invasion and destruction of our ally, Kuwait, the terroristic murders of thousands of our people on 911, and continued threats by Sadam caused the Iraq wars and we never would have been in Iraq were it not for those events.

The oil is still there and free Iraq can do with it what they will.

[way2muchcoffee]

Lao Po, we are leaving Iraq now and we are not taking their oil with us or destroying it as Sadam attempted to do with Kuwait's oil fields. It's not about oil, its about terrorism and the murders and destruction on 911 which you seem to belittle by ignoring those events. Sadam's invasion and destruction of our ally, Kuwait, the terroristic murders of thousands of our people on 911, and continued threats by Sadam caused the Iraq wars and we never would have been in Iraq were it not for those events.

The oil is still there and free Iraq can do with it what they will.

You are aware that it was Saudi citizens trained in Afghanistan that committed the acts on 911 aren't you?

[LaoPo]

Lao Po, we are leaving Iraq now and we are not taking their oil with us or destroying it as Sadam attempted to do with Kuwait's oil fields. It's not about oil, its about terrorism and the murders and destruction on 911 which you seem to belittle by ignoring those events. Sadam's invasion and destruction of our ally, Kuwait, the terroristic murders of thousands of our people on 911, and continued threats by Sadam caused the Iraq wars and we never would have been in Iraq were it not for those events.

The oil is still there and free Iraq can do with it what they will.

I'm not belittling anything here, ignoring those -horrible- events; I stick to facts.

"...our ally, Kuwait"......and that isn't about oil since the US find Kuwait such an interesting country with all that sand and a few filthy rich Sheiks BECAUSE of that oil ?

If you believe it's not about oil...dream on.

Than propaganda has done it's work but it doesn't hide the fact that both the US and the UK Government admitted they were lied upon by their intelligence services (and the UN as well) and were thus "allowed" to invade Iraq (in 2003) under the codename Operation Iraq Liberation or.....OIL, later changed into Operation Iraq Freedom because there was absolute proof of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq...yeah right.

The reports by the Investigation Commissions were denied upon since they weren't comforting the hawks in the Bush Administration, preparing for war.

And all this because of terrorists and 9/11 ?

You are mixing things up here since 9/11 wasn't caused by Iraq although GW Bush (and his buddy Dick Cheney) mislead the US public -and the world- , insinuating that there were connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. But there weren't any.

Maybe you forgot that Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990 and 9/11 was in 2001, eleven years later.

The follow up in 1990/1991 by means of the "Gulf War/Desert Storm", a UN authorized ticket to war with US/UK lead allied forces of 34 Nations to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait, wasn't about oil ?....Give me a break.

Do you honestly think that the same would have happened if it was just a piece of desert sand, without oil....? Do you really think Saddam would have invaded Kuwait (in the first place) if it was just a piece of sand -without oil- ?

If you say it was and it's not about oil, you're dreaming and living in another world than mine.

AND...if you think that the US will not present a bill to Iraq for their "losses" and that Iraq can do with it's oil what it wants you're dead wrong because they will, just watch it.

Of course they will...

LaoPo

[ronz28]

Yes, I am aware the 911 terrorist were originally from Saudi and trained in Afghanistan.

Are you aware that Saddam’s government in Iraq operated and supported terrorists training at Salman Pak and other locations in Iraq, provided them with cash, gave them safe haven such as Yasin, one of the al Qaeda bombers who hit the World Trade center in 1993, provided diplomatic aid and facilitated international transit of terrorists such as 911 Pentagon terrorist Midhar and al Hamzi with its Embassy employees in Malaysia, etc., celebrated the destruction of the twin towers with shrines in Iraq, provided them with medical support, and finally paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers.

I hope the U.S. will recover some or all of the money spent on pursuing terrorists and preventing future attacks. But I am not holding my breath as that is just not in the cards. As for me being dead wrong, rest assured I will never die and will pursue the elimination of terrorism forever.

[LaoPo]

Yes, I am aware the 911 terrorist were originally from Saudi and trained in Afghanistan.

