Gene Frenkle Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Republicans in the House and Senate said this week they plan to push for Alaska refuge drilling legislation early next year, and they predict success, given the 55-44-1 GOP Senate majority in the next Congress. Democrats and some environmental activists say continued protection of the refuge has never been as much in doubt. "It's probably the best chance we've had," Rep. Richard Pombo, R-California, chairman of the House Resources Committee and a vocal drilling advocate, said in an interview. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/10/...y.ap/index.html Stupid Caribou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, we should try and stop that from happening, and keep our dependence on foreign oil... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, we should try and stop that from happening, and keep our dependence on foreign oil... 111946[/snapback] Waittaminute. I distinctly heard Kerry say that we have to reduce our dependence of foreign oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Republicans in the House and Senate said this week they plan to push for Alaska refuge drilling legislation early next year, and they predict success, given the 55-44-1 GOP Senate majority in the next Congress. Democrats and some environmental activists say continued protection of the refuge has never been as much in doubt. "It's probably the best chance we've had," Rep. Richard Pombo, R-California, chairman of the House Resources Committee and a vocal drilling advocate, said in an interview. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/10/...y.ap/index.html Stupid Caribou 111938[/snapback] Thanks for repeating the same ridiculous Liberal talking points. The caribou population in Prudhoe is significantly HIGHER than it was before it was drilled. Why, you ask? Because they have a place to stand behind when the goddamn wind is blowing 90+ miles an hour and the snow is hitting you like needles and because they can actually corner faster than the predators that eat them. The laws of Alaska prevent the building of ice roads until the temperatures are below -20 degrees F. Care to guess how many caribou are hanging around at these temperatures? How about how many plants are in full bloom? I suppose you think it's better to allow the Russians to drill in similiar environments and bring their oil to market instead? Surely they are just as environmentally concious as we are. One of my buddies helped them build the Trans-Siberian pipeline. Care to guess how many caribou are there? Answer: NONE. BECAUSE THE WORKERS KILLED THEM ALL SO THEY'D HAVE SOMETHING TO EAT. I guess it's much smarter to have oil traverse the most important ecosystem on the planet (the ocean) on foriegn flagged carriers, who are subject to international "law", than to move American oil through a pipeline and then to ships that are subject to AMERICAN scrutiny. Keep up the good work, lemming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 10, 2004 Author Share Posted November 10, 2004 Thanks for repeating the same ridiculous Liberal talking points. The caribou population in Prudhoe is significantly HIGHER than it was before it was drilled. Why, you ask? Because they have a place to stand behind when the goddamn wind is blowing 90+ miles an hour and the snow is hitting you like needles and because they can actually corner faster than the predators that eat them. The laws of Alaska prevent the building of ice roads until the temperatures are below -20 degrees F. Care to guess how many caribou are hanging around at these temperatures? How about how many plants are in full bloom? I suppose you think it's better to allow the Russians to drill in similiar environments and bring their oil to market instead? Surely they are just as environmentally concious as we are. One of my buddies helped them build the Trans-Siberian pipeline. Care to guess how many caribou are there? Answer: NONE. BECAUSE THE WORKERS KILLED THEM ALL SO THEY'D HAVE SOMETHING TO EAT. I guess it's much smarter to have oil traverse the most important ecosystem on the planet (the ocean) on foriegn flagged carriers, who are subject to international "law", than to move American oil through a pipeline and then to ships that are subject to AMERICAN scrutiny. Keep up the good work, lemming. 111966[/snapback] The caribou part was an afterthought...in reference to the picture CNN had next to the article. I guess by your response you're all for drilling the !@#$ out of Alaska - I would have thought otherwise, but you seem to have some strong feelings about it. I'm not pretending to understand the intricacies of the tundra or the plight of the caribou population at any given temperature, so I'll bow to your apparant expertise. My intent was to bring the article to light, not to incur the Wrath of Darin. My bad! I'm such a friggin lemming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 You drive a car "Gene"? Use electricity? Own anything made of plastic? Yes? Then shut your pie-hole. Youve got no right to make such talk. And what Darin said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 10, 2004 Author Share Posted November 10, 2004 You drive a car "Gene"? Use electricity? Own anything made of plastic? Yes? Then shut your pie-hole. Youve got no right to make such talk. And what Darin said. 111986[/snapback] You're such a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 The caribou part was an afterthought...in reference to the picture CNN had next to the article. I guess by your response you're all for drilling the !