Should We Drill Alaska?

[melon1]

A resounding, "YES" from me. The EPA is not our friend. I'm convinced that they actually care more about the caribou than people. The EPA is inflicted with human hatred and animal worshipping worldview that is devoid of common sense and reason.

[chrisfan]

I vote yes. I disagree with the notion that the EPA is not our friend. But I think there are resources there which we need, and we can get to them in a way that is still respectful to the land. We're getting ourselves in trouble with a "not in my back yard" attitude across the country, and we need to get over it ... in Alaska, as well as off the coast of Florida.

[Dr. Drum]

Do Canucks get to vote in these things?

I assume we're talking about the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge here. The EPA had nothing to do that – the Eisenhower administration set it up in 1960.

The whole point of creating these kinds of national parks and wildlife refuges is to set aside some small morsel of land from large-scale development in perpetuity.

The idea that you’re going to move heavy industry (which is what oil extraction is) into the centre of the ANWR (which is the proposal here) without serious detrimental impact to its land and wildlife is sheer fantasy. That it would be done for, in relative terms, such a small oilfield – according USGS seismic surveys you’re talking the equivalent of 180 days worth of oil at the current U.S. national rate of consumption – is simply appalling. At $70, $80, $100-a-barrel oil, someone stands to make a bag of money off this, but it’s not like you’re going to be weaning yourselves off the Saudis.

[chrisfan]

Or the Canadians, since we get more oil from there than any other country.

[Galactus]

I agree with Drum, if drilling in ANWR would actually solve anything I'd be for it. Everything I've read and heard about it says it won't. That amount of oil wouldn't even really be much temperary relief, it's just driving them crazy they can see the dollar signs but nobody's touching it...

[chrisfan]

I don't look at it as an issue exclusive to ANWR. There are a lot of pockets of oil in our country which we are not bothering to tap in to. Most of it is a "not in my back yard" attitude. Off the coast of Florida is another area we need to tap in to. The reality of oil drilling is that until you do it, you don't know what you have.

When you look at ANWR as a piece of a bigger picture, rather than as the exclusive picture, I believe it also weakens the "it's not enough to make a dent" argument. It is somewhat like an individual who looks at his personal budget, and sees items which cost $15 - $25 and says "It's not that much money". Each of those items on there own may not be much - but you start putting together multiple small items, and it morphs into something much bigger. Not to mention the non-verbal effect of demonstrating to OPEC that they are NOT the only option for a needed resource.

[Galactus]

Well, I'm no oil expert so it's possible the realties of oil drilling escape me but the people who are for it make it sound as though it will solve all our problems. If the plan were to include cutting back on foreign oil as well as developing alternatives...which I know has been mentioned but not really implamented...while we were drilling in our backyard it might more sense. We're never going to run out of oil because it'll become too expensive to use before that happens and big oil is going to squeeze every penny they can out of it. For the average consumer the answer doesn't lie in "where can we find more oil?"...drilling these oil pockets is only a minor temporary fix, we should be working on a more permanent solution.

[chrisfan]

I'm not aware of anyone who is arguing it as a "one or the other" solution. I agree with you that we need to do much much more than merely drilling in our own country. But I think it goes both ways - it makes no sense to go after alternative fuels as the only solution either.

[Thorngrub]

No more drilling, period.

[Dr. Drum]

chrisfan said:

I don't look at it as an issue exclusive to ANWR. There are a lot of pockets of oil in our country which we are not bothering to tap in to. Most of it is a "not in my back yard" attitude. Off the coast of Florida is another area we need to tap in to. The reality of oil drilling is that until you do it, you don't know what you have.

Your problem is not that there are a lot of pockets of oil in the country that you’re not bothering to tap into, it’s that you’re basically tapped out. Worldwide, we’ve almost certainly crossed the threshold of "peak oil". (Moot point anyway since the market is acting like it regardless.) In the US, you’ve been drilling for oil since the latter half of the 19th century. All the large and easily accessible fields have long since been found, developed and in many cases played out ages ago. What you’re left with is the marginal stuff – small deposits that no one would have considered developing when oil was $15, $25, $35 dollars a barrel but are suddenly commercially viable at $50+, or the stuff that’s remote and/or hard to extract. Even a relatively new area of development like Alaska is starting to play out at this point. Prudhoe, which saw commercial exploration from the late 60s, peaked in 1998 and is now in decline. Note: even without the ANWR, 95% of the potential oil-producing areas of the state have always been open to oil exploration. Give it nearly 40 years of development and you've probably found whatever's there.

The real argument about ANWR and similar regions worldwide, BTW, is for your drop in the bucket and short-term gain now, what are you giving up forever?

[phil]

melon1 said:

A resounding, "YES" from me. The EPA is not our friend. I'm convinced that they actually care more about the caribou than people. The EPA is inflicted with human hatred and animal worshipping worldview that is devoid of common sense and reason.

Case closed !!

[Galactus]

The problem isn't even how much oil is out there. It's our dependence on it. It's insane to be so dependent on a finite resorce, especially when no body really seems to know how much of it is left. That we have no "plan B" for times like now when the problem isn't how much oil we can get our hands on but that we don't have the capacity to refine it at the rate we're consuming it.

[Thorngrub]

I personally think we should call a state of national emergency:

Not about "terrorism" (bleh), but rather, on our


current state of priorities

I believe it's time for our nation to have a "natl huddle" so to speak, officiated by a wise panel of smart people. The jist would be, People, We need to shift our priorities WAAAAAY back around to a more proper listing.

*Take $$$ Off the Top of the priority list, and place it SEVERAL NOTCHES down*

*replace issues like HEALTH and even more importantly the ENVIRONMENT and push them up the list*

*place a revamped EDUCATION system to the #1 position (previously occupied by $$).

It's time we get real, and radically alter 100% of our lifestyle. Completely UNLEARN everything we've been handed down and unconsciously rendered into our daily rituals.

It's time we realized just what the CONSEQUENCES of this so-called "American Dream" really & verily are. (By "American Dream" I mean getting rich, of course)

I'm an American . . .and that's my dream.

O well, Y'all can go back to raping and killing God & all her creatures large & small, now.

(Obviously we're too far down this path for anyone to really take such notions seriously, so just ignore my suggestions & go back to your collective suicide then)

[chrisfan]

ded said:

The problem isn't even how much oil is out there. It's our dependence on it. It's insane to be so dependent on a finite resorce, especially when no body really seems to know how much of it is left. That we have no "plan B" for times like now when the problem isn't how much oil we can get our hands on but that we don't have the capacity to refine it at the rate we're consuming it.

Correct me if I'm wrong - but it appears to me that everyone agrees that our dependence is an issue, and that something needs to be done about it. The question is not whether or not we need to do something but WHAT needs to be done.

[Galactus]

The approach of "let's just find more oil" is sort of like suggesting that a crack addict find more crack to deal with his addiction. Obviously there are those who don't really feel the dependence on oil is the problem...they feel a shortage of oil might be becuase we're dependent on it, but they have no problem with the dependence itself.