So, What do you all think about Bush's plan to drill oil in Alaska?

[datalink7]

Good Idea, or bad Idea?

I personally would prefere to look for a different solution, cause of the environmental ramifications. But I would like to hear arguments from both sides, if you are so inclined to give them.

 

[Whitedog]

I say outlaw anything non-commercial that get's worse than 30MPG... they Messed up bad when they went BACKWARDS with that plan 15 years ago.
They had the right idea, but then the economy got a little better and Oil became a little more plentiful... so they said, Oh SCREW IT! Let's make GAS Guzzlers again!

 

[lilstevo]

i wonder when the earth's supply of oil is gonna run out. that is scary...i don't like the idea of bush's plan. Question: Does anyone like Bush?

 

[Yzzim]

Here's a quote from CNN.com:


<< Nobody's sure exactly how much oil is under the refuge. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that, at current oil prices, about six billion barrels would be worth pumping out. That's roughly enough to supply all U.S. oil needs for about 11 months. >>



That is a sizeable amount of oil, but I don't think it's worth destroying a National Wildlife Refuge. I doubt that would cause much of a drop in oil prices, and if it did it wouldn't be effective for an extended period of time. I think we should keep it there and use it for a strategic supply.

Edit: Forgot the link

 

[Marty]

Drilling oil != destroying the wilderness, despite what environmentalists may have told you.

Marty

 

[JellyBaby]

What do Alaskans have to say about new drilling there?

 

[jacobnero6918]

People are such hypocrits when it comes to energy matters, your all on the internet right now which means your using electricity. Most electricity comes from coal still.

Do know how many people die in coal mines or how much enviromental damage is caused by digging coal mines ?


Some day when Cold Fusion is a reality and were all driving electric cars we can worry about the the enviroment of a big hunk of frozen land were nobody lives!

 

[LaBang]

It is not a good idea.

first of all, people that want to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge say that it is needed so that we can reduce the US's foreign dependence on oil. BS! in the year 2027 (the peak year of production if we start the process of drilling today) the oil from the refuge will only account for 2 percent of america's oil consumption. the oil released from the refuge only makes up 0.3 percent of the world's accesible oil supply so it would have little to no affect on lowering gas prices.

we need to use new technologies to reduce our dependence on oil. america has 5% of the world's population but consumes 1/4 of it's oil.

did you know that replacement tires that you get for your car are normaly not as effecient as the tires that came with your car were? why doesn't the goverment raise the standards for replacement tires? come on!

i don't think that for the amount of gain that the citizens of america would get out of drilling in the refuge it can be justified to destroy the environment.

 

[syzygy]

i hope they don't drill. it would be aweful to put the preserve in danger
of some major environmental disaster. the amount of oil under there is
probably not enough to affect prices here for any sustainable period
of time.

 

[Balt]

<<What do Alaskans have to say about new drilling there?>>

They helped elect Bush, so I guess they are for it.


Personally, I think we have far greater environmental problems than oil drilling in Alaska.

 

[Wallydraigle]

Drilling doesn't mean destroying the preserve. They said the same thing when the pipeline was going in. They said it would make the caribou go extinct, remember? We got more of them now than ever, because of the pipeline. If we can produce more oil for ourselves, then I say go for it!

 

[C'DaleRider]

<< Personally, I think we have far greater environmental problems than oil drilling in Alaska. >>


Possibly true.....but why create another problem when the benefits are so insignificant?

 

[JellyBaby]

People aren't buying highly fuel efficient cars. They're buying SUVs. Demand for oil is quite high even after at least two decades of forced environmental messages in schools. That plus the Clinton/Gore administration utterly dropping the ball on efficiency standards (and past regimes, too) means we still want and need mondo oil.

 

[FrontlineWarrior]

cold fusion?! wtf isn't that a hoax

 

[Tripleshot]

Uh,when would the alledged oil,yet to be discovered,begin to flow to the storage tanks in Houston? Last I heard it was a 10 year wait for that oil that will only be an 11 month supply. Another politician with selfish motivations making unrealistic policies on the guize of providing a better society for us by allowing us to use our own oil for less than a friggin year?

Bush is a moron! :|

 

[jacobnero6918]

<< cold fusion?! wtf isn't that a hoax >>



Actually there spending billions trying figure out Fusion (not cold fusion). Cold Fusion may never be figured out or maybe in 50 years they will have a break through.



BTW, drilling in Alaska is better than drilling in the 50 states if you ask me. How many of you want them drilling for oil in your backyard. We still need oil and will for years to come. That oil has to come from somewhere and they will drill so the enviroment is going to be a little messed up in the process.

And also what makes Alaska so precious compared to the other places they drill ???????

 

[DRGrim]

<< Demand for oil is quite high even after at least two decades of forced environmental messages in schools. >>


So? Most of the kids who were exposed to those messages can't vote yet. They are a maxamum of twenty years old. I think its safe to assume that the majority of them are concerned about the enviorment, and even those that can drive are not likly to afford SUV's.

The result of the messages has not taken its full effect yet, because they have no chance at outnumbering the rickety old rebublicans who would rather save a few dollers then try to protect a National Wildlife Refuge.

 

[Ornery]

List all the places that you think would be preferable to drill. Take your time, but I am waiting...

 

[JellyBaby]

<< Last I heard it was a 10 year wait for that oil that will only be an 11 month supply >>

Triple, it's not much oil but it's important to keep in mind that it will not all be extracted over &quot;11 months&quot;, it'll be withdrawn over decades in a steady supply. Not exactly &quot;wham, bam, thank you mam&quot;.

 

[fluxquantum]

i think it's a bad idea.

 

[JellyBaby]

DRGrim,

No the pro-environmental education message has been around since the late 70s. Graduates in the 80s and 90s have been voting for years now. And still nothing has really changed.

 

[Whitedog]

Well, perhaps if all you people in this forum donated the Oil off your Oily Ass, Pimple Faced, No bath takin'...! :|

hehe j/k

 

[Ornery]

For those that &quot;think it's a bad idea&quot;, list all the places that you think would be preferable to drill. Take your time, but I am waiting...

 

[etech]

Can someone please tell me why they automatically assume that drilling will destroy the ANR and turn it into a ecological wasteland. Please give more then just your heard it somewhere, a few facts would be nice.

While you are studying that, look up not just the amount of oil there but also the amount of nat. gas reserves that are there. Add in some balance of trade numbers to round it out a little.

Then find out what forms of alternative energy are viable right now and add in how much they could conceivably supply even with full implementation.

I am not disagreeing that conservation is also necessary, but more energy sources will also have to be developed in the interim.

 

[Azraele]

<<I personally would prefer to look for a different solution, cause of the environmental ramifications>>

I agree. I hate to see the enviromnent compromised for any reason. They're logging trees around here a lot lately and it's not only tearing up the landscape, all the loose mud is getting onto the roads and causing a driving hazard. I think drilling would be a bit more harsh. It would temporarily alleviate the price problems, but according to my geo prof (so blame him if I'm wrong) thre's only about 45 years worth of ouil left. I think bush would be wiser to push for alternatives to oil.