@#$ out of Alaska - I would have thought otherwise, but you seem to have some strong feelings about it. I'm not pretending to understand the intricacies of the tundra or the plight of the caribou population at any given temperature, so I'll bow to your apparant expertise. My intent was to bring the article to light, not to incur the Wrath of Darin. My bad! I'm such a friggin lemming! 111982[/snapback] Then why did you address the article to AD, if your intent was to simply bring the article to light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 10, 2004 Author Share Posted November 10, 2004 Then why did you address the article to AD, if your intent was to simply bring the article to light? 111991[/snapback] He's the only person I've "met" who lives in Alaska. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 He's the only person I've "met" who lives in Alaska. 111993[/snapback] By that standard, should all posts dealing with Federal Government be addressed to Tom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Then why did you address the article to AD, if your intent was to simply bring the article to light? 111991[/snapback] Maybe he assumed that Darin was an environmental NIMBY person like Walter Cronkite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 The caribou part was an afterthought...in reference to the picture CNN had next to the article. I guess by your response you're all for drilling the !@#$ out of Alaska - I would have thought otherwise, but you seem to have some strong feelings about it. I'm not pretending to understand the intricacies of the tundra or the plight of the caribou population at any given temperature, so I'll bow to your apparant expertise. My intent was to bring the article to light, not to incur the Wrath of Darin. My bad! I'm such a friggin lemming! 111982[/snapback] My biggest problem is the continued repeating of the same ridiculous and stupid arguments from people who couldn't find ANWR on a map if they cut Alaska in half for them. ANWR is one of the most desolate places on this planet. There are few people who could survive the environment there during the time the drilling and building can take place. The fact that NONE of those opposed (including that POS Tom Daschle) would take up the offer extended by our Congressional delegation to visit during the winter tells me all I need to know about the situation. Plus, I've been there (my former company had a contract to provide water and sewage to the native village of Kaktovik). I don't know why anyone would be against tapping American resources using our much improved technology and oversight. We are talking about putting a platform the size of a moderate Airport in an area about the same size as SOUTH CAROLINA (over 19,000,000 acres). It will create between 500,000-750,000 jobs downstream and be worth BILLIONS to our economy. The Caribou population of Prudhoe is currently FIVE times the size it was before drilling commenced - a whole 80 miles to the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 My biggest problem is the continued repeating of the same ridiculous and stupid arguments from people who couldn't find ANWR on a map if they cut Alaska in half for them. ANWR is one of the most desolate places on this planet. There are few people who could survive the environment there during the time the drilling and building can take place. The fact that NONE of those opposed (including that POS Tom Daschle) would take up the offer extended by our Congressional delegation to visit during the winter tells me all I need to know about the situation. Plus, I've been there (my former company had a contract to provide water and sewage to the native village of Kaktovik). I don't know why anyone would be against tapping American resources using our much improved technology and oversight. We are talking about putting a platform the size of a moderate Airport in an area about the same size as SOUTH CAROLINA (over 19,000,000 acres). It will create between 500,000-750,000 jobs downstream and be worth BILLIONS to our economy. The Caribou population of Prudhoe is currently FIVE times the size it was before drilling commenced - a whole 80 miles to the west. 112004[/snapback] But...but....the environment!!! Those poor caribou! The oil there would only last us three months!!! What would Greenepace do!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 What's the quality of the petroleum? Light sweet? Where would it go as far as processing and the market goes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry in KC Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, it's easy for you to say, Darin. You probably don't have caribou tracking oil on your living room carpet. It's a mess when that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 My biggest problem is the continued repeating of the same ridiculous and stupid arguments from people who couldn't find ANWR on a map if they cut Alaska in half for them. ANWR is one of the most desolate places on this planet. There are few people who could survive the environment there during the time the drilling and building can take place. The fact that NONE of those opposed (including that POS Tom Daschle) would take up the offer extended by our Congressional delegation to visit during the winter tells me all I need to know about the situation. Plus, I've been there (my former company had a contract to provide water and sewage to the native village of Kaktovik). I don't know why anyone would be against tapping American resources using our much improved technology and oversight. We are talking about putting a platform the size of a moderately sized Airport in an area about the same size as SOUTH CAROLINA (over 19,000,000 acres). It will create between 500,000-750,000 jobs downstream and be worth BILLIONS to our economy. The Caribou population of