POLL - Should Bush drill for oil? - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Land Use and Trails > Land Use Issues
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-17-2001, 11:33 AM   #1 (permalink)
1962 YellowSubmarine
 
YellowSub1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Member # 1494
Location: The Land Of The Free, Thanks To The Brave!
Posts: 8,310
Post POLL - Should Bush drill for oil?

<font color="yellow"> I got this from vote.com</font c>

President Bush, warning of the most serious energy shortage since the oil embargoes of the 1970s, unveiled his energy policy today. One of his most controversial proposals would allow oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and other federal lands. Is ANWR drilling necessary to reduce our dependence on foreign oil or would it needlessly endanger the environment?

Log on to http://www.vote.com to tell the president and Congress what you think. Your vote on this issue will be sent to key decision-makers in Washington. Make your vote count - and ask your friends and family to vote too.
__________________
Peter S. Di Primo - Waterjet, laser, metal forming, CNC work, Fiberglass and Carbon work, patterns and molds. No job too small.
Prototyping and small production is our specialty, but we have the network to handle large jobs as well.
Email me if you need something cut, bent, formed, milled, machined, etc.


Ventura County Axle Snappers 4 Wheel Drive Club

Help Fight Global Warming- turn your A/C on high and open all your windows.

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store - NOT a government agency!!!!
YellowSub1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2001, 01:16 PM   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
JeepinIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Member # 2510
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 4,437
Post

Voted & forwarding!
__________________
[url=http://www.jeeptalk.net/]Florida Jeep Forum[/url]

It is much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem.
- Malcolm Forbes

"I've been accused of vulgarity. I say that's bullshit." ---Mel Brooks
JeepinIan is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 05-17-2001, 01:30 PM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Berzerker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 35
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,431
Exclamation

NO!
__________________
The best things in life aren't things!
-Adam
Berzerker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 12:39 AM   #4 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Thumbs down

This one should be a No vote.
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 06:37 AM   #5 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

I voted yes. Not saying we should exploit it, but we should RESEARCH it, and find out where the oil is if we end up needing it some day...

Why vote no?
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 08:17 AM   #6 (permalink)
1962 YellowSubmarine
 
YellowSub1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Member # 1494
Location: The Land Of The Free, Thanks To The Brave!
Posts: 8,310
Post

<font color="yellow">I voted yes also,(agreeing with DRM is really starting to worry me because its happening so much lately <IMG SRC="smilies/biggrin.gif" border="0">) because I feel that it can be done in a safe way, adhering to NEPA, and the ESA(bogus anyway). </font c>

[ 05-18-2001: Message edited by: Yellowsub1962 ]
__________________
Peter S. Di Primo - Waterjet, laser, metal forming, CNC work, Fiberglass and Carbon work, patterns and molds. No job too small.
Prototyping and small production is our specialty, but we have the network to handle large jobs as well.
Email me if you need something cut, bent, formed, milled, machined, etc.


Ventura County Axle Snappers 4 Wheel Drive Club

Help Fight Global Warming- turn your A/C on high and open all your windows.

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store - NOT a government agency!!!!
YellowSub1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 08:26 AM   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
JeepinIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Member # 2510
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 4,437
Post

I voted yes also. We need to research the possibility to use the oil.
__________________
[url=http://www.jeeptalk.net/]Florida Jeep Forum[/url]

It is much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem.
- Malcolm Forbes

"I've been accused of vulgarity. I say that's bullshit." ---Mel Brooks
JeepinIan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 11:00 AM   #8 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Birfield King:
<STRONG>I voted yes. Not saying we should exploit it, but we should RESEARCH it, and find out where the oil is if we end up needing it some day...

Why vote no?</STRONG>
The research as been going on for 100 years. Suddenly after only a few months in office George W. Bush has all the answers? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0"> Must everything be destroyed? Is nothing sacred except the all mighty dollar? This is about profits for oil companies not about energy for the future. It is estimated that there is a 50% chance of finding a 9 month supply of oil in the refuge. Is this enough oil to justify destroying the land that will never recover in your lifetime? Land that may take centuries to recover? Have you ever been above the Arctic Circle? It is a very fragile place. To me it is not worth the cost.
http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/arctic/
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 11:23 AM   #9 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul G:
<STRONG>Is this enough oil to justify destroying the land that will never recover in your lifetime? Land that may take centuries to recover? Have you ever been above the Arctic Circle? It is a very fragile place. To me it is not worth the cost. </STRONG>
Ok then, just how will the land be "destroyed"? I am always interested in this - will it be "destroyed", or just "visually un-appealing" to you?

