Yesterday

[thebullet]

Neocon warlord Paul Wolfowitz will head the World Bank;

The White House illegally puts out fake news reports, and the Justice Department does nothing;

Another $81 billion of your money and mine is to be poured onto the Iraqi sand;

The GOP majority in Congress is preparing to trash 200 years of Senate tradition in order to post a number of certifiably insane people to the bench;

Kevin Martin, a conservative Christian activist for the GOP, will now chair the FCC;

The Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve, one of the most ecologically pristine areas remaining to us, will be paved and drilled for its tiny amount of petroleum.

And that was just yesterday.

 

[Dar~]

ANWR isn't going to be paved, you idiot. Even if they do decide to open it, which would be good for americans b/c it would end our dependence on middle eastern oil, there are strict guidlines in place for alaska to even allow it. I lived in AK for three years, the whole time they were talking about it, it even went up for a vote while I was there. There will be test drilling and if they find oil then there will be talks about what will happen then. Also, they will be cordonning off the area for animal safety. No animals will be harmed, they will just be forced to avoid that specific area. No habitats will be destroyed and no animals endangered. Do your homework before posting incendiary bullshit on here.
Thank you.

 

[gauchecritic]

So they're going to drill for oil just to make sure it's there and then leave it? Hmm and just how much money are they prepared to spend to find out if something is there that they're not going to use?

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I really don't know how I feel about ANWR drilling, but wouldn't it be wise to also invest some money in alternative energy research as well? I mean, we've pretty much run out of places to drill for oil. When ANWR's used up, then what? Isn't anyone thinking about the day after tomorrow?

 

[Dar~]

I agree with both of you. They are going to drill to find oil and then they will have a strick set of guidelines on how to harvest it and still be kind to the conservation.

I believe there are many gov't funded projects searching for alternative means of energy.

 

[CharleyH]

So they're going to drill for oil just to make sure it's there and then leave it? Hmm and just how much money are they prepared to spend to find out if something is there that they're not going to use?

Well (lol) Alaska National Park.


(makes no sense if you dont know congress actually agreed to oil drilling in a 25 year old SAFE zone national park. OIL I TELL YOU, OIL. Ah Americans are beautiful, arent they. Kill people first, and then the rest of nature.)

Hit me if you want. I could care less. It's true. :|

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Well (lol) Alaska National Park.


(makes no sense if you dont know congress actually agreed to oil drilling in a 25 year old SAFE zone national park. OIL I TELL YOU, OIL. Ah Americans are beautiful, arent they. Kill people first, and then the rest of nature.)

Hit me if you want. I could care less. It's true. :|

You have a piece of squirrel in your teeth.

 

[CharleyH]

You have a piece of squirrel in your teeth.

And I see the snakes swirrling on your head

 

[ABSTRUSE]

And I see the snakes swirrling on your head

 

[Colleen Thomas]

ANWR isn't going to be paved, you idiot. Even if they do decide to open it, which would be good for americans b/c it would end our dependence on middle eastern oil, there are strict guidlines in place for alaska to even allow it. I lived in AK for three years, the whole time they were talking about it, it even went up for a vote while I was there. There will be test drilling and if they find oil then there will be talks about what will happen then. Also, they will be cordonning off the area for animal safety. No animals will be harmed, they will just be forced to avoid that specific area. No habitats will be destroyed and no animals endangered. Do your homework before posting incendiary bullshit on here.
Thank you.

I'm usually the first one to call the bullet on his bullshit, but your response sounds like it was paid for by Exxon. You can not drill, without cutting roads. You cannot drill, without destroying habitat. And you can not in any way, guarentee there won't be a spill. There is no way practiceable of being sure your drilling won't let oil into the watertable. In fact, federal regulations were loosened on fracture drilling, a favorite of Haliburton, which is shown to compromise the water table. And all the oil in the refuge lands, will not end our dependance on foerign oil.

A more practical way to ease our dependance would be to invest in alternate sources, while opening up the strategic reserve a little to ease the price gouging. The administration has been dead set against that tack.

