Political Crossfire Forums

[GTTofAK]

Sostratos wrote: First as I have already stated it will take about ten years before we start drilling. Now the reason for this is because first we have to set up the pipe lines, create new roads, and this will be inhibited by many obstacles. The acres are not right next to each other they are spread out. The government still has to sign oil companies to drill the land. Also there is a small problem that we do not know exactly where the oil is. Notice that I put about ten years it can change depending on the circumstances.

Building the pipeline is the most time consuming thing. It took three years to build the Alaska pipeline 30 years ago. And this isn't nearly as big of a task. So the only way its going to take 10 years is if the environmentalists hold it up in the courts for 7. Now that is a real possibility.

[ReelBigSpikey]

GTTofAK wrote: Sostratos wrote: First as I have already stated it will take about ten years before we start drilling. Now the reason for this is because first we have to set up the pipe lines, create new roads, and this will be inhibited by many obstacles. The acres are not right next to each other they are spread out. The government still has to sign oil companies to drill the land. Also there is a small problem that we do not know exactly where the oil is. Notice that I put about ten years it can change depending on the circumstances.

Building the pipeline is the most time consuming thing. It took three years to build the Alaska pipeline 30 years ago. And this isn't nearly as big of a task. So the only way its going to take 10 years is if the environmentalists hold it up in the courts for 7. Now that is a real possibility. No, building the pipeline is not the most time-consuming process. Exploratory drilling is the most time-consuming process.

[antiprefix]

ReelBigSpikey wrote: GTTofAK wrote: Sostratos wrote: First as I have already stated it will take about ten years before we start drilling. Now the reason for this is because first we have to set up the pipe lines, create new roads, and this will be inhibited by many obstacles. The acres are not right next to each other they are spread out. The government still has to sign oil companies to drill the land. Also there is a small problem that we do not know exactly where the oil is. Notice that I put about ten years it can change depending on the circumstances.

Building the pipeline is the most time consuming thing. It took three years to build the Alaska pipeline 30 years ago. And this isn't nearly as big of a task. So the only way its going to take 10 years is if the environmentalists hold it up in the courts for 7. Now that is a real possibility. No, building the pipeline is not the most time-consuming process. Exploratory drilling is the most time-consuming process.

That's only because you have to find the oil.

Isn't the oil in the alaskan pipeline the last of the oil?

:(

[Sostratos]

Yes we do have to find the oil first we don't even know where it is located. I did not say that the construction of the pipe line is the only thing but it will be time consuming because there is more then one area.

[Trvgr]

With the so called "conservative" judges in place (What the hell do they conserve, anyway?), 7 years in court looks like a pretty far off impossibility. The question is, why does this drilling have any popular support? When American oil companies get a surplus of oil, prices go UP. If you need any evidence of this, go out to 7-11 and see what the Middle East Oil Wars have gotten you. I really don't see how the drilling in the north will help any average Americans, so why is it that these are often the people supporting the drilling?

[next_exit]

Personally, I'm so much against the actual drilling of oil as I am the apparent refusal to research and try out alternative energy sources. Nobody can argue with the fact that that is the direction we need to be heading yet we continue to take the path of least resistence. If Americans and the Bush administration took the time to sit down and really think about this issue (thoughtfully, that is) then we wouldn't be doing what we are now.

[Face Value]

A word on oil:

The United States imports greater than fifty percent of the oil it consumes each day. As of 2000, this consumption has risen by fourteen percent (approximately 19.3million barrels a day) since the Clinton administration. Also, during that time domestic production fell by seventeen percent, reaching the lowest levels since 1954.

The Administration's Energy Information Agency reports that the United States will depend on foreign nations for 64.6 percent of its petroleum by 2015-2020, if current trends continue.