Are you aware that Saddam's government in Iraq operated and supported terrorists training at Salman Pak and other locations in Iraq, provided them with cash, gave them safe haven such as Yasin, one of the al Qaeda bombers who hit the World Trade center in 1993, provided diplomatic aid and facilitated international transit of terrorists such as 911 Pentagon terrorist Midhar and al Hamzi with its Embassy employees in Malaysia, etc., celebrated the destruction of the twin towers with shrines in Iraq, provided them with medical support, and finally paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers.

I hope the U.S. will recover some or all of the money spent on pursuing terrorists and preventing future attacks. But I am not holding my breath as that is just not in the cards. As for me being dead wrong, rest assured I will never die and will pursue the elimination of terrorism forever.

Yes, I'm aware that the whole Middle East is about 3 things:

* Oil

* the conflict between The Arab -Islamic- states and -Jewish- Israel

* the Iran conflict

The outcome of those 3 has resulted in what we have now: aggressive terrorism and the Jihad towards the West in general because 'we' are non-believers (in their eyes).

If there wouldn't have been oil in the Middle East nobody would ever have heard about those countries and the terrorism wouldn't have existed.

A next note is that Iran is coming more and more into the horizon -read: attacks by the US on their nuclear facilities- once there will be less and less Americans in neighboring Iraq in due time.

The war-story continues and the present Iran regime is a pain in the @rse for the West and dangerous because they control a substantial transport flow in the Strait of Hormuz because of...oil.

Oil from Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE etc.

A small missile here and there and they will block the access to the Suez Canal too...easy for Djibouti and Somalia gangsters to block that access.

It's all about oil, the rest comes next.

LaoPo

[ronz28]

Well oil is no small matter, but despite what you think, we didn't fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to take someone else's oil. Here in Texas we have oil and are a leader in new natural gas exploration techniques that have recently found more natural gas in the U.S. than the Saudis have oil. We also lead the world in wind energy and are continuing to develop that resource.

We are behind the curve on solar energy but new solar power plants are under contract and R&D continues to drop the cost.

My hero, Boone Pickens provides national leadership in pushing our Congress to get the U.S. off of foreign oil by developing the use of wind energy and natural gas throughout the U.S. as substitutes for foreign oil.

I don't know where you are from or what your country is doing to provide your own energy, but, to me, Thailand needs to exploit alternative energy sources too or it may end up with oil pollution in the Gulf of Siam and tar on the beaches of Koh Samui.

Edited August 9, 2010 by ronz28

[Soutpeel]

Thailand needs to exploit alternative energy sources too or it may end up with oil pollution in the Gulf of Siam and tar on the beaches of Koh Samui.

The gulf of Thailand only produces about 140,000 barrels of oil a day, almost all the production is gas/condensate, and the oil is heavy, not a sweet, so your visions of doom are highly unlikely..

Thailand is attempting to exploit alternative energy sources.....its called Nuclear

[NanLaew]

^ Thanks for trying to steer this one back on topic!

Thailand's oil and gas fields are in decline. Exploration is moving into shallower waters and onshore. We cannot claim that there will never be an accident but a "catastrophe" of the GoM magnitude will never, ever be on the cards.

Usually when such environmental issues start making headlines in the west, it's because there's local or national elections coming up. What's Thailand's or Samui's excuse?

[ronz28]

^ Thanks for trying to steer this one back on topic!

Thailand's oil and gas fields are in decline. Exploration is moving into shallower waters and onshore. We cannot claim that there will never be an accident but a "catastrophe" of the GoM magnitude will never, ever be on the cards.

Usually when such environmental issues start making headlines in the west, it's because there's local or national elections coming up. What's Thailand's or Samui's excuse?

Its good to hear Koh Samui will probably never be fouled with tar balls from oil drilling as we haven't been there yet and would like to see it without an environmental disaster like in Louisiana. Do you know if Thailand's old gas fields or other areas are susceptible to the new type of fracking techniques that have started to be applied in the US recently as discussed in this recent Forbes article?

http://www.forbes.com/global/2010/0719/markets-ken-fisher-portfolio-strategy-fracking-gets-cracking.html

There are stories that indicate fracking has a risk of causing problems with a local water supply if done incorrectly, but it shouldn't happen, and natural gas appears to be the cheapest alternative for USA energy needs in the future as long as the drilling is done responsibly.