Prudhoe is currently FIVE times the size it was before drilling commenced - a whole 80 miles to the west. 112004[/snapback] Pardon my pragmatism...but as the last remaining source of in-ground oil reserves in the nation, wouldn't it make more sense to tap it when we really need it? I don't think tapping the country's last reserve - representing maybe six months of use - for the sake of short-term price breaks is necessarily a wise energy policy. Now, if we could reduce our dependency on oil, to the point where the ANWR reserves can supply need over a more reasonable length of time...then it might be a wise idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 My biggest problem is the continued repeating of the same ridiculous and stupid arguments from people who couldn't find ANWR on a map if they cut Alaska in half for them. 112004[/snapback] Maybe because they're looking for ANWAR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Pardon my pragmatism...but as the last remaining source of in-ground oil reserves in the nation, wouldn't it make more sense to tap it when we really need it? I don't think tapping the country's last reserve - representing maybe six months of use - for the sake of short-term price breaks is necessarily a wise energy policy. Now, if we could reduce our dependency on oil, to the point where the ANWR reserves can supply need over a more reasonable length of time...then it might be a wise idea... 112037[/snapback] Er, enlighten me. The Kerry campaign seemed to blame the Administration for high fuel costs (Increases in world-wide demand, Venezuela and so on were ignored, of course). Will oil rain from the skies? Too bad the Clinton Adm. put our western State's low-sulfur coal off-limits - the payoff to James Riady and his Lippo Group, which coincidentally owns vast amount of Indonesian low-sulfur coal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Pardon my pragmatism...but as the last remaining source of in-ground oil reserves in the nation, wouldn't it make more sense to tap it when we really need it? I don't think tapping the country's last reserve - representing maybe six months of use - for the sake of short-term price breaks is necessarily a wise energy policy. Now, if we could reduce our dependency on oil, to the point where the ANWR reserves can supply need over a more reasonable length of time...then it might be a wise idea... 112037[/snapback] The problem with that line of thinking is the undertaking to make it happen. We're talking somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 years if they start TODAY. As far as how much is actually available, that's a debatable point. The only people who really know for sure are the oil companies that did the testing - they ain't ever going to be completely honest (especially to the government). It also ignores the HUGE reserves of natural gas that will be available as well. That is going to be a spectacular boon for the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Pardon my pragmatism...but as the last remaining source of in-ground oil reserves in the nation, wouldn't it make more sense to tap it when we really need it? I don't think tapping the country's last reserve - representing maybe six months of use - for the sake of short-term price breaks is necessarily a wise energy policy. Now, if we could reduce our dependency on oil, to the point where the ANWR reserves can supply need over a more reasonable length of time...then it might be a wise idea... 112037[/snapback] You're both right, and that's why this issue is being discussed at this moment at all levels. Some analysts are estimating that we've hit an inflection point on supply of proven reserves, meaning that new oil exploration has hit its peak and we'll now start tapping into the proven reserves. Estimates have this at 70-100 years worth of supply. It may be shorter if the world industrializes at a faster pace than now. I'm guessing we have a 20 yr time frame to begin developing alternative fuels to wean our oil habit, but it won't be easy. Oil has been the driver of industrialized West for over 150 years. Would people be ok with raising gas taxes by $1.00/gal to fund new energy initiaties? What about the impact to the economy of that huge tax? How willing will people be to voluntarily alter their lifestyles to "pay" for the new energies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, we should try and stop that from happening, and keep our dependence on foreign oil... 111946[/snapback] We cant develop hydrogen cell technology for the masses soon enough. That will really reduce our dependance on oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Caribou Flight Suit Halliburton Nose Pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Caribou Flight Suit Halliburton Nose Pick 112096[/snapback] It's about the Caribou.* *Substituting caribou for children and said in my best William Jefferson Clinton voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 The problem with that line of thinking is the undertaking to make it happen. We're talking somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 years if they start TODAY. As far as how much is actually available, that's a debatable point. The only people who really know for sure are the oil companies that did the testing - they ain't ever going to be completely honest (especially to the government). It also ignores the HUGE reserves of natural gas that will be available as well. That is going to be a spectacular boon for the country. 112056[/snapback] 10 years may be a little late. The question is, When do you start? The answer is, not too late. So IMO, now would be a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Genie posts an article as flamebait and Im a tool. Whhhaaaaaatttttteeeeeeevvvvvveeeeerrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And what Darin said. Again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Yeah, it's easy for you to say, Darin. You probably don't have caribou tracking oil on your living room carpet. It's a mess when that happens. 112033[/snapback] No, but I do have three Dobermans. Almost the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidey Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Thanks for repeating the same ridiculous Liberal talking points. The caribou population in Prudhoe is significantly HIGHER than it was before it was drilled. Why, you ask? Because they have a place to stand behind when the goddamn wind is blowing 90+ miles an hour and the snow is hitting you like needles and because they can actually corner faster than the predators that eat them. The laws of Alaska prevent the building of ice roads until the temperatures are below -20 degrees F. Care to guess how many caribou are hanging around at these temperatures? How about how many plants are in full bloom? I suppose you think it's better to allow the Russians to drill in similiar environments and bring their oil to market instead? Surely they are just as environmentally concious as we are. One of my buddies helped them build the Trans-Siberian pipeline. Care to guess how many caribou are there? Answer: NONE. BECAUSE THE WORKERS KILLED THEM ALL SO THEY'D HAVE SOMETHING TO EAT. I guess it's much smarter to have oil traverse the most important ecosystem on the planet (the ocean) on foriegn flagged carriers, who are subject to international "law", than to move American oil through a pipeline and then to ships that are subject to AMERICAN scrutiny. Keep up the good work, lemming. 111966[/snapback] Darin you were doing good till the last point "ships that are subject to AMERICAN scrutiny. " What about the Exxon Valdez was that not a ship subject to American scrutiny? Iknow accidents happen but protecting the environment is what is important in the long run and I would like to see more money and research put into hydrogen fuel cells etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Darin you were doing good till the last point "ships that are subject to AMERICAN scrutiny. " What about the Exxon Valdez was that not a ship subject to American scrutiny? Iknow accidents happen but protecting the environment is what is important in the long run and I would like to see more money and research put into hydrogen fuel cells etc. 112220[/snapback] Liberals always try to use the exception to prove the rule. The Exxon Valdez was by far the worst oil spill in U.S. History (over 10,000,000 gallons). We also have FAR AND AWAY, the best spill response and environmental cleanup technology in the world BECAUSE OF IT. Below are examples of oil spills by other entities that are significantly more catastrophic. Nov. 10, 1988 Saint John's, Newfoundland : Odyssey spilled 43 million gallons of oil Jan. 23–27, 1991 southern Kuwait: during the Persian Gulf War, Iraq deliberately released 240–460 million gallons of crude oil into the Persian Gulf from tankers 10 mi off Kuwait. Spill had little military significance. On Jan. 27, U.S. warplanes bombed pipe systems to stop the flow of oil. April 11, 1991 Genoa, Italy: Haven spilled 42 million gallons of oil in Genoa port. May 28, 1991 Angola: ABT Summer exploded and leaked 15–78 million gallons of oil off the coast of Angola. It's not clear how much sank or burned. March 2, 1992 Fergana Valley, Uzbekistan: 88 million gallons of oil spilled from an oil well. March 24, Prince William Sound, Alaska: tanker Exxon Valdez hit an undersea reef and spilled 10 million plus gallons of oil into the waters, causing the worst oil spill in U.S. history. Dec. 19, off Las Palmas, the Canary Islands: explosion in Iranian supertanker, the Kharg-5, caused 19 million gallons of crude oil to spill into Atlantic Ocean about 400 mi north of Las Palmas, forming a 100-square-mile oil slick. Sept. 8, 1994 Russia: dam built to contain oil burst and spilled oil into Kolva River tributary. U.S. Energy Department estimated spill at 2 million barrels. Russian state-owned oil company claimed spill was only 102,000 barrels. (Example used to prove the difference between our country and the Soviets, as if that should be necessary). Nov. 13, 2002 Spain: Prestige suffered a damaged hull and was towed to sea and sank. Much of the 20 million gallons of oil remains underwater. The Exxon Valdez was not an accident. It was criminal negligence. Alternative technology is coming because the public is demanding it and is willing to pay for it. Toyota has proved that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Dont confuse him with facts Darin. Its ALWAYS America's fault for the bad things that go on in the world, didnt you know that? Sincerely the left Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VabeachBledsoefan Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Dont confuse him with facts Darin. Its ALWAYS America's fault for the bad things that go on in the world, didnt you know that?Sincerely the left 112327[/snapback] how about that cold fusion mumbo-jumbo??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 dilithium mines. We need more dilithium mines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Electric Mini-Cars, wont somebody PLEASE think of the Ed Begley-owned electric mini-cars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 All we need to solve the entire world's energy needs are two porcupines, an exercise wheel, and six tons of Raisin Bran... (If anyone knows this reference...I pity you.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts