Senate votes to open arctic refuge to oil drilling

[Sunstone]

This seems to be as close as the Bush Administration gets to having an energy policy.

[Druidus]

Saw, what do you mean "ice" under Alaska? Do you mean the permafrost? Cause other than that, Alaska does not rest on a bed of ice.

First of all, there are many environmental problems that this could introduce. More oil pollution, globally, more possibilities of oil contaminations, destructing one of the last great refuges of the wild, possibility of introducing pipelines that disturb all northern animals (Northern animals are highly nomadic), disrupting birthing of new generations of animals (especially in such a fragile ecosystem as the north) etc. There's no doubt that the damage is there. Saw, if you've never read about any oil drilling causing ecological damage, you'd better start reading more. You can't look at this situation purely from an economical point of view. This situation requires multiple perspectives of judgement.

Secondly, it is absurd to think that this is a good thing, if one has looked at all the evidence. There is simply not enough oil left to be of any continuous future benefit. We have thirty, forty, at most sixty, years left, before oil is no longer a resource affordable by the masses. Coal will be around longer, at around 200-220 years, but I don't think cars will be powered by coal, and if oil is no longer present, we'll run out of coal faster. We must start a search now, for as many possible alternative feul sources as we can find. We must put much, perhaps the majority, of our resources into advancing the technology behind them. The simple fact is, we don't have the time to waste anymore. This might have worked as a kid, when you would procrastinate the project until the night before the deadline, but right now, the odds are higher. We won't just fail a project, civilization could be destroyed. The teacher is nature, and she's one tough teacher. Oh yeah, and she's got a massive migraine, as well as going through her PMS, so she's pretty ******...

[michel]

This morning, before I had a chance to look through the posts on R.F, Marie showed me something she had received in the post - it was 'junk mail', from a company offering 'opportunities to invest in oil exploration'. Since the known resources are steadilly drying up, there is the need to explore in areas hitherto considered too uneconomical; therefore there is now need for more investment....etc etc.... These companies offer predicted returns to shareholders that are obviously vastly oversestimated - but, unfortunately, as ever there is a greedy world out there.

[Melody]

Oh hell....let's just strip mine the national parks while we're at it. After all, we won't be around to deal with the problems this causes. Let our kids deal with the fallout.

[Saw11_2000]

Originally Posted by Druidus

Saw, what do you mean "ice" under Alaska? Do you mean the permafrost? Cause other than that, Alaska does not rest on a bed of ice.

First of all, there are many environmental problems that this could introduce. More oil pollution, globally, more possibilities of oil contaminations, destructing one of the last great refuges of the wild, possibility of introducing pipelines that disturb all northern animals (Northern animals are highly nomadic), disrupting birthing of new generations of animals (especially in such a fragile ecosystem as the north) etc. There's no doubt that the damage is there. Saw, if you've never read about any oil drilling causing ecological damage, you'd better start reading more. You can't look at this situation purely from an economical point of view. This situation requires multiple perspectives of judgement.

Secondly, it is absurd to think that this is a good thing, if one has looked at all the evidence. There is simply not enough oil left to be of any continuous future benefit. We have thirty, forty, at most sixty, years left, before oil is no longer a resource affordable by the masses. Coal will be around longer, at around 200-220 years, but I don't think cars will be powered by coal, and if oil is no longer present, we'll run out of coal faster. We must start a search now, for as many possible alternative feul sources as we can find. We must put much, perhaps the majority, of our resources into advancing the technology behind them. The simple fact is, we don't have the time to waste anymore. This might have worked as a kid, when you would procrastinate the project until the night before the deadline, but right now, the odds are higher. We won't just fail a project, civilization could be destroyed. The teacher is nature, and she's one tough teacher. Oh yeah, and she's got a massive migraine, as well as going through her PMS, so she's pretty ******...

Yes, there is environmental problems with this, too. There is also environmental problems with the crap recycling facility they're building less than a mile from my house. Lots of things can potentially be environmentally damaging. I have heard about the pros and cons of drilling, and for now think that the pros outweigh the cons.

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?...tentId=2018380

[Green Gaia]

and for now think that the pros outweigh the cons

Perhaps.... we don't have to upset our way of life, for a few more years at least... but what about the long term? What's the pros and cons for that?

[Saw11_2000]

Long term?

Hydrogen or fuel cells will take over, and the plants will be deactivated and taken apart.
Hydrogen is an extremely clean fuel comparing to oil and gasoline.
Only problem is its flammability.

If you do live in Alaska, I do feel your pain. Hell, I wouldn't want one of those $#*(#es going up near my house! Most of my issue with it would come from just its unsightlyness, having this beautiful terrain destroyed by some giant metal thing would certainly aggrevate me, I wouldn't exactly worry about it for health reasons.

[Druidus]

Why do you assume that hydrogen cells will take over if we do nothing to advance the technology? The technology today is still in it's infancy, and it will never grow, unless we feed it.

[Saw11_2000]

NOt sure if I understand your post Trance.

[Saw11_2000]

Originally Posted by Druidus

Why do you assume that hydrogen cells will take over if we do nothing to advance the technology? The technology today is still in it's infancy, and it will never grow, unless we feed it.

When the demand is there, the technology will be there. As that link showed BP has hydrogen already available (something I did not even know).