Anwr

[Arc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insanity Er, drive cars that get as good a gas mileage as the cars they drive in Europe? Take public transit more often? If we tap our resources in the short term and while failing to do these things that's exactly what those resources will be: short term resources.

Don't know that I totally disagree - though I'm very comfortable letting the market drive such changes - and very uncomfortable with government dictating them.

[packrat44]

I have my gas cap off and am waiting to fill the tank. Start the drilling.

[Notmuchlonger]

I propose we use Flinstone cars. We cure obesity and oil dependency in one swipe. I know I know how will I fend off the noble peace prize offers. But for the good of mankind I deliver.

[Arc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notmuchlonger I propose we use Flinstone cars. We cure obesity and oil dependency in one swipe. I know I know how will I fend off the noble peace prize offers. But for the good of mankind I deliver.

I'll volunteer to go the horse route. Think of all the jobs I'd create in my wake.

But then again the vapors from billions of piles of manure would undoubtedly put the planet in some kind of jeopardy.

[Caroline]

I don't see the point of risking a unique land and ecology to put a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.

Easy oil is running out, we're fighting wars for the little that is left, and we need an alternative for political, economic, and myriad other reasons.

New drilling in Alaska, or anywhere else for that matter, lines the pockets of the big corporations (currently enjoying obscene profits while we pay nearly $4 at the pump to fill our gas guzzlers), adds to our polluted environment, and merely delays the inevitable.

It's been a great ride, but it's time to take our medicine. Who knows, we might even like it: Germany shines a beam on the future of energy / Nation gambles on amped-up push for renewable power

[mickeyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinaco If we drill for oil, the money should go to shore up SS or Medicare. .

This is a joke, right?

[Independent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arc Yes - If we don't tap our resources in the short term - how will we ever reduce reliance on Mid East. Who decided that we can't do anything until we find an area that can meet the entire need? Doesn't every little bit help?

In this case, this little bit could hurt. The problem is that we keep denying that we have a long term problem. Drilling in ANWR could be a political excuse to keep doing stupid things instead of facing the real issues.

[Arc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Independent In this case, this little bit could hurt. The problem is that we keep denying that we have a long term problem. Drilling in ANWR could be a political excuse to keep doing stupid things instead of facing the real issues.

Why would it hurt in this case?

[Bestwifeever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notmuchlonger I propose we use Flinstone cars. We cure obesity and oil dependency in one swipe. I know I know how will I fend off the noble peace prize offers. But for the good of mankind I deliver.

And think of the money we would save on shoes since bare feet work best for those cars--an added bonus!

Please never change your "Incoming" avatar, by the way--no matter how many times I see it, it makes me laugh.

[toofrugalformycat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mickeyd Alaska is a beautiful state with millions of unspoiled acres of natural beauty. Millions of lakes, hundreds of thousands of glaciers and mountains, both named and unnamed, are a thing of beauty to observe. In the attached map of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, only a bit over 3 square miles of land (tiny red box) is proposed for oil drilling.

The other side of the story - I've been told that the three square miles (if that is indeed the number) is not in one place - it is multiple drilling platforms connected by roads. Picture a spider web of roads covering a huge area, with lots of tiny tiny red boxes, instead of one tiny red box in one place. So the tiny red box is misleading.
If you've ever seen arctic tundra you know how fragile it is. The damage will be there for hundreds if not thousands of years.
And all this for maybe one year's worth of oil, minus the oil consumed to drill and deliver it, plus all the spills that go with drilling and shipping.

[Khan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toofrugalformycat The other side of the story - I've been told that the three square miles (if that is indeed the number) is not in one place - it is multiple drilling platforms connected by roads. Picture a spider web of roads covering a huge area, with lots of tiny tiny red boxes, instead of one tiny red box in one place. So the tiny red box is misleading. If you've ever seen arctic tundra you know how fragile it is. The damage will be there for hundreds if not thousands of years. And all this for maybe one year's worth of oil, minus the oil consumed to drill and deliver it, plus all the spills that go with drilling and shipping.

If it takes .9 barrels of oil to extract and process 1.0 barrels, is it worth the effort?

[Insanity]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arc Why would it hurt in this case?

Sorry kids. We used the last of the ANWR reserve so we could continue to drive our SUVs. By the way, could you please call your state representative and tell him to vote YES on the heating oil subsidies for seniors bill?

'Nuff said?

[Razor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khan If it takes .9 barrels of oil to extract and process 1.0 barrels, is it worth the effort?

Of course it is. Now if it took a barrel of ethanol to make a barrel of ethanol, it wouldn't work.

[Independent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arc Why would it hurt in this case?

I thought I included my reasoning: "Drilling in ANWR could be a political excuse to keep doing stupid things instead of facing the real issues."

I could use more words: Our problem with oil is that we don't have the political will to deal with the facts. (1) Most of the easy-to-get oil is in countries with unfriendly and/or dysfunctional governments. That generates geopolitical costs (e.g. war in Iraq) that we don't include in the cost of oil. (2) Any replacement for oil is going to require more human labor than drilling a hole in the ground, and therefore will be more expensive.

Both voters and politicians don't want to face up to either of these. We've had 30 years to get ready for the current spike in oil prices. We've been expecting the free lunch, and somehow haven't found it.

I think that ANWR is just one more red herring that distracts us from the real issues.

[kaudrey]

Estimated retrievable oil in the ANWR: 6-16 billion barrels
Annual US consumption: 7 billion barrels

Is it worth it?

DD

----

I'm with DD, Khan, and Caroline on this one. Not enough oil to risk ruining one of the few untouched places left.

[Razor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaudrey Estimated retrievable oil in the ANWR: 6-16 billion barrels Annual US consumption: 7 billion barrels Is it worth it? DD ---- I'm with DD, Khan, and Caroline on this one. Not enough oil to risk ruining one of the few untouched places left.

Two years worth of oil. Better to keep it in reserve for a rainy day.

[Rustic23]

Was it worth it to drill in Texas? Was it worth it to drill in the Gulf? Was it worth it to drill in Alaska? Was it worth it to drill in Colorado, Oklahoma, Louisiana, California.....? How about the Middle East, South America, or Asia?

Do you know it is .9 barrels per barrel recovered? Or is this just troll fodder.

[Caroline]

Quote:

Was it worth it to drill in Texas? Was it worth it to drill in the Gulf? Was it worth it to drill in Alaska? Was it worth it to drill in Colorado, Oklahoma, Louisiana, California.....? How about the Middle East, South America, or Asia?

I think this is comparing apples and oranges. Alaska -- heck no. Texas -- why the heck not? A lot depends on who / what you're destroying to get what you want.

[Rustic23]

Caroline,
You have no icompassion for the chiggers that gave their life so you could drive you behemoth?

[Khan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustic23 Was it worth it to drill in Texas? Was it worth it to drill in the Gulf? Was it worth it to drill in Alaska? Was it worth it to drill in Colorado, Oklahoma, Louisiana, California.....? How about the Middle East, South America, or Asia? Do you know it is .9 barrels per barrel recovered? Or is this just troll fodder.

".9 barrels per barrel recovered" is not the present or the immediate future. However, the amount of input required per unit of output keeps increasing. I was wondering at what point would it no longer be worth the effort.