The facts are simple. While domestic production decreases, the demand does not automatically fall to balance the equation. Quite the opposite is true, as oil consumption increases dramatically. This demand is, in turn, satisfied by the most available supply, which comes from foreign sources. As the United States relies more heavily on foreign sources, namely the OPEC crew, it moves deeper into territory in which those foreign sources hold sway over its efficiency and functionality.

A strong nation does not, and ought not, place itself in a situation were it is at the mercy of a conglomerate of other countries. As alternative fuel sources and technology develop, the United States should be doing whatever it can to ease the existing tensions surrounding its domestic energy production. The drilling for and collection of oil in the Alaskan reserves is an inevitability. When the other oil supplies on Earth are exhausted, which they will be eventually, the powers that be will take the remaining oil. One should not lobby against the collection of the oil, for it is a battle that is already lost. The question is: "When is the right time to open the door to this particular energy prospect?"

I believe the time is now.

[micfranklin]

Freeyourmind wrote: Am I the only one who stands dumbfounded at the decision by the Senate to allow oil drilling in an Alaskan nature reserve?

How can the American people just stand by while Bush seeks to strip every last resource from the planet?

What is wrong with everyone? Has apathy become the latest trend?

No, you are most certainly not. In these days, politics control everything and why? Because they've got money and ego to look out for. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve is quite low on my scale; destroying an environment that took millions of years to build just to fill up their already full pocketbooks. If anyone has heard about the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident that happen in Prince William Sound Alaska, then they should know that if he keeps this up, there is a chance that could very well happen again, but maybe not on the same scale.

Simply put, I hate it when people think of their dollar bills more than the huge landscapes surrounding them. :x :x :x :x :x :x

[Freeyourmind]

micfranklin wrote: Freeyourmind wrote: Am I the only one who stands dumbfounded at the decision by the Senate to allow oil drilling in an Alaskan nature reserve?

How can the American people just stand by while Bush seeks to strip every last resource from the planet?

What is wrong with everyone? Has apathy become the latest trend?

No, you are most certainly not. In these days, politics control everything and why? Because they've got money and ego to look out for. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve is quite low on my scale; destroying an environment that took millions of years to build just to fill up their already full pocketbooks. If anyone has heard about the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident that happen in Prince William Sound Alaska, then they should know that if he keeps this up, there is a chance that could very well happen again, but maybe not on the same scale.

Simply put, I hate it when people think of their dollar bills more than the huge landscapes surrounding them. :x :x :x :x :x :x

Here, here.

It all comes down to our short-term view of the world and a mis0guided belief that the resources we crave will be around forever.

[GTTofAK]

micfranklin wrote: Freeyourmind wrote: Am I the only one who stands dumbfounded at the decision by the Senate to allow oil drilling in an Alaskan nature reserve?

How can the American people just stand by while Bush seeks to strip every last resource from the planet?

What is wrong with everyone? Has apathy become the latest trend?

No, you are most certainly not. In these days, politics control everything and why? Because they've got money and ego to look out for. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve is quite low on my scale; destroying an environment that took millions of years to build just to fill up their already full pocketbooks. If anyone has heard about the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident that happen in Prince William Sound Alaska, then they should know that if he keeps this up, there is a chance that could very well happen again, but maybe not on the same scale.

Simply put, I hate it when people think of their dollar bills more than the huge landscapes surrounding them. :x :x :x :x :x :x

And do you know who fought every attempt to widen the narrow straights leading to the port of Valdez, and still fight it to this day.

You think some day the environmentalist would take some responsibility for their actions. But they never will. They are too ignorant to even see when they are to blame. See spruce bark beetle.

[anselfir]

what other immeidate uses does that little tundra present? only another conflicting use of that land resource can force this development project off. if there are no human actors behind "preservation" there is no priority to it.

[Freeyourmind]

Just a quick note to put all this into perpective and show how short-sighted and money grubbing Bush Jr is.

America currently uses 7.3 billion barrels of oil per year to drive it's fleet of 'efficient' SUVs.

