| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Maaxx" |
| Date: |
17 Mar 2005 03:39:18 PM |
| Object: |
We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
If you've cruised the net over the last day or so, on the right or left, you
can't help but see ANWR, ANWR, ANWR everywhere. The 51-49 vote in the Senate
to open drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is causing Liberal
Democrats to gnash their teeth in grief and conservative Republicans to get
more excited than the kid in that Numa Numa Dance video.
We can learn a lot about the priorities of conservatives and liberals by
watching their reaction to ANWR.
Conservatives are happy because they believe we're about to start tapping
into a major, new domestic source of oil even if it will take years to get
the crude flowing out of the ground. That means new jobs for Americans who
handle the drilling and build the pipeline to Alaska. It also means that
we're going to acquire more of the substance that powers our economy without
having to pay out our money to less than friendly countries like Saudi
Arabia & Venezuela. Best of all, the oil is in the absolute middle of
nowhere, so we don't have to inconvenience anyone to drill ANWR. To the
right, developing ANWR is all upside, all positive, an idea that is so
fantastic that they can hardly understand how any rational person could
oppose it.
On the other hand, liberals are enraged that it looks like we may be
drilling ANWR. Part of that is because of their free floating hostility to
the oil industry, but their real beef is that ANWR is such a remote area.
Conservatives may consider that a feature, but to liberals it's a bug. The
very fact that it's a godforsaken region that almost no one visits makes it
so rare and valuable to them that it's worth leaving billions of dollars
worth of oil in the ground and forsaking tens of thousands of jobs just in
case someone wants to ever see what the boonies are like in the future. Oh,
and we mustn't forget, they claim that the pipelines, roads, oilmen and
people going back and forth might -- and I say might because this is heavily
disputed -- disturb the animals. The fact that you could make the exact same
argument about every populated area in North America seems lost on them.
Now you tell me: who's looking out for everyday Americans on this issue?
Conservatives who want more jobs & oil for their fellow countrymen or
liberals who are concerned about future back-packing trips for an
infinitesimal percentage of the population and maybe happier caribou and
polar bears, maybe not. That's not a tough call.
.
|
|
| User: "chrisv" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 11:14:46 AM |
|
|
"ANWR Oil Worker Ready to Roll" <Ready to drill ANWR@ Alaska .gov>
wrote:
Guess what
*plonk*
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:17:23 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:16:20 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
I recently read that scientists have figured out how to make plastic from
orange peels. That's a good start in the direction of weaning ourselves
from oil.
=========================
And when Florida has another freeze destroying all it's Orange crops , then
what ?
1. Florida isn't the only placein the US that grows citrus fruits.
2. Even the worst freeze doesn't kill off the trees. So you wait for
the next crop. Worst case, you salvage seeds from the ruined crop and
plant more trees.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ANWR Oil Worker Ready to Roll Ready to drill ANWR@ Alaska .gov" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:29:15 AM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:slvl31ddh885hqh65itgbg710u5olvc3oq@4ax.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:16:20 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
I recently read that scientists have figured out how to make plastic
from
orange peels. That's a good start in the direction of weaning ourselves
from oil.
=========================
And when Florida has another freeze destroying all it's Orange crops ,
then
what ?
1. Florida isn't the only placein the US that grows citrus fruits.
2. Even the worst freeze doesn't kill off the trees. So you wait for
the next crop. Worst case, you salvage seeds from the ruined crop and
plant more trees.
--
===============================
Yeah, and it takes 20 years for a seedling to mature into a good producing
Orange tree.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maaxx" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:41:49 AM |
|
|
"ANWR Oil Worker Ready to Roll" <Ready to drill ANWR@ Alaska .gov> wrote
in news:PsadnTKXfJFGnKbfRVn-ug@adelphia.com:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:slvl31ddh885hqh65itgbg710u5olvc3oq@4ax.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:16:20 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
I recently read that scientists have figured out how to make plastic
from orange peels. That's a good start in the direction of weaning
ourselves from oil.
And when Florida has another freeze destroying all it's Orange crops ,
then what ?
1. Florida isn't the only placein the US that grows citrus fruits.
2. Even the worst freeze doesn't kill off the trees. So you wait for
the next crop. Worst case, you salvage seeds from the ruined crop and
plant more trees.
Yeah, and it takes 20 years for a seedling to mature into a good
producing Orange tree.
That's why orange trees aren't propogated using seeds.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Anwar Sadat" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:58:33 AM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
1. Florida isn't the only placein the US that grows citrus fruits.
2. Even the worst freeze doesn't kill off the trees. So you wait for
the next crop. Worst case, you salvage seeds from the ruined crop and
plant more trees.
Then one day a big rain came and washed all the crops away
I told mama I was gonna quit school.
But she said that was daddy's strictest rule.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Dykes" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 07:43:28 AM |
|
|
In article <423ad7d5$0$13896$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net>,
Maaxx <maaxx@xrs.net> wrote:
"soup" <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote in
news:W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said:
we should keep our own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
Or develop an alternative fuel that could realisticly replace petroleum
and finally kick OPEC and the ragheads to the curb.
I recently read that scientists have figured out how to make plastic from
orange peels. That's a good start in the direction of weaning ourselves
from oil.
based on the last oranges I bought, I think they've figured
out how to make oranges _from_ plastic.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
19 Mar 2005 07:40:26 AM |
|
|
Maaxx wrote:
"soup" <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote in
news:W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said:
we should keep our own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
Or develop an alternative fuel that could realisticly replace petroleum
and finally kick OPEC and the ragheads to the curb.
I recently read that scientists have figured out how to make plastic from
orange peels. That's a good start in the direction of weaning ourselves
from oil.
Hemp for victory !!
http://www.hempplastic.com/newSite/index.htm
http://www.vianet.net.au/~croft/page7.html
http://www.ukcia.org/industrial/default.html
Ever wonder why the Oil-industry hates Hemp with such a vengeance ?
'Cos we don't need them.
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
19 Mar 2005 07:55:17 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:40:26 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Hemp for victory !!
My cataract-plagued eyes read that first as "hump for victory"!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liam Slider" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
19 Mar 2005 09:27:01 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:40:26 +0000, Jez wrote:
Ever wonder why the Oil-industry hates Hemp with such a vengeance ?
'Cos we don't need them.
Hell, the growing of hemp was made illegal in the first place due to wood
pulp paper industry....and the clever use of corporate propaganda
(produced by fundamentalists, but funded entirely by corporate
interests, the film "Tell your Children" AKA "Reefer Madness" (the
original, not the new tongue in cheek remake) which sparked a marijuana
panic which enabled the industry to slip all hemp in the legislation
banning it). Hemp can be used to very cheaply produce paper (in fact, the
Declaration of Independence was written on hemp paper) you see, which was
a serious threat to the timber and wood pulp industries.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
19 Mar 2005 10:00:35 AM |
|
|
Liam Slider wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:40:26 +0000, Jez wrote:
Ever wonder why the Oil-industry hates Hemp with such a vengeance ?
'Cos we don't need them.
Hell, the growing of hemp was made illegal in the first place due to wood
pulp paper industry....and the clever use of corporate propaganda
(produced by fundamentalists, but funded entirely by corporate
interests, the film "Tell your Children" AKA "Reefer Madness" (the
original, not the new tongue in cheek remake) which sparked a marijuana
panic which enabled the industry to slip all hemp in the legislation
banning it). Hemp can be used to very cheaply produce paper (in fact, the
Declaration of Independence was written on hemp paper) you see, which was
a serious threat to the timber and wood pulp industries.
Good to see someone know his history !!!
http://www.ezklean.com/hemp-trivia.htm
http://www.jackherer.com/chapters.html
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Dykes" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 06:55:21 AM |
|
|
In article <W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
soup <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said
we should keep our
own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
--
yours S
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
Why don't we have a conservation and alternative energy plan ?
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Arkansas Hillary Billarys" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:15:30 AM |
|
|
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1ej3p$qnr$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
soup <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said
we should keep our
own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
--
yours S
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
=========================
What a fucking flawd argument. We are gaing new technology every year to
further extract oil from the ground that was un raeachable before. 10 year
from now we will have even more abilities to suck oil from the ground that
was not possible now. AnWR is NOT 7 months of US oil consumption because we
do NOT use only 1 location for oil demand. ANWR could be 20 years of oil
or more just like Prudhoe Bay has been almost 30 Years of Oil so far
numbnutts.
Lets just cap off every well in the US now because any given well produces
such miniscule ammmounts of oil based on annual consumption.
Using that imbecilic Liberal logic, we would NEVER have any oil wells
then.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:29:26 AM |
|
|
In article <Rf-dnT2qxOMMbaffRVn-sg@adelphia.com>,
"Arkansas Hillary Billarys" <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1ej3p$qnr$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
soup <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said
we should keep our
own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
--
yours S
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
=========================
What a fucking flawd argument. We are gaing new technology every year to
further extract oil from the ground that was un raeachable before. 10 year
from now we will have even more abilities to suck oil from the ground
that
was