Gas Prices
- Thread starter djv
- Start date
smurphy said:
Ease up turbo...Just because you drive a hybrid doesn't make you a greenie...so I'm not talking about YOU...rather I'm talking about Groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front, those that have torched hotels, office buildings, homes, SUV dealerships and research labs and threatened individuals and small businesspeople.
Those are the eco-whackos that I'm referring to.
Personally I am for drilling in ANWR. I have seen projections of reserves from both sides of fence and if truth is somewhere in the middle there is quite a lot of oil there. Also funny extremes from both sides is when they show the area that they expect to drill. The rebs show it as the white desolate area itis 8 months of year and dems show it a lush area abundant with wildlife the other 4 months.If I slant left on any issues it would be environment and abortion--but I think drilling here can be done with benefit to all. The majority of population there are for it simply because they have little means of revenue. Since most these oil companys have deep pockets let them bid on it and include perks for community in general there and huge bond they forfeit if they destroy any of inhabitat.
I have seen this done successfully in Ky with coal stip mining. Once the mining of area is complete the coal company has to not leave vast gashes in the earth like they once did but now in many areas have to rebuild area when they leave--turning these once ulgy excavations into beautiful lakes and recreational areas and wildlife preserves.
Maybe a compromise here would work in letting the rebs initiate the drilling with the dems contoling the environmental oversee.
Na --That would be too simple and partisan.
I have seen this done successfully in Ky with coal stip mining. Once the mining of area is complete the coal company has to not leave vast gashes in the earth like they once did but now in many areas have to rebuild area when they leave--turning these once ulgy excavations into beautiful lakes and recreational areas and wildlife preserves.
Maybe a compromise here would work in letting the rebs initiate the drilling with the dems contoling the environmental oversee.
Na --That would be too simple and partisan.
Alaska Oil Drilling Taps Into Political Fight
Sunday, March 13, 2005
KAKTOVIC, Alaska ? During winter, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a white and freezing expanse. In summer, it's green and spectacular. Regardless of the time of year, it's a piece of land at the center of a hot debate.
Five U.S. senators and two Cabinet secretaries flew to the top of the world recently to explore the impact and potential of oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, otherwise known as ANWR (search).
Some Alaskans rolled out the un-welcome mat. "We want you to go home. We don't want oil development," demonstrators told the officials upon their arrival.
But the protesters are actually a minority. Roughly three-out-of-four Alaskans and local natives in Kaktovic support the drilling, as do all of the Republicans who went on the tour. Democrats who planned to take part backed out because of pressure from their party's leadership, some on the trip said.
"I think you really have to see it for yourself to appreciate the vastness and to appreciate the technology and the land," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (search), R-Alaska.
Added Interior Secretary Gale Norton (search): "When you look at ANWR, in comparison to our resources elsewhere in the country, this is clearly the largest untapped sourced of oil based on what we know today."
ANWR contains between 5 and 16 billion barrels of oil, according to government figures. At peak production, it could yield more than 1 million barrels per day ? nearly as much as the United States imports from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela combined.
Eight months a year, ANRW's coastal plain is covered in ice. Thanks to "directional drilling," which can sink as many as 50 wells from a single 10-acre site, no platform will be anywhere near some spectacular mountains, proponents of the plan argue.
ANWR represents a small portion of Alaska and the oil exploration area is even smaller. Drilling pads total 2,000 acres, or less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the refuge.
Last Stand for Environment or First Step to Energy Independence?
Today, ANWR is as much a symbol as it is a place. To environmentalists, it is a last stand and the first step toward an alternative energy economy. To supporters, it is the most logical, sensible thing to do to reduce our dependence on unstable foreign countries.
The Gwich'in Indians, who live near the refuge, are concerned that drilling for ANWR's oil will hurt migrating caribou.
"We have always been caretakers of the porcupine caribou herd because they have always taken care of us and we take care of them," said Lucy Sweet of the Gwinch'in Indian Nation (search).
But experience suggests a different story. Since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay began pumping oil 30 years ago, the caribou herd there has grown from 3,000 to 36,000 animals.
"We need exploration development for our economy," said Richard Glenn, a Kaktovic resident. "We don't have forests, we don't have agriculture, we barely have tourism and so this is our only economy."
Party Divide Over ANWR Issue
Republicans prefer to see ANWR this time of year when it looks like flat, frozen tundra ? miserable for people but not bad for oil drilling. Democrats prefer summer, when the area becomes a magnet for wildlife.
"Oil drilling and wildlife ? they just don't go together," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (search), D-Calif., who has so far successfully led the fight to stop drilling there.
But supporters of ANWR drilling insist Alaska's natural beauty is safe.
"The risks are going to be minimal, if any, and America stands to gain enormously," said Republican Sen. Pete Dominici (search) of New Mexico.
But a new balance of power on Capitol Hill means the next vote on the issue may be different. Domenici says his party has the votes to push the legislation through.
"I think the prospects are pretty hopeful that we'll be able to get something passed in this session," added Sen. John Thune (search), R-S.D.
In the November elections, supporters of oil development gained four votes in the Senate, giving Republicans a two-vote edge ? 51 to 49, which is all that's needed as long as the ANWR measure is attached to a budget resolution. Sources told FOX News that two more Republican moderates may be willing to support ANWR; debate could come as early as next week.
From a historical perspective, it was Democratic President Jimmy Carter and a Democratic Congress who set aside more than 1 million acres of ANWR for oil exploration in 1980.
Sunday, March 13, 2005
KAKTOVIC, Alaska ? During winter, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a white and freezing expanse. In summer, it's green and spectacular. Regardless of the time of year, it's a piece of land at the center of a hot debate.
Five U.S. senators and two Cabinet secretaries flew to the top of the world recently to explore the impact and potential of oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, otherwise known as ANWR (search).
Some Alaskans rolled out the un-welcome mat. "We want you to go home. We don't want oil development," demonstrators told the officials upon their arrival.
But the protesters are actually a minority. Roughly three-out-of-four Alaskans and local natives in Kaktovic support the drilling, as do all of the Republicans who went on the tour. Democrats who planned to take part backed out because of pressure from their party's leadership, some on the trip said.
"I think you really have to see it for yourself to appreciate the vastness and to appreciate the technology and the land," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (search), R-Alaska.
Added Interior Secretary Gale Norton (search): "When you look at ANWR, in comparison to our resources elsewhere in the country, this is clearly the largest untapped sourced of oil based on what we know today."
ANWR contains between 5 and 16 billion barrels of oil, according to government figures. At peak production, it could yield more than 1 million barrels per day ? nearly as much as the United States imports from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela combined.
Eight months a year, ANRW's coastal plain is covered in ice. Thanks to "directional drilling," which can sink as many as 50 wells from a single 10-acre site, no platform will be anywhere near some spectacular mountains, proponents of the plan argue.
ANWR represents a small portion of Alaska and the oil exploration area is even smaller. Drilling pads total 2,000 acres, or less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the refuge.
Last Stand for Environment or First Step to Energy Independence?
Today, ANWR is as much a symbol as it is a place. To environmentalists, it is a last stand and the first step toward an alternative energy economy. To supporters, it is the most logical, sensible thing to do to reduce our dependence on unstable foreign countries.
The Gwich'in Indians, who live near the refuge, are concerned that drilling for ANWR's oil will hurt migrating caribou.
"We have always been caretakers of the porcupine caribou herd because they have always taken care of us and we take care of them," said Lucy Sweet of the Gwinch'in Indian Nation (search).
But experience suggests a different story. Since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay began pumping oil 30 years ago, the caribou herd there has grown from 3,000 to 36,000 animals.
"We need exploration development for our economy," said Richard Glenn, a Kaktovic resident. "We don't have forests, we don't have agriculture, we barely have tourism and so this is our only economy."
Party Divide Over ANWR Issue
Republicans prefer to see ANWR this time of year when it looks like flat, frozen tundra ? miserable for people but not bad for oil drilling. Democrats prefer summer, when the area becomes a magnet for wildlife.
"Oil drilling and wildlife ? they just don't go together," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (search), D-Calif., who has so far successfully led the fight to stop drilling there.
But supporters of ANWR drilling insist Alaska's natural beauty is safe.
"The risks are going to be minimal, if any, and America stands to gain enormously," said Republican Sen. Pete Dominici (search) of New Mexico.
But a new balance of power on Capitol Hill means the next vote on the issue may be different. Domenici says his party has the votes to push the legislation through.
"I think the prospects are pretty hopeful that we'll be able to get something passed in this session," added Sen. John Thune (search), R-S.D.
In the November elections, supporters of oil development gained four votes in the Senate, giving Republicans a two-vote edge ? 51 to 49, which is all that's needed as long as the ANWR measure is attached to a budget resolution. Sources told FOX News that two more Republican moderates may be willing to support ANWR; debate could come as early as next week.
From a historical perspective, it was Democratic President Jimmy Carter and a Democratic Congress who set aside more than 1 million acres of ANWR for oil exploration in 1980.
Congress and the Pres need to move on. Start with what you can get. You can come back to Alaska later. This we want our ball or were going home hurts all of us. Get started stop passing the buck.
You know DJV I understand how you get your position on this especially in light of your acknowlegement of your preference for CNN. I never view CNN often except on trips Madisonville once a week in hotel room where fox is not available.
Was viewing there yeterday at about 7:45 central time and they had about a 6 minute special on Anwar.They had interview with Dem Rep who was adamantly against it and no one to present other side of view.As he was speaking they went to pictorial of wildlife frolicking there no less than 4 times also showed the handful of Demonstrators against it twice.
At NO time did they show the frozen tundra it is over the majority of the year--NOT once when flashing the handful of protestors did they mention the fact 75% of locals supported it--Not once did they show small area involved.
Review Foxes report above. Durng it they had both side represented not just one.
I got same info on fox that CNN reported plus the other side--
Fox>We report you decide
CNN >We report what we want you to believe.
You can choose which side you believe in debates but you owe it to your self to know what they are.
Was viewing there yeterday at about 7:45 central time and they had about a 6 minute special on Anwar.They had interview with Dem Rep who was adamantly against it and no one to present other side of view.As he was speaking they went to pictorial of wildlife frolicking there no less than 4 times also showed the handful of Demonstrators against it twice.
At NO time did they show the frozen tundra it is over the majority of the year--NOT once when flashing the handful of protestors did they mention the fact 75% of locals supported it--Not once did they show small area involved.
Review Foxes report above. Durng it they had both side represented not just one.
I got same info on fox that CNN reported plus the other side--
Fox>We report you decide
CNN >We report what we want you to believe.
You can choose which side you believe in debates but you owe it to your self to know what they are.
smurphy I agree ... I love seeing the price of gas climb while I drive my 38 mpg Corolla and watch these assholes in their super-sized small-prick compensating trucks and SUVs suffer.
Oil SHOULD be expensive as it IS the only way to force conservation and alternative energy sources to be seriously developed.
Oil SHOULD be expensive as it IS the only way to force conservation and alternative energy sources to be seriously developed.
"Environmentalism as a refuge of socialists and communists".
How pathetically absurd.
THANK GOD that workers organized against unrestrained capitalism. Only a complete dumbass would believe we are not all better off for Clean Air and Water Acts and that we aren't better off without being bathed in lead paint and DDT.
You jerkoffs utterly amaze me. Sorry your penises are so tiny you require a huge Lincoln Navigator or Hummer to feel like men.
How pathetically absurd.
THANK GOD that workers organized against unrestrained capitalism. Only a complete dumbass would believe we are not all better off for Clean Air and Water Acts and that we aren't better off without being bathed in lead paint and DDT.