The estimated amount of oil in ANWR is 10.5 billion barrels (source CNN).

So for destroying one of the last pristine areas of Alaska, the US will get less than a year and a half of extra oil.

Yeah...........seems worth it to me.

[anselfir]

lol! even if it gets 1 barrel of oil in marginal return, it is a good deal. pristine? like they are going to develop tourism there?

again your little preference for a pristine tundra is not an use.

[Freeyourmind]

oneofthem wrote: lol! even if it gets 1 barrel of oil in marginal return, it is a good deal. pristine? like they are going to develop tourism there?

again your little preference for a pristine tundra is not an use.

So your ok with destroying the planet for short-term gain?

Tell me. Why can't we leave this piece of the earth untouched for our children? The returns that we are going to get are not worth destroying yet another piece of the planet. I'd like to take my child to Alaska one day to see the beauty of nature without telling him/her to imagine what it would look like if oil refinery wasn't there.

[Protostar]

MasterChefD wrote: ieatfood wrote: From my point of view, as long as humans aren't being adversely affected who cares? Why bother them for no good reason if they don't bother us? You're going to wipe out an entire species just so you can make some extra money? Do you value life? Why not destroy the Amazon? You could make a lot of money AND paper! Why not kill all the tigers and pandas? Their skins makes pretty clothing for the rich and famous! Why not wipe out all the rhinoceroses? Chinese people use it to make their medicine! Why not kill all the elephants? Ivory is soooo cool! Do you see where this is heading? We shouldn't exterminate a species for vanity or greed.

ieatfood wrote: I eat chickens all the time. I have the right to kill chickens--why not moose or reindeer or whatever? I have no problem with you killing chickens, or moose, or reindeer for food. While we shouldn't exterminate a species for vanity or greed, we certainly shouldn't exterminate a species for fun, and we definitely shouldn't exterminate a species just because we can.

If you want to, we can continue in the the proper forum.

I would easily cause an entire species extinction just for profit. I don't care about pandas or tigers or elephants. I need the elephant ivory to build my ivory palace. Where the hell am I going to get the ivory needed to build my ivory fortress if I don't poach the elephants? I could poach all the rhinos as well but thats besides the point. Animals are just that, animals. They have no rights and are here for the sole appeasement of mankind. If the pursuit of profit calls for the extermination of a species then I'm all for it so long as I profit.

[anselfir]

Freeyourmind wrote: oneofthem wrote: lol! even if it gets 1 barrel of oil in marginal return, it is a good deal. pristine? like they are going to develop tourism there?

again your little preference for a pristine tundra is not an use.

So your ok with destroying the planet for short-term gain?

Tell me. Why can't we leave this piece of the earth untouched for our children? The returns that we are going to get are not worth destroying yet another piece of the planet. I'd like to take my child to Alaska one day to see the beauty of nature without telling him/her to imagine what it would look like if oil refinery wasn't there. dude, are you seriously saying that drilling some holes in a piece of tundra is "destroying the planet?"

[Freeyourmind]

oneofthem wrote: Freeyourmind wrote: oneofthem wrote: lol! even if it gets 1 barrel of oil in marginal return, it is a good deal. pristine? like they are going to develop tourism there?

again your little preference for a pristine tundra is not an use.

So your ok with destroying the planet for short-term gain?

Tell me. Why can't we leave this piece of the earth untouched for our children? The returns that we are going to get are not worth destroying yet another piece of the planet. I'd like to take my child to Alaska one day to see the beauty of nature without telling him/her to imagine what it would look like if oil refinery wasn't there. dude, are you seriously saying that drilling some holes in a piece of tundra is "destroying the planet?"

Gee lets see. Dirty great oil refinerys belching out god knows what into an atmosphere that is already strained to breaking point by the short-sightedness of governments more interested in linig their pockets than leaving a legacy for generations to come.

