Senate Rejects Oil Drilling in Alaska Refuge

[hateproduct]

click (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/19/anwar.vote.ap/index.html)

[The Nephilm]

wow

that is about the first good thing to happen to the environment since bush came into office.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by The Nephilm
wow

that is about the first good thing to happen to the environment since bush came into office.

I will agree that drilling in alaska isn't a good thing, but only because there isn't enough oil there to last us more then a yr or two. But the democrats make me sick that they won't let us drill in other areas of our terr. that does have large quanities of oil. Its almost like they want us to be dependent on the middle east.

[yeat182]

they should just use the money they would have spent on the drilling and develop an alternatvie fuel source,then we wouldn't be dependent on anyone...

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by yeat182
they should just use the money they would have spent on the drilling and develop an alternatvie fuel source,then we wouldn't be dependent on anyone...


No matter how much money we spend on an alternative fuel source it will still be more the 10yrs before the nation can run on them, so drilling is still needed.

[WithStamin]

We will continue to be dependant on oil for quite a few years. Technologies are being developed, but they are young and will never replace oil. As for there not being much oil there, the oil there could replace 30 years of Saudi Arabian oil. I'd say that's quite signifigant.

There are tons of good reasons to drill there. Here are some of them. (http://www.anwr.org/topten.htm)

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
We will continue to be dependant on oil for quite a few years. Technologies are being developed, but they are young and will never replace oil. As for there not being much oil there, the oil there could replace 30 years of Saudi Arabian oil. I'd say that's quite signifigant.

I'm not sure where you read that but all reports i've read say that theres 1 to 2 yrs worth of oil. nad it will take at least 4 to 5 years to begin pumping oil

[WithStamin]

The impact on our economy may not be gigantic (although I think it would be), but it would still help. Are there any reasons that we shouldn't drill in the ANWR?

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
The impact on our economy may not be gigantic (although I think it would be), but it would still help. Are there any reasons that we shouldn't drill in the ANWR?

Yes the amount of oil there isn't anywhere near as much as there is in the Gulf of mexico or off the coast of socialistornia...oh i mean california.

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Yes the amount of oil there isn't anywhere near as much as there is in the Gulf of mexico or off the coast of socialistornia...oh i mean california. Hmm I didn't know about that. Where did you get that info? I'd like to read it.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
Hmm I didn't know about that. Where did you get that info? I'd like to read it.

i'll post a link if i cna find one, thats really old news, why dont you find one saying that theres thirty yrs worth of oil in the ANwar.

[WithStamin]

I couldn't find the 30 years bit, but here's (http://www.anwr.org/backgrnd/potent.html) something about how much oil there is (a lot).

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
I couldn't find the 30 years bit, but here's (http://www.anwr.org/backgrnd/potent.html) something about how much oil there is (a lot).


"but the limited data means that there is a high level of uncertainty about how much oil and gas may be present."

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
No matter how much money we spend on an alternative fuel source it will still be more the 10yrs before the nation can run on them, so drilling is still needed.

we have enough oil to last us atleast the next 10 years. the thing is, once we develop the new fuel source, it will take along time to convert everything we have now that runs a conventional source, to the new one, which is why it is better to start now, while we still have oil reserves, than to wait until those reserves are low and we are out of time.

[yeat182]

the point is, we will run out of oil in less than 100 years, that is certain. so it is wise to start investing in new technologies now so we can avoid a crisis later. a few years extra worth of oil isn't really worth all that much, yet that money could seriously help fund research into new energy sources. the rate of consumption increases exponentionally, so today we may have 100 years of oil, but in 10 years, consumption will be even higher, and we may only have 50 years. in 15 years, that number could be 20 years, or less, depending on how much the consumption rate increases each year. i think alot of people over look that fact, that yes, we have 100 years (or 50 or whatever the number is these days) of oil now, IF we continue at this current rate, which we won't. if in 10 years there are twice as many cars on the road, that means half as much oil will be available, so instead of (for the sake of arguement) 50 years of oil, there will only be 25. better to take care of the situation now, rather than later.

[EmoMoose86]

Whats wrong with drilling 2,000 acres (a spec of land in Alaska standards trust me) in a 19 million acre refuge?

Please don't say that it hurts the carribu...

[WithStamin]

It dosn't hurt the caribou -at all-. In Prudhoe Bay, just a few miles away, oil drilling has been going on for 40 years. The caribou population has nearly quadroupled. So saying that it will hurt the environment isn't a valid argument.

[EmoMoose86]

Originally posted by WithStamin
It dosn't hurt the caribou -at all-. In Prudhoe Bay, just a few miles away, oil drilling has been going on for 40 years. The caribou population has nearly quadroupled. So saying that it will hurt the environment isn't a valid argument.

Thumbs up!