Originally Posted By plpeters70 "Its freaking wilderness... that means no one lives there." That's actually not quite true - there are some Native American tribes that live in those areas. But even if they didn't, there are many animals that call that area home - and I for one am unwilling to destroy their habitat just so we can keep using oil for a few years more. People aren't going to die if we don't drill up Alaska, but they could if we don't make a huge effort to find a better alternative to burning fossil fuels. It's as plain and simple as that - we MUST get off oil, and the sooner, the better.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<there are many animals that call that area home - and I for one am unwilling to destroy their habitat just so we can keep using oil for a few years more.>> Sorry. I'm not. How many species have been saved over the past 45 years because of our conservations efforts? One heck of a lot. Many species that were endangered in the past (American Bald Eagles, Wolves, etc.) are now plentiful and in some cases increasing more rapidly than nature would allow. Does this mean we can totally ignore all of our impact on nature? Of course not. Does it mean that we can manage a less than desirable situation for the short tem with the knowledge that it will not be a problem in the long term? Absolutely!! I'm not looking for oil for next 100 years. I'm looking for oil for maybe the next 20 years which will allow us time to transition to other energy sources. The problem with so many green/global warming people is that this is an all-or-nothing proposition for them. That just is not reality -- there are a broad range of options in the middle than can help get us to where we need to go. Yeah, I did it too. When I was in my 20's I shrieked like a banshee and figured that the world was going to hell in a handbasket. You want to know what I've found in the 30+ years I've lived since then? Ain't gonna happen. We (both Americans and other citizens of the World) are resourceful people. Faced with challenges, we meet them. Thirty years ago, how many folks would have predicted: 1) Unbelievably powerful computers for under $1,000? 2) The World Wide Web and the unbelievable number of changes that has made to everyone's life? 3) Big pig cars like my Dodge Charger that can get 25+ mpg on the highway? (Thirty years ago we would have been looking at 15 mpg at best.) 4) Massive TV screens with absolutely superior resolution and technology for under $1,500? All of you gloom and doomers just haven't lived long enough. Don't worry Bunky. Things probably didn't look so great on December 7, 1941 either. We'll handle it.
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP Drilling in ANWAR just postpones the inevitable. We've know since *at least* the 1970's that oil would *eventually* run out and being addicted to forgiegn oil is a dangerous addiction. However, while americans made brief changes for a time (Yeah for the VW bug! boo on Fins and 10 miles a gallon) as soon as oil became cheap again we went right back to the way we were. (Yea for Suburbans and then proliferation the heavy spacious SUVs) If we drill in ANWAR and *if* that actually brings down the price of oil, and more importantly, the price of gas, why in the world do you think now would be different? Where would the money do develop alternative forms of energy come from? On the other hand, as long as oil and gas stay high there is huge incentive to develop alternatives. There is no form of energy we know of on this earth that is as cheap as oil at $50 a barrel. There is no incentive for and no money for creating alternatives as long as it exists. We are going to have to go through the pain of high prices before alternatives can be developed, we may as well do it before ANWAR is irrepairably harmed as after.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<We are going to have to go through the pain of high prices before alternatives can be developed, we may as well do it before ANWAR is irrepairably harmed as after.>> I don't see it necessarily as a cost savings issue. If the price needs to stay high to develop alternate sources I guess I can live with that. I just hate to be so darned dependent on the Middle East providing us with a vital product. They have us over a barrel so to speak (has that phrase ever been more fitting?). I think it would be a big plus if we pumped more of our own oil, even if it didn't make a big change in the price.
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP But the alternitives get us away from the middle east too! <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshelf/brochures/gasoline/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshe...dex.html</a> According to a US Government publication dated April of this year, the 2007 consumption broke down like this: Western Hemisphere: 48% (domestic production + Canada + Mexico) Africa: 22% (Nigeria, etc.) Persian Gulf: 18% Everywhere Else: (Brazil for example) 12% Obviously most companies would love to have an 18% market share, it's nothing to sneeze at. However, by no means do they control most of our oil.