Have you ever been to an oil field where the environment hasn't been damaged? And no it's not just one oil field. It's the countless oil fields around the world that contribute to environmental destruction.

Don't be so naive.

I suppose next you're going to tell me that our actions over the last 50-100 years have had no impact on the environment and that we should all go about our merry way consuming finite resources, and belching pollutants into the air.

Wouldn't you rather live in a country that isn't tied to oil? Wouldn't you rather look out onto the wonders of nature rather than oil fields and the brown haze that hangs over all modern cities?

[micfranklin]

Freeyourmind wrote: Just a quick note to put all this into perpective and show how short-sighted and money grubbing Bush Jr is.

America currently uses 7.3 billion barrels of oil per year to drive it's fleet of 'efficient' SUVs.

The estimated amount of oil in ANWR is 10.5 billion barrels (source CNN).

So for destroying one of the last pristine areas of Alaska, the US will get less than a year and a half of extra oil.

Yeah...........seems worth it to me.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Love the sarcasm you have and I agree with your point. I'll never understand why these people think that nature can just recover itself over the course of a few days when it took millions of year to shape that tundra land. And plus, by adding that refinery there for short-term gain, you drive millions of animals out of their habitat, their homes, their world (if you will) and into places closer to cities, which increases human encounters and attacks and even deaths of both man and beast.

[micfranklin]

Protostar wrote: MasterChefD wrote: ieatfood wrote: From my point of view, as long as humans aren't being adversely affected who cares? Why bother them for no good reason if they don't bother us? You're going to wipe out an entire species just so you can make some extra money? Do you value life? Why not destroy the Amazon? You could make a lot of money AND paper! Why not kill all the tigers and pandas? Their skins makes pretty clothing for the rich and famous! Why not wipe out all the rhinoceroses? Chinese people use it to make their medicine! Why not kill all the elephants? Ivory is soooo cool! Do you see where this is heading? We shouldn't exterminate a species for vanity or greed.

ieatfood wrote: I eat chickens all the time. I have the right to kill chickens--why not moose or reindeer or whatever? I have no problem with you killing chickens, or moose, or reindeer for food. While we shouldn't exterminate a species for vanity or greed, we certainly shouldn't exterminate a species for fun, and we definitely shouldn't exterminate a species just because we can.

If you want to, we can continue in the the proper forum.

I would easily cause an entire species extinction just for profit. I don't care about pandas or tigers or elephants. I need the elephant ivory to build my ivory palace. Where the hell am I going to get the ivory needed to build my ivory fortress if I don't poach the elephants? I could poach all the rhinos as well but thats besides the point. Animals are just that, animals. They have no rights and are here for the sole appeasement of mankind. If the pursuit of profit calls for the extermination of a species then I'm all for it so long as I profit.

Just so you know, in Africa, if you get caught poaching then you'll get shot, sent to jail, and possibly killed. So Mr. Greedy, if you actually do plan on doing that then I hope the bullets from those rifles hit you right between the eyes :-D

[micfranklin]

Freeyourmind wrote: micfranklin wrote: Freeyourmind wrote: Am I the only one who stands dumbfounded at the decision by the Senate to allow oil drilling in an Alaskan nature reserve?

How can the American people just stand by while Bush seeks to strip every last resource from the planet?

What is wrong with everyone? Has apathy become the latest trend?

No, you are most certainly not. In these days, politics control everything and why? Because they've got money and ego to look out for. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve is quite low on my scale; destroying an environment that took millions of years to build just to fill up their already full pocketbooks. If anyone has heard about the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident that happen in Prince William Sound Alaska, then they should know that if he keeps this up, there is a chance that could very well happen again, but maybe not on the same scale.

Simply put, I hate it when people think of their dollar bills more than the huge landscapes surrounding them. :x :x :x :x :x :x

Here, here.

It all comes down to our short-term view of the world and a mis0guided belief that the resources we crave will be around forever.

Some resources will be around forever, oil is not one of them.