Can you share specifically what damage will be done by searching for oil there?
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 11:55 AM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
twn44s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Member # 3417
Location: Plymouth, CA USA
Posts: 1,051
Post

78% yes
22% no
I voted yes also
__________________
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Friends Of the Rubicon

"I believe that forgiving them is Gods function.Our job is simply to arrange the meeting" General Norman Schwartzkof
twn44s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 01:00 PM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Member # 3904
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,197
Post

I VOTE NO BECAUSE ALTERNATIVE FUELS ARE NEVER AN OPTION AND MAYBE NOW THEY WILL INVEST MORE IN THEM. FOSSIL FUELS NEED TO BE A THING OF THE PAST.
A-55 OR MY FAVE ALCOHOL <IMG SRC="smilies/grinpimp.gif" border="0">
rokryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 01:32 PM   #12 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Birfield King:
<STRONG>Ok then, just how will the land be "destroyed"? I am always interested in this - will it be "destroyed", or just "visually un-appealing" to you?

Can you share specifically what damage will be done by searching for oil there?</STRONG>
This is already a protected area and has been protected for over 40 years. The burden of proof lays not with the people who want to continue to protect the area but with those who wish to dismantle that protection and exploit this sensitive area.

Since the area is already protected and you wish to see that protection removed and drilling for oil begin, why don't you share with me specifically why you think that oil and gas exploration will not do any damage.
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2001, 07:50 PM   #13 (permalink)
Registered User
 
GENA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Member # 3450
Location: San Frantastic, CA!
Posts: 3,417
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul G:
<STRONG>The research as been going on for 100 years. Suddenly after only a few months in office George W. Bush has all the answers? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0"> Must everything be destroyed? Is nothing sacred except the all mighty dollar? This is about profits for oil companies not about energy for the future. It is estimated that there is a 50% chance of finding a 9 month supply of oil in the refuge. Is this enough oil to justify destroying the land that will never recover in your lifetime? Land that may take centuries to recover? Have you ever been above the Arctic Circle? It is a very fragile place. To me it is not worth the cost.
http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/arctic/</STRONG>
Vote No! <IMG SRC="smilies/bounce.gif" border="0"> I completely agree with you...it is not worth the cost! Just keep giving in to the big business oil companies' pockets people; <IMG SRC="smilies/rolleyes.gif" border="0"> makes sense, right? <IMG SRC="smilies/scary.gif" border="0">
__________________
You + are = You're, you dumbfawks!
I am a pussy. - MattS
GENA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 07:18 AM   #14 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Originally posted by Paul G:
<STRONG>Since the area is already protected and you wish to see that protection removed and drilling for oil begin, why don't you share with me specifically why you think that oil and gas exploration will not do any damage.</STRONG>[/QUOTE]


Are you serious? Think about this for just one, tiny second. I am supposed to tell you how they WON'T damage the land by exploratory drilling? How on earth can I list things that DON'T happen? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0">

That is like asking me to explain the ways that 4 wheeling does not harm the envorinment - it is a rediculous request...
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 10:15 AM   #15 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul G:
<STRONG>Since the area is already protected and you wish to see that protection removed and drilling for oil begin, why don't you share with me specifically why you think that oil and gas exploration will not do any damage.</STRONG>
Quote:
Originally posted by Birfield King:
<STRONG>Are you serious? Think about this for just one, tiny second. I am supposed to tell you how they WON'T damage the land by exploratory drilling? How on earth can I list things that DON'T happen? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0">

That is like asking me to explain the ways that 4 wheeling does not harm the envorinment - it is a rediculous request...</STRONG>
You're damn right I'm serious. You think about this for one tiny second. Everyone wants to see "good science" before closing an area and protecting it. So then why not again show "good science" when trying to re-open an already protected area?
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 10:31 AM   #16 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul G:
<STRONG>You're damn right I'm serious. You think about this for one tiny second. Everyone wants to see "good science" before closing an area and protecting it. So then why not again show "good science" when trying to re-open an already protected area?</STRONG>
You act like making it possible to do exploratory drilling means they are just "opening the gates" so to speak and they will just drive and tromp over every inch of land "destroying" it all. Come on - you have more sense than that.

So I ask again - what exactly will be "destroyed"? Can you not even suggest one thing that will be "destroyed" by explortatory drilling?
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 10:41 AM   #17 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

I look at it like this. There WILL come a time when man will scour every square inch of this earth for power sources.

I prefer to do it now - in a controlled environment, take our time, make sure we are doing it RIGHT, and "book mark" these sources for energy for later use. Then, when the need arises (and it WILL arise sooner or later) we are prepared to handle it.

The alternative is to leave places like this alone, and then some day when there is an immediate need for energy, there WILL be a no-holds-barred rush to exploit any energy source they can find - ASAP.

That is where I am coming from on this. I do not want to see natural areas exploited - but I am realistic enough to see that either we do it WISELY now, or wait for a future crisin when they are not fortunate enough to have time and carefulness on their side. Even worse - they may not care <IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0">
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 10:50 AM   #18 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Angry

Quote:
Originally posted by Birfield King:
<STRONG>You act like making it possible to do exploratory drilling means they are just "opening the gates" so to speak and they will just drive and tromp over every inch of land "destroying" it all. Come on - you have more sense than that.

So I ask again - what exactly will be "destroyed"? Can you not even suggest one thing that will be "destroyed" by explortatory drilling?</STRONG>

I can suggest all sorts of things but I know how you like to argue and will just come back with some more doubletalking "prove it to me" questions. You never want to be wrong so you always make other people prove their point. I am asking you to prove me wrong. If I am wrong I will concede but I don't think that you can prove me wrong. I think that you will keep coming back asking me to prove it because that is how you work. You try to frustrate your oponents rather than answer the questions that are asked of you. You may end up with the last word but more often than not you are wrong. Stick your neck out David. Find out a little about what the Arctic is like. I know what it is like, I have been there. It is a fragile place.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is for the most part untouched by man. I will ask again, must everything be destroyed? Is nothing sacred? Will you not be happy until there are no wild places left?
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 10:50 AM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
GENA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Member # 3450
Location: San Frantastic, CA!
Posts: 3,417
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally posted by Birfield King:
<STRONG>I look at it like this. There WILL come a time when man will scour every square inch of this earth for power sources.

I prefer to do it now - in a controlled environment, take our time, make sure we are doing it RIGHT, and "book mark" these sources for energy for later use. Then, when the need arises (and it WILL arise sooner or later) we are prepared to handle it.

The alternative is to leave places like this alone, and then some day when there is an immediate need for energy, there WILL be a no-holds-barred rush to exploit any energy source they can find - ASAP.

That is where I am coming from on this. I do not want to see natural areas exploited - but I am realistic enough to see that either we do it WISELY now, or wait for a future crisin when they are not fortunate enough to have time and carefulness on their side. Even worse - they may not care <IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0"></STRONG>
That's sad that you feel like "giving in" to the demise of the few protected areas left.
<IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0"> Why not hope for or support alternative energy such as solar and the fuel cell? Why do we have to constantly search for an unrenewable resource such as oil---when we know eventually it will run out? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0"> I know our infrastructure and transportation are currently set up to support oil use, but one day that will be gone along with once protected lands. <IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0">
__________________
You + are = You're, you dumbfawks!
I am a pussy. - MattS
GENA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:04 AM   #20 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

First off Paul - you are the one pulling crap here. I asked FIRST for you to prove what damage would be done. You are the one balking at answering that.

I am NOT saying there would be no damage. I personally have no informaion one way or the other as to what damage there will, or will not be. Therefore it is silly for me to have to "prove" what damage there would or would not be.

You on the other hand are claiming there WILL be damage. For you to make that claim, it is only fair for YOU to have some idea of what damage you are claiming there will be. If you cannot even mention one instance of this damage you have repeatedly claimed there will be, it leads me to belive you have NO BASIS FOR YOUR CLAIMS OF DAMAGE.

Based on that, it comes down to the fact that you have no clue what damage there will be, and therefore your claims that there will be damage are FALSE.

Please address that as you wish, and try to be mature enough not to drag up more of the personal attacks about me. You claim there will be damage - prove it or stop making those claims - this seems pretty cut & dried.
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:14 AM   #21 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Originally posted by BALLCRUSHER:
That's sad that you feel like "giving in" to the demise of the few protected areas left.

Giving in? I think not...
You can "dream" all you want, I am just smart enough to see reality. NO - I don';t like everything reality has to offer, but being in denial about it gets us nowhere...

Why not hope for or support alternative energy such as solar and the fuel cell?

You tell me the last time "hope" invented or improved something and I will start "hoping" full time <IMG SRC="smilies/tongue.gif" border="0">
And where did I say we shoudl stop researching alternative fuels or power sources? Don;t read things that aren't there...
In actuality, if you pay attention to my outlook - I would say we should research ALL options - solar, wind, water, etc. This would be part of the "being prepared" I mentioned above, wouldn't it?

Why do we have to constantly search for an unrenewable resource such as oil---when we know eventually it will run out? <IMG SRC="smilies/confused.gif" border="0"> I know our infrastructure and transportation are currently set up to support oil use, but one day that will be gone along with once protected lands. <IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0">

First off - it is NOT "unrenewable". It is just renewing slower that we are presently consuming.

Hey - you have lofty ideals here... but come back to reality! We do not yet have a viable alternative energy source to replace fossil fuels, so what do we do in the mean time? No, we must plan ahead...

It would be wonderful IMHO if we found possible sources of oil in these areas and never touched then. We just know they are there "just in case". And by then - perhaps we will all be surviving just fine off of alternative fuel sources <IMG SRC="smilies/smile.gif" border="0">

[ 05-21-2001: Message edited by: Birfield King ]
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:19 AM   #22 (permalink)
Poseur SUV
 
Paul Gagnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 610
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
Posts: 10,051
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via ICQ to Paul Gagnon
Post

David, in one of my posts above I provided a link to the Fish and Wildlife Service website on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. If you cannot even take the time to click on that link then there is nothing that I can say to you that will prove anything or convince you of anything. I gave out the link and you didn't read it. I will provide it again. http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/arctic/refinfo.html If you don't want to read the information that it contains then you have no business arguing with me about this.
__________________
Paul Gagnon
Sherwood Park, Alberta eh?
"No Brain, No Pain"
Paul Gagnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:30 AM   #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Member # 2288
Location: Lancaster, Texas USA
Posts: 84
Post

Interesting discussion. I don't know enough about oil exploration and drilling practices of the big oil companies to know whether there will be any destruction, permanent or otherwise. However, I do know of the never-ending fight between surface landowners and mineral rights owners here in Texas and in the other oil rich states.

As many of you know, in Texas and most other oil rich states, the landowner, or "surface" landowner as the term is used in the oil industry, owns the land subject to the rights of the mineral rights owner. As the term suggests, the "mineral rights owner" owns the right to extract the minerals and other resources from the subsurface. Often, the mineral rights owner leases his/her interest to oil companies, who in turn drill for and store the oil on-site.

In so doing, many surface landowners, such as cattle ranchers, farmers and yes, even loggers, often complain of the "destruction" to their land from this practice. One example of such "destruction" can be found from the use of oil pits in and near Smackover, Arkansas, just north of the Louisiana state line. Many of the surface landowners in Smackover, most of whom use the land to harvest pine trees, complained to state and federal authorities of the "mess" the oil pits left on their land. EPA inspectors discovered massive oil pits, which were simply huge pits dug out of the earth where crude oil was stored. Many times, heavy rains would cause the oil filled pits to overflow and spill off-site onto the rest of the land and into nearby ditches and creeks, which in turn eventually flowed into rivers and water systems used by the local towns for their drinking water supply. Although crude petroleum and its byproducts are exempt from the definition of a "hazardous substance" under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601, (thanks, in part, to the oil industry lobby), crude oil is toxic nonetheless, as evidenced by the fish kills in some of the water systems where oil had been discharged. However, what can be more toxic than oil itself is the salt-water brine that often comes up from the well-head with the crude. For this reason, most states require permits for salt-water re-injection facilities.