Originally Posted By LadyKluck Yes the gas prices bother me, especially when things like gas going up .10 per gallon OVERNIGHT. The Chevron here in Emmett was at 3.79/gal on Wednesday night at 11 pm when I passed it, the next day, around noon when I drove by it again, it was 3.89! That's what bothers me. It also bothers me that when we bought our car 2 years ago September, it cost about $32 to fill it up, now it costs $52 to fill it up. I can go about 400 miles on one tank of gas, but it also takes me 4 days or less to go thru that because I have a 45 minute commute every day and so does my husband - so it takes 1 and a half round trips to go 100 miles! It most definitely bothers me, but there's not much I can do about it - I can't exactly ride my bike to work, and our public transportation doesn't come all the way out here. We have a commuter-ride vanpool program but it only runs the times of day that "normal" people work - you know the M-F, 8-5 folks, which doesn't help the nightshift people like myself!
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Whatever environmental harm drilling in ANWR might cause is much smaller than any other source of energy will create? Do people really think that wind turbines or solar panels won't affect the environment? What other energy options do they think are going to come along in the next 10 years? More hydroelectric? Coal burning? Nuclear? Drilling in ANWR and off our coasts is our best option now.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I thought, according to many Democrats, that we invaded Iraq so that we could have our own oil source. Wow, funny how long it's taking for that deal to work out. Personally I really don't understand how the whole thing works. I really don't know what drives gas prices and how they relate to what I do on a daily basis. I have heard of OPEC and all that but I am too lazy to learn about those people. Everyone is blaming the oil companies, but really not all of them are making record profits. What is the answer? I have no idea. Do gas prices bother me? Yes very much so. Will it get worse before it gets better? I think it will. Is it W's fault? In some way it must be. I am really surprised it hasn't happened before now, like a decade ago. I wonder at what price per gallon the demand will plateau, where an additional penny in price actually means less gas sold? 8 to 10 bucks? I dunno.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "Whatever environmental harm drilling in ANWR might cause is much smaller than any other source of energy will create?" And just what proof do you have to make this kind of statement? How could solar or wind power cause MORE pollution than drilling and burning fossil fuels? I would love to see some proof of that, because frankly, that just sounds silly.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Environmental harm is not necessarily the same as pollution. In order to generate the same amount of energy, you'd need many, many more wind turbines and solar panels than you would oil derricks, destroying much more habitat.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Solar panels don't really destroy habitat, particularly installing them in urban and suburban areas that aren't wildlife habitat to begin with. Wind turbines are trickier, but the Scientific American article that someone (plpeters?) posted a month or two ago had an excellent proposal for their utilization that beats drilling in ANWR hands down.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Solar panels don't really destroy habitat> They will if you install enough of them to generate a reasonable amount of power.
Originally Posted By X-san ***Drilling in ANWAR just postpones the inevitable. We've know since *at least* the 1970's that oil would *eventually* run out and being addicted to forgiegn oil is a dangerous addiction.*** Oil is never going to completely "run out". However, you will not like the price you'll have to pay to get some.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Solar panels don't really destroy habitat>> <They will if you install enough of them to generate a reasonable amount of power.> Not necessarily. Certainly, installing them on urban rooftops destroys no wildlife habitat. Installing them on suburban rooftops doesn't either. What is needed is serious government investment in solar power (as opposed to yet more tax breaks for fossil fuels) to bring the cost per kilowatt hour down, and to develop ways to shrink the size of the panel needed to generate x-amount of power. This has not been a priority, and it should be.
Originally Posted By X-san Out of curiosity, does oil have a shelf-life? How complicated would it be to obtain for youself a few dozen barrels of crude anyway? I wonder because, *if* what some people are saying is correct and this situation will only exacerbate to the penultimate extreme (oil warlords roaming the lands riding Cadillacs pulled by donkeys, perhaps )...wouldn't the best gift you could ever give your grandkids be a few barrels of black gold?
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Out of curiosity, does oil have a shelf-life? >>> Well, it seems to keep in the ground for millions of years just fine! (or 5000-6000 years according to some folks) As for refined product, it depends. I know that gasoline goes bad in just a few months (and certainly in less than a year). Diesel will last years, but I don't know about decades. I would think that natural gas in a tank would last just about forever as long as the tank didn't leak.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad What about electric cars, and nuclear power plants? Oh wait..... NEW-CU-LER power plants
Originally Posted By X-san ***Well, it seems to keep in the ground for millions of years just fine! (or 5000-6000 years according to some folks)*** lol.
Originally Posted By inlandemporer I'm lucky in that I don't live too far from where I work, but I know getting from Ontario to Anaheim sure costs a lot more than it used to. i don't envy those people who have that sort of commute every day.
