ANWR, Saved by 9/11?

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

PsYco, it is going to take more then 1 Square mile of land,

And what time of year did you come at?

First off twit, it is either assassin or sin.

Second, I visited twice, during June and December of 2000.

Third, I bet you being as ignorant as you are, havent even looked over the plan or heard about it in enough detail to get an educated opinion of it. It will take up approximately one square mile of area to drill.

[Typhy]

The supidity of some of these comments is really sad, it was declared as a Wildlife Refuge, Not an Oil Drilling Refuge. Basically, you can really damage the ecosystem there for a little oil, or you can actually think to the future, and realize that the supply of oil is going to run out, and work on other sources of power. The aditude of "This will get us some oil for a year", thats really bad. Think to the future, Overall, Oil for a year isn't that much, what you've really gotta think about is the fact that you've gotta get another sources, Not just strip the last out of this one by destroying really nice land.

[theN00b]

Even though I am not american I feel inclined to get in your buissness. I would like to first point out that 40% of our oil is ours. The largest expoter of oil to the US is Venuzuela Iraq and Saudi Arabia contribute very little, but they do contribute to Europe who are important trading partners Also the taxes you pay go to fund production of military arms used by the Isreali's to shoot palestinians. As for ANWR, hell if I care, I am a dirty russkie. As long as none of your pollutants go across the Bering Sea I am quite comftorble. But If I was a full American I would be against it. If you drill in ANWR where will it stop. Will they drill in Yosemite next?

[Typhy]

So basically the choices are:

1.) Give a little money to terrorists, and the middle eastern countries, and not dig into a Wildlife Refuge and kill lots of animals.

2.) Kill hundreds of animals, 'cause a big mess in ANWR and cross the line of what it's okay to dig into, if ANWR's not safe from oil drilling, then what is? And the only diffrence is our money will be going to big corperations, and also to the Isralies to buy weapons to overall make the situation worse by killing 100 inocent palistinians for every Terrorist that they kill.

[Brain]

excuse my blatant ignorance here, but what the fuck ever happened to texas?

[Typhy]

It was ruled unsafe for digging because of the stupidity of the people who live there.

[Typhy]

400 and welcome to it: Sorry if anyone took offence to my last post.

[Brain]

spam post!!!!
delete it!!!!

[Typhy]

Okay let's stear this back to ANWR, it's a good topic, and let's not have it locked, no more spamming here please. Sin, I am still waiting for your response.

[Bondo]

I'm chiming in a little late here but as a Geography and Environmental Science major and an Energy Science minor trust me on this.  ANWR was only going to provide a 6 month supply of oil AT BEST.  That means they'd screw up the environment at least a little for what would be a very small supply of oil.  It just isn't worth it so no, they shouldn't pursue it.  The way to cut down on our dependance of middle eastern oil isn't to find our own, it is to cut our need for oil by using ethanol and biodisel heavy fuels that are much cleaner and that we have plentiful access to.  We currently pay farmers not to grow crops or to destroy them when we could use all that production to create fuel for our cars.  And I'll tell you one thing, the farmers would be much better off as well.

[Typhy]

Very good points. I agree that even if it just screws up the enviornment a little, it's still not worth it. We should be pursuing other forms of fuel.

[Brain]

while i agree that that is what we should be doing, it will never happen becouse of the big oil lobbys that will prevent any real reform untill it is too late

[theN00b]

This is why we have a revolution in the people's name!!!

[Typhy]

*sigh*, yes Cossak.

[Ace]

So basically the choices are:

1.) Give a little money to terrorists, and the middle eastern countries, and not dig into a Wildlife Refuge and kill lots of animals.

2.) Kill hundreds of animals, 'cause a big mess in ANWR and cross the line of what it's okay to dig into, if ANWR's not safe from oil drilling, then what is? And the only diffrence is our money will be going to big corperations, and also to the Isralies to buy weapons to overall make the situation worse by killing 100 inocent palistinians for every Terrorist that they kill.

Typhy, think about what you just said. You are in favor of contributing money to terrorists who have attacked and killed INNOCENT AMERICAN CIVILIAN HUMANS because you do not want to hurt LITTLE TINY ANIMALS THAT ARE LOWER ON US ON THE FOOD CHAIN. Are you a vegetarian? Because if you are not, you are a goddamn hypocrite. We eat animals because we enjoy the taste, but you are against killing them for something that's got a more definitive impact than just our simple enjoyment. While we are on the subject of hypocrisy, I sure hope you don't drive a car yet argue against this.

BTW, how the fuck would having AMERICAN corporations in AMERICAN lands drilling for oil that would be used by AMERICANS in any way give money to Israel? That's about as ridiculous as saying Israel kills 100 Palestinian civilians for every 1 terrorist. While Israel has made a couple mistakes, they are only mistakes. They are trying to nail just the terrorists. The Palestinians on the other hand suicide bomb Israel civilians almost daily it seems.

[Typhy]

First off, Yes, I am a vegetarian. Also, I think that not giving money to terrorists in no excuse to dig into one of the last places in the U.S where animals controle it, not people.

[Bondo]

Well, I'm not a vegitarian and have no moral complaints against eating animals (they do it to each other so why not us), but I still think it is wrong to drill in Alaska...then again, I'm not for "giving money to the terrorists" either.  Like I said, there is a third option that doesn't kill animal or give money to terrorists, it is called renewable energy sources.  Any carbon product (meaning plants) can be made into fuel and put into cars in enough quantities that we could cut out Middle Eastern oil within a year.

[Brain]

i love how ace competly ignored bondo's perfectly viable answer to the problem. after all we have more than enough corn grown in this country to create a decent fuel supply. and have we all forgotten about the huge national oil reserve that the government has? if the bad guys decided to cut our oil supply, it wouldnt be instant death for the nation and there would more than likely be enough time to convert to more ethanol based fuels. would it hurt? more than likely. but it's not like the nation would grind to a halt

p.s. i'm sorry if this post is rambling and off topic a bit, but it's late and i'm tires so just dealwithit

[Ace]

First, Typhy, not giving money to terrorists is a damn fine excuse to do a lot of stuff, especially cutting down some damn trees. Why don't you go tell someone who lost a loved one in 9/11 that you would give your money to terrorism to keep your precious trees.

Second, Brain and Bondo, the problem with that is that switching from oil to another fuel source is not efficient enough as of yet. To my knowledge, there are no combustion engines capable of using such fuels while still retaining the power they would need for our automobiles. If this is the case sometime in the near future where it is a viable option, I guess it would be a good idea. I just better buy myself a big gas guzzling American V8 (Mustang or Vette preferably) before they are no more.

[Bondo]

No, cars can't run well on pure ethanol, but what I'm suggesting is that we go to a 50/50 mix of gas/ethanol rather than the 95/5 or so that it is now.  Cars could more than capably handle this.  Secondly we need to more actively get hybrids out which are about twice as efficient as a normal car.  Together these two things could quickly cut down our usage to a third (would be a quarter but the hybrids wouldn't be immediate like the ethanol would be).  That type of cut would be more than enough to not need oil from hostile nations.