Many of the oil production storage facilities in Smackover, Arkansas and other parts of Texas are considered small, "Mom and Pop" facilities, where a few barrels of crude a month is the expected production capacity. It is unknown how much oil can be produced out of the Alaska reserve, but I am sure it would not be produced by Mom and Pop businesses who operate marginally and can only afford to use earthen oil pits to store the oil. Be that as it may, there will still be some damage/destruction inherent in the operation, although how much or to what extent I have no idea. Some of the damage I can envision would be the construction of roads through pristine areas in order to transport the heavy machinery and oil production equipment to the site. The oil producing site itself will most likely see some damage also as the area is cleared for drilling purposes. However, I am not sure if this damage would be considered minimal and temporary, or major and permanent, nor do I know how this damage would affect the wildlife in the area.

Even with the assurance of little to no damage, my personal conviction would be to vote "no", but not necessarily for environmental reasons. My reasons for voting "no" are mostly for national interest reasons and not so much for environmental reasons. For one, I feel the Alaska reserve should be saved for emergencies, such as during a time of war, in the event our supply lines from foreign oil are somehow placed at risk or curtailed. As most of you know, the oil from OPEC countries comes from huge, slow-moving oil tankers. During World War II, the German U-boats and Japanese submarines took pleasure in sinking our merchant marine vessels. If there were a war today, I'm sure enemy submarines would take just as much pleasure sinking slow moving oil tankers on their way to our shores, despite the use of Navy escort destroyers to protect the tankers.

Instead of investing in domestic oil production, my focus would be on investing in research and development of alternative fuels and other technologies in order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It irks me that after sacrificing our soldiers' lives and spending billions freeing Kuwait and defending the other oil rich Arab countries, OPEC, which is dominated by the same oil rich Arab countries, including Kuwait, has decided to cut production, reduce supply and in turn inflate prices to our detriment. As a result, our economy has begun to falter and signs of a recession are looming, just as it happened in the 70's. I would prefer to bite the bullet now and pay more for gas at the pump in the meantime, while we subsidize the research and development of hybrid engines, fuel cells, and other fuel alternatives and technologies that would serve to reduce, if not outright replace, our dependence on foreign oil.

That's my humble opinion on the subject. Take care folks,
__________________
Ed Q.
47 CJ2A Willys (Jibarito Jeep); 93 Ford Bronco; 03 Toyota Tacoma 4x4
EQuin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:33 AM   #24 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Paul, for your information I did follow the link - and am still reading through their rather poorly formated information.


But their explanations still leave me with the same questions - what IS "damage"?

A quote I found:
"The report concluded that oil development and production in the 1002 Area would have major effects on the Porcupine Caribou herd and muskoxen. Major effects were defined as "widespread, long-term change in habitat availability or quality which would likely modify natural abundance or distribution of species."

There are several problems with calling this "damage". For one, they work under the assumption that the migratory paterns of the caribou are static. Secondly, they assume that any change in these patterns are detramental by nature, and that the animals could not adjust, or possibly thrive under the changes. And just what is "long term"? Long Term to me may be 50 years... but in the timeline of the earth - 50 years is miniscule!

This is my problem - all too often we are bing egocentric in our terminology and line of thiking. I often see people say "damage" when the proper terminology should be "aesteticly unpleasant".

So again I ask an honest question - what "damage" could be done? I did not ask for you to get on the defensive, only for you to explain exactly what "damage" you have repeatedly claimed there will be.
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2001, 11:40 AM   #25 (permalink)
DRM
Super Moderator
 
DRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 8
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 35,534
Blog Entries: 1
Post

Originally posted by EQuin:
For one, I feel the Alaska reserve should be saved for emergencies, such as during a time of war, in the event our supply lines from foreign oil are somehow placed at risk or curtailed.

This is the same thing I am saying. But come war time or the day they cut off our oil supply - do you think there will be more or less damage to the area if we rush in and need oil ASAP, or if we had planned ahead?

That's my humble opinion on the subject. Take care folks,

Thanks - that is the first down to earth "lets ask the hard questions" look at this I have seen here. Lots of good info there to be sure <IMG SRC="smilies/smile.gif" border="0">

[ 05-21-2001: Message edited by: Birfield King ]
__________________
>David
> 4x4Spot.com
>It only hurts the first time you agree with me...
>"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
DRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.