No drilling in ANWR!

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
CPA

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: DanJ
Originally posted by: Piano Man
Good
Click to expand...
There goes one of Bush's domestic agendas.

I for one am glad to hear it.
Click to expand...

True, but noone can argue that he didn't keep his campaign promise.

 
D

DanJ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
3,509
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: DanJ
Originally posted by: Piano Man
Good
Click to expand...
There goes one of Bush's domestic agendas.

I for one am glad to hear it.
Click to expand...

True, but noone can argue that he didn't keep his campaign promise.
Click to expand...
I know, I'm just saying that I hated that promise. There's no reason for it. What year is it, 2003? Can we still not come up with alternative forms of energy that we have to resort to drilling in the ANWR?
 
J

Jugernot

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,889
0
0
Dammit! Do any of you actually live here in Alaska? Do you know anything firsthand about this other than what you've heard on the news? ANWR drilling should be allowed. THe oil companies need a space about the size of a football field for a oil rig. Then they'd build another pipeline just like the current TransAlaska pipeline. Which studies have showed, hasn't effected the wildlife much at all...

Some of you have a warped perception of what actually goes on here...
 
D

DanJ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
3,509
0
0
Originally posted by: fuzzy bee
The United States could save more oil than the refuge will produce ?by just getting the SUVs to have the same fuel economy as autos,? Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., argued Tuesday night.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of when Sheryl Crow said "The best way to solve problems is to not have enemies."
Click to expand...
How difficult do you really think it would be to mandate such action? To make SUVs and other gas-guzzlers have to meet a certain requirement. The industry can do it they just refuse to try. There's no reason my 96 Jeep gets the same crap gas mileage as my 88 Ford Ranger or my Dad's 2001 Jeep. They can do better.
 
N

nord1899

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,444
0
0
Hmm, last I checked it was a Wildlife Refuge. Not an Oil Rig. Glad they voted it down.
 
M

m2kewl

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2001
8,263
0
0
don't worry, Bush already has ways of obtaining more oil elsewhere..*cough* *cough* :p
 
M

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,764
6,770
126
CPA: True, but noone can argue that he didn't keep his campaign promise.
-------------------------------------
You mean like being a uniter. The Great Uniter that divided the world.
 
K

*kjm

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 1999
2,222
6
81
Originally posted by: Jugernot
Dammit! Do any of you actually live here in Alaska? Do you know anything firsthand about this other than what you've heard on the news? ANWR drilling should be allowed. THe oil companies need a space about the size of a football field for a oil rig. Then they'd build another pipeline just like the current TransAlaska pipeline. Which studies have showed, hasn't effected the wildlife much at all...

Some of you have a warped perception of what actually goes on here...
Click to expand...

No they dont! But they are at work now with all the lights on using the computer to post on company time and will drive a 4X4 home tonight in bumper to bumper traffic:0
I'm with Jugernot... tap it!
 
N

Nutdotnet

Diamond Member
Dec 5, 2000
7,721
3
81
Originally posted by: Jugernot
Dammit! Do any of you actually live here in Alaska? Do you know anything firsthand about this other than what you've heard on the news? ANWR drilling should be allowed. THe oil companies need a space about the size of a football field for a oil rig. Then they'd build another pipeline just like the current TransAlaska pipeline. Which studies have showed, hasn't effected the wildlife much at all...

Some of you have a warped perception of what actually goes on here...
Click to expand...

Hey man, just because you live in Alaska doesn't give you supreme knowledge of ANWR. You make it sound as if all Alaskans want ANWR to be drilled. I, being born and raised in Alaska, am happy to here that ANWR isn't being touched for now.
 
ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: DanJ
Originally posted by: fuzzy bee
The United States could save more oil than the refuge will produce ?by just getting the SUVs to have the same fuel economy as autos,? Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., argued Tuesday night.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of when Sheryl Crow said "The best way to solve problems is to not have enemies."
Click to expand...
How difficult do you really think it would be to mandate such action? To make SUVs and other gas-guzzlers have to meet a certain requirement. The industry can do it they just refuse to try. There's no reason my 96 Jeep gets the same crap gas mileage as my 88 Ford Ranger or my Dad's 2001 Jeep. They can do better.
Click to expand...

yep, they sure can. not including suvs and 1/2 ton trucks and small trucks in cafe standards is ignoring the reality of the market. heres the thing, take a look at the power numbers on the 88 ranger, the 96 jeep, and the 01 jeep. they keep going up. cars are getting more efficient. just, not in fuel consumption. if the auto makers were forced to, they could keep the power numbers the same for a few years and boost mileage considerably.
 
C

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: DanJ
How difficult do you really think it would be to mandate such action? To make SUVs and other gas-guzzlers have to meet a certain requirement. The industry can do it they just refuse to try. There's no reason my 96 Jeep gets the same crap gas mileage as my 88 Ford Ranger or my Dad's 2001 Jeep. They can do better.
Click to expand...

yep, they sure can. not including suvs and 1/2 ton trucks and small trucks in cafe standards is ignoring the reality of the market. heres the thing, take a look at the power numbers on the 88 ranger, the 96 jeep, and the 01 jeep. they keep going up. cars are getting more efficient. just, not in fuel consumption. if the auto makers were forced to, they could keep the power numbers the same for a few years and boost mileage considerably.
Click to expand...

Boils down to one of the biggest problems in the way our government works today....lobbyists.
 
T

tk149

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2002
7,253
1
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: DanJ
How difficult do you really think it would be to mandate such action? To make SUVs and other gas-guzzlers have to meet a certain requirement. The industry can do it they just refuse to try. There's no reason my 96 Jeep gets the same crap gas mileage as my 88 Ford Ranger or my Dad's 2001 Jeep. They can do better.
Click to expand...

yep, they sure can. not including suvs and 1/2 ton trucks and small trucks in cafe standards is ignoring the reality of the market. heres the thing, take a look at the power numbers on the 88 ranger, the 96 jeep, and the 01 jeep. they keep going up. cars are getting more efficient. just, not in fuel consumption. if the auto makers were forced to, they could keep the power numbers the same for a few years and boost mileage considerably.
Click to expand...

Boils down to one of the biggest problems in the way our government works today....lobbyists.
Click to expand...

Try voting with your wallet. Most people don't have to drive a gas-guzzler (like a Jeep). But no, then we wouldn't have an excuse to whine about the government being controlled by lobbyists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom