|
|
Post by scooterfanatic on Jul 31, 2008 15:10:30 GMT -5
I vote no. I vote no because I'm afraid that driving the oil prices back down will stifle interest in alternative fuels just like it did in the 80's. I'm not confident that Americans can drill there with the mindset that it is a temporary stop-gap measure against a serious oil crisis. Oil prices will fall and we will stop thinking about the day when the oil under ANWR runs out. When that day comes, we'll be in a far worse situation than we are today.
However, if the government sets up an alternative fuel project on the same level as say, the Manhattan project, then I wouldn't be opposed. That way, we'd be ready with alternative fuel technology when we need it, and we can start rolling out those vehicles before the supplies start to dwindle, that way you won't have a mass sell-off of gas-burning cars and trucks, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by potthole on Jul 31, 2008 18:26:27 GMT -5
I say drill. Don't care if it changes the prices now or not. I'd just be happy to know that our country isn't relying on foreign oil as much.
...Crap, there goes my personal vow to not get involved with any further political topics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mad Dog on Jul 31, 2008 18:29:43 GMT -5
Absolutely. Lets be self reliant and not so dependent on others
|
|
|
|
Post by scooterfanatic on Jul 31, 2008 21:09:15 GMT -5
You both have good points, but my issue is how long will ANWR will allow us to be self-reliant? When that oil runs out, we'll be right back to where we started, but even worse off, because other countries will have been using that foreign oil all those years.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaydethespaz on Aug 1, 2008 1:54:49 GMT -5
They won't allow us to stay self relient very long. besides they would be drilling in a wildlife RESERVE! I'm not an avid animal activist by any means but when it's called a reserve, it should stay one
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyson on Aug 1, 2008 7:13:16 GMT -5
"How much oil is out there? According to the Department of the Interior, these restricted deepwater areas contain 19 billion barrels of oil, about 30 years' worth of imports from Saudi Arabia. And these initial energy estimates have a track record for being low." -http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380922,00.html The point isn't to be completely self-reliant. The point is to show foreign oil companies that we don't rely solely on them either. So even if we cut our foreign oil purchasing in half, we would have 60 years worth of negotiation before oil runs out in that one specific area. Within a few years the foreign oil companies would go broke not getting American business and eventually come to their senses. ...Crap, there goes my personal vow to not get involved with any further political topics. QFT... |
|
|
|
Post by Dino on Aug 1, 2008 7:15:14 GMT -5
I agree.....Quails are F'n Tasty! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 7:21:35 GMT -5
Absolutely. Lets be self reliant and not so dependent on others Wouldn’t that be the exact purpose of renewable energy? |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 8:22:04 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - Opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil development would only slightly reduce America’s dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the Energy Department. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/ |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 8:30:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 8:31:19 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - Opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil development would only slightly reduce America’s dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the Energy Department. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/Think of it this way...instead of sending that extra money over seas for foreign oil...we can keep it here....and use it to further development of foreign oil...They need to commit the money saved to renewable fuels. Instead....it'll probably go to welfare or eskimos or something |
|
|
|
Post by The Biff Lebowski on Aug 1, 2008 8:33:08 GMT -5
Drilling doesn't do as much good as if they coupled the drilling with building new refineries.
|
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 8:36:06 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - Opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil development would only slightly reduce America’s dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the Energy Department. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/Think of it this way...instead of sending that extra money over seas for foreign oil...we can keep it here....and use it to further development of foreign oil...They need to commit the money saved to renewable fuels. Instead....it'll probably go to welfare or eskimos or something "With the 876,000 barrels the refuge could provide a day, the reliance on imports would drop to 66 percent of domestic consumption..." We currently import 70%...wow 4% difference |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 8:39:12 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - Opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil development would only slightly reduce America’s dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the Energy Department. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/Think of it this way...instead of sending that extra money over seas for foreign oil...we can keep it here....and use it to further development of foreign oil...They need to commit the money saved to renewable fuels. Instead....it'll probably go to welfare or eskimos or something Also: Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens stood on the floor of the Senate a month ago and urged his colleagues to support drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Do it to boost our domestic oil supplies, he said. Do it to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. What Stevens did not mention was this: Alaskan oil could wind up being sold overseas. seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002245699_export17m.html |
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 11:49:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 11:51:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:01:17 GMT -5
What’s the point of the pictures?
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:07:19 GMT -5
What’s the point of the pictures? education....whats the point of the thread? It's pertinent to the thread...can't i post pictures with out a motive? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:08:02 GMT -5
ANWR Coastal Plain  |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:08:07 GMT -5
What’s the point of the pictures? education....whats the point of the thread? It's pertinent to the thread...can't i post pictures with out a motive? ;D The middle one has caribou with missing bodies…it’s the worst Photoshop ever! |
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:08:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by potthole on Aug 1, 2008 12:09:03 GMT -5
education....whats the point of the thread? It's pertinent to the thread...can't i post pictures with out a motive? ;D The bottom one has caribou with missing bodies…it’s the worst Photoshop ever! Because there's no such thing as a hill... |
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:09:36 GMT -5
education....whats the point of the thread? It's pertinent to the thread...can't i post pictures with out a motive? ;D The middle one has caribou with missing bodies…it’s the worst Photoshop ever! if you look closely (i thought the same thing) it's a high sun and the caribou is behind a little grassy knob.... |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:11:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:12:44 GMT -5
I wish talk bubbles of truth appeared over my head |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:14:22 GMT -5
People would sell out their countries future for a 50cent per barrel of oil decline …sounds a bit crazy too me.
|
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:17:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:20:17 GMT -5
People would sell out their countries future for a 50cent per barrel of oil decline …sounds a bit crazy too me. you make it sounds like the drillers will be ran by Mr. Burns. Leaky pipeline and whatnot. It could end up being the cleanest drilling ever...you don't know. Sell out their future? you mean dedicate 3 square miles of an area the size of S. Carolina for oil? People could easily take the tour away from the oil if it's that much of a problem...plus it's the coastal plain....it's as exciting as watching paint dry |
|
|
|
Post by wienerpoopie on Aug 1, 2008 12:26:53 GMT -5
Sellout as in it’s a preserved habitat, PRESERVED for future generations, if you want energy from something protected they need to build a dam over Niagara Falls, or geothermal station in Yellow Stone. That was intended to be our kids land not ours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie Feltersnatch on Aug 1, 2008 12:31:12 GMT -5
half truth, thats why i posted my pictures. look at the map...where is the oil going to be drilled at? |
|