You jerkoffs utterly amaze me. Sorry your penises are so tiny you require a huge Lincoln Navigator or Hummer to feel like men.
FOR ALL OF YOU IDIOTS
FOR ALL OF YOU IDIOTS
BUSH has nothing to do with the gas prices.......do your homeowrk
FOR ALL OF YOU IDIOTS
BUSH has nothing to do with the gas prices.......do your homeowrk
some good threads
some good threads
ANWR
How gas prices work
My more crackpot or apocalyptic environmental freinds warn (dream?) of terrible crisis soon, due to Peak Oil (alway capitalized)---But even Washington Times has noticed this.
some good threads
ANWR
How gas prices work
My more crackpot or apocalyptic environmental freinds warn (dream?) of terrible crisis soon, due to Peak Oil (alway capitalized)---But even Washington Times has noticed this.
"If we had only stolen all that oil that the libs said we were going to do in Iraq, maybe our prices would be lower. Damn' W for not taking over the entire Iraqi oil supply for our personal use and to keep prices low. What was he thinking?"
Ferdville......we should have taken over the oil supply in Iraq after Gulf War I, when Papa Bush was president. If Saddam was so wrong for invading Kuwait and we were so justified in coming to Kuwait's aid, then war reparations should have been collected for our war expense into an illegal war started by Iraq and Saddam Hussein, period.
Instead we pushed the Iraqis back into Iraq, waved a finger at them and said "shame on you", then put out all the oil well fires and went home and took it up the a$$ financially. WOW!
As usual, help out the middle east and get a knife in the back as a reward.
The middle east oil producing countries don't need to supply thier own military force......just cry to big brother USA, they'll supply all the military that's needed. Then when they need more money, they just raise oil prices and give that knife in the back a little twist.
Ferdville......we should have taken over the oil supply in Iraq after Gulf War I, when Papa Bush was president. If Saddam was so wrong for invading Kuwait and we were so justified in coming to Kuwait's aid, then war reparations should have been collected for our war expense into an illegal war started by Iraq and Saddam Hussein, period.
Instead we pushed the Iraqis back into Iraq, waved a finger at them and said "shame on you", then put out all the oil well fires and went home and took it up the a$$ financially. WOW!
As usual, help out the middle east and get a knife in the back as a reward.
The middle east oil producing countries don't need to supply thier own military force......just cry to big brother USA, they'll supply all the military that's needed. Then when they need more money, they just raise oil prices and give that knife in the back a little twist.
I don't know what Alaska will save. Reports are 3 to 4 cents a gallon. We can get that today if action was taken by congress. All they have to do is stop putting oil in the national reserves. Those are for security and have about 600 million gallons in them already.
All I know when gas goes up 30 cents in less then 3 months someone is screwing some one. I guess we are that someone.
All I know when gas goes up 30 cents in less then 3 months someone is screwing some one. I guess we are that someone.
Alaska reserves will do little/nothing to the price but the oil needs to be harvested and there are ways to be good stewards with the environment...no need for some wacko to "protect" the tundra nor should we cater to communists under cover of militant environmentalism
the current problem lies in that refineries are at capacity and as the demand increases as summer approaches, prices will continue to escalate
the current problem lies in that refineries are at capacity and as the demand increases as summer approaches, prices will continue to escalate
ocelot said:
Obviously reading is a skill you don't possess :142slap:
:idea:
You and Smurph should get a room :142hump:
Yes, everyone who has ever agreed on any topic at any given time should have sex with each other. Hell, I've even agreed with Manson on some things. So much wonderful logic up in this hizzle fashizzle.IntenseOperator said:
I say we just drill everything. You know, because cheap oil will last foreve that wayr. If only the damn Left would get out of the way, we'd have endless cheap fuel flowing without end. Cheap refineries and get rid of the emission standards too. We could be as beautiful as role model cities like Mexico City if we just didn't have to worry about environmental standards.