Interestingly, the GOP wasn't sure they could get this drilling proposal passed even with their majorities, so they tacked it onto a budget bill, which convienintly only requires a simple majority. That kind of underhandedness and attempt to avoid open debate leads me to suspect they know well in advance they are destroying a national treasure and they just don't give a flying leap.

I'm not an enviornmentalist. I am a conservationist. And I'm sick of this administration rolling over for big bussiness on every issue. The only people who profit from drilling in the reserve are the big oil companies and you can bet they won't pass the savings on to consumers. Meanwhile, a pristine area will be fucked beyond all recognition. I lived in Mississippi and I have seen the havoc oil companies wrought just drilling some test wells on my grandmother's property. About the only interest I can think of who reek more destruction on the land are strip miners and pulp wood companies. And it's still a closely run thing.

 

[Dar~]

Just for the record, I was really really against opening ANWR. Until my husband became a military member in a war that we are only fighting b/c of oil. My husband could be sent over there and be killed. So could many others. I know it's a cheap way of thinking, but i am sick of americans dieing b/c of our involvement in foreign oil. this whole thing would have never happened if we weren't. I just want the dead soldiers back and my husband and family safe. If that means drilling in ANWR go for it. I'm not even a republican, as a matter of fact, I hate GWB for much the same reasons that I want to drill ANWR. I want our soldiers safe, he sends them to a stupid pointless war, I want our country safe, he declares war on the whole freaking planet. I am sorry, this is just an incredibly sore subject for me.

 

[cantdog]

They strip mine national parks and preserves, too, if they like.

And it is precisely roads which destroy habitat. Roads are the death knell. That's why there are areas deep within some of the parks where roads are not built. Motorized transport is not allowed. Sure, guys in wheelchairs and three hundred pound drunks on snowmobiles don't go in. Tough titty.

We've passed the peak of oil production already, people. If someone doesn't pay the fuck attention, energy will be so high that the most dynamic economy onb the planet will go down. Cheap energy is the single biggest factor contributing to prosperity. There is cheap energy, but we have to start using it. Oil will never be cheap energy again.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Just for the record, I was really really against opening ANWR. Until my husband became a military member in a war that we are only fighting b/c of oil. My husband could be sent over there and be killed. So could many others. I know it's a cheap way of thinking, but i am sick of americans dieing b/c of our involvement in foreign oil. this whole thing would have never happened if we weren't. I just want the dead soldiers back and my husband and family safe. If that means drilling in ANWR go for it. I'm not even a republican, as a matter of fact, I hate GWB for much the same reasons that I want to drill ANWR. I want our soldiers safe, he sends them to a stupid pointless war, I want our country safe, he declares war on the whole freaking planet. I am sorry, this is just an incredibly sore subject for me.

Um, yeah. So destroying a natural wilderness area is helping you rhusband just how exactly? Do you think we will pull out of the mid east and quit buying foerign oil over the few billion barrels of crude that might be under there? Do you believe drilling will make GWB suddenly intpo a stesman and stop his jingoistic foerign policy? If you do, I fear you are in for a grave disllusionment.

The reserves under the ANWR, even if they were fully developed, would produce something on the order of 3 to 6 percent of our current useage. You favor destroying one of the few pristine enviornments the big oil companies haven't alredy defiled for 3 to 6 percent of current useage? Is an etra 6 percent less dependence on imports going to make any diference in GWB's policy?

I don't get it. For a few extra barrels of oil that will burned and gone in no time, you favor destroying a sceneic and pristine envoirnment we can never recover? I just don't see the logic in that. Unless the only beauty you recognize in this world is bigger figures on the bottom line.

 

[cantdog]

Sorry, dndjsp, my post went up before I saw yours. I understand your position between the rock and the hard place. I have friends there, myself. But oilmen are running the country right now, and empire builders. We can prevail against them, but it is costing a lot in blood and treasure to do it.

Oil really cannot be continued with, though. It's still the best source of hydrocarbons for plastics, but just burning it is profligate. Much ink and many lives have been spent shouting into the deaf ears of extractive industry about this. I live in a state which once had woods. The paper companies' idea of forestry has been to clearcut it all and move on to the next forest. In theory, you would imagine forests to be renewable, but to have that work, someone has to leave some woods behind, someone has to plant and husband. Business doesn't do that, because there's better money in making paper in Sumatra, right now, especially since they have cheaper labor, no pollution controls, no safety regs, and no limits on clearcuts.

We managed to retain the forest jobs for two generations only by having a state forestry department which did all the silviculture for them for free, but in the end they left the plants and the state to perish. Uncontrolled capitalistic ventures always make this kind of decision. Ask the hundreds of new homeless in Millinocket, with the bumper stickers on their cars: "If you don't like forest work, try wiping your ass with plastic." People here supported the businesses with tax cuts, with the state foresters, with votes and voluntary cutbacks in pay, with direct subsidies. They gutted the place and left.

Conservation of existing oil would have an amazing impact. The act of conservation alone saves money. The trouble is, it doesn't save money for the oil industry. After the initial benefits, refitting of plants, innovations and the implementation of them would create another whole industry out of conserving. It might even give us time to invest in alternatives on a serious scale. This is a big country, we need a lot of lead time to change this stuff.

Alternatives are myriad to oil, but many of them are best implemented on a small scale. This is no use to the men with the clout. It's very hard to get people to look up.

And, I'm afraid, there has been no limit to how much of other people's stuff they are willing to expend, including other people's husbands and daughters, to get their way about this stuff.

 

[davidwatts]

I'm not in favor of destroying any scenic treasures, even those in Alaska that I'll never be able to afford to see. I'm also not going to admit that I won't be at the pump waiting for one of those few gallons of gas to come out of Alaska when/if it comes. It's all temporary anyway.

This planet will have recovered and will be looking fine long after we're dust in the wind. Nothing we build lasts anyway, so a few hundred years after we've managed to put ourselves out of our misery, everything we've created will be gone. A few thousand years after that, something will slither out of the ooze and it will all begin again. Maybe they'll do a better job than we have. Then again...

 

[minsue]

Just for the record, I was really really against opening ANWR. Until my husband became a military member in a war that we are only fighting b/c of oil. My husband could be sent over there and be killed. So could many others. I know it's a cheap way of thinking, but i am sick of americans dieing b/c of our involvement in foreign oil. this whole thing would have never happened if we weren't. I just want the dead soldiers back and my husband and family safe. If that means drilling in ANWR go for it. I'm not even a republican, as a matter of fact, I hate GWB for much the same reasons that I want to drill ANWR. I want our soldiers safe, he sends them to a stupid pointless war, I want our country safe, he declares war on the whole freaking planet. I am sorry, this is just an incredibly sore subject for me.

I can understand why it would be a touchy subject for you, Dar. The painful truth, though, is that 16 billion barrels (the very optimistic upper limit of the estimated oil in ANWR) isn't going to do a damn thing for our oil supply. It's nothing compared to the amount we gorge ourselves on and it won't keep Americans and others from being killed over foreign oil.

 

[rgraham666]

This planet will have recovered and will be looking fine long after we're dust in the wind. Nothing we build lasts anyway, so a few hundred years after we've managed to put ourselves out of our misery, everything we've created will be gone. A few thousand years after that, something will slither out of the ooze and it will all begin again. Maybe they'll do a better job than we have. Then again...

I wrote a story about something similar. I figured out what really killed the dinosaurs.

 

[cheerful_deviant]

I really don't know how I feel about ANWR drilling, but wouldn't it be wise to also invest some money in alternative energy research as well? I mean, we've pretty much run out of places to drill for oil. When ANWR's used up, then what? Isn't anyone thinking about the day after tomorrow?

The simple answer is, No, they're not. I don't think most people have the mental capacity to even begin to grasp the remafications of no more oil. Honestly, I don't think most people even realize how close we are to the end of the road. Current estimates put peak oil production at sometime in the next 5 years. After that, it's a downhill slide. Prices will continue to escalate as supply dwindles. The actualy day when the oil really runs dry is many years away, but just the downturn in production will be disasterous.

Transportation costs will soar, commuting cost will climb, raw material costs will escalate. The cost of finished goods will climb due to the transport costs and material costs. THe current mass transit system in the US is woefully inadequate and will be overwelmed as more and more people can no longer afford to drive to work. And that's just the start of it if we don't start seriously exploring alternatives now.

Hydrogen fuel cells are a good start but much more research is needed to make mass production of hydrogen commercially viable. The problem is, once the oil is dwindling, it's to late to start looking for something new, we need to start now. Trouble is, there just isn't enough interest yet to make it a top priority and the current administration certainlly isn't going to do anything that will harm the oil company's bottom line by pushing alternatives to Unleaded.

 

[rgraham666]

To paraphrase a funny line I heard many years ago.

Do you know when we'll get solar power. When Exxon figures out a way to bring it to us in a truck.

 

[minsue]

To paraphrase a funny line I heard many years ago.

Do you know when we'll get solar power. When Exxon figures out a way to bring it to us in a truck.

They're getting there, Rob. I'm too tired and pilled (yes, in goslingland that's a verb) to find a source for you at this point, but if you're ever feeling like being disillusioned & horrified look into who's at the table with Bush's much lauded hydrogen fuel cel research.

 

[BigAndTall]

For everyone that thinks we should not be drilling in ANWAR, what would you propose as a society we do?


I know everyone likes to say "alternative" or "renewable" but those are just buzzwords. What is something specific you would say "Mister Bush, this is a much better idea"

 

[Dar~]

I truly don't think anything good about Bush. I think he has Alexander syndrom. He wants to take over the world and make it into a "democracy." He fels that he is some hero, a "patriot" In reality he is a charlatan. He saw his father get famous by being president during a war, and he tinks he can get the same fame. It really ticks me off how there is no right answer.
I picketed the voting establishments handing out fliers against ANWR. I participated in info sessions and I hate the idea of them opening it to drilling and possibly destroying the area. It makes me sick. What I hate more is this war. I believe I have already stated that I think more money needs to be put into alternate means of fuel, but if that isn't going to happen b/c big business gets in the way of legislation to make it happen, then we need to play the game like they do. Some way we need to become uninvolved in the middle east. We need to be able to pull our troops out with out worrying about losing our only definite means of fuel. We need to be able to control our own gas prices and thereby gain a little more control of our budget.

 

[cheerful_deviant]

For everyone that thinks we should not be drilling in ANWAR, what would you propose as a society we do?


I know everyone likes to say "alternative" or "renewable" but those are just buzzwords. What is something specific you would say "Mister Bush, this is a much better idea"

Wind, solar, geothermal & hydro for grid power. Hydrogen or something else for transport. All are clean and renewable. What these things need is funding to make them viable alternatives. Research is needed to make them competative with oil. But this administration is completly sold to the oil companies who have no interest in giving us alternatives to crude that will impact their bottom line. So instead of working on alternatives, we destroy the wilderness that was specifically set asside for preservation.

The whole point of this really is how little difference drilling in the Alaskan Refuge will make. THe 6-16 billion gallons of oil up there is a drop in the bucket, literally. Something like 2.5-4% of total US oil consumption. It's pointless.

 

[BigAndTall]

I believe I have already stated that I think more money needs to be put into alternate means of fuel, but if that isn't going to happen b/c big business gets in the way of legislation to make it happen, then we need to play the game like they do.

I don't like the term "alternate means" as it is so vague as could mean anything. Could you define it more?

 

[BigAndTall]

Wind, solar, geothermal & hydro for grid power. Hydrogen or something else for transport. All are clean and renewable. What these things need is funding to make them viable alternatives. Research is needed to make them competative with oil. But this administration is completly sold to the oil companies who have no interest in giving us alternatives to crude that will impact their bottom line. So instead of working on alternatives, we destroy the wilderness that was specifically set asside for preservation.

The whole point of this really is how little difference drilling in the Alaskan Refuge will make. THe 6-16 billion gallons of oil up there is a drop in the bucket, literally. Something like 2.5-4% of total US oil consumption. It's pointless.

Thanks, thats getting somewhere. So how large would the amount of oil up there have to be before its not pointless in your opinion?



Edit: i have heard a lot of negative talk about all those options you are voicing there. Also, I am not sure that any of those can do for us what oil can.


For the record, I don't really have much opinion on if I am for or against it. I have no problem with exploration and drilling, but I know that there are a lot more areas that exploration is not allowed than it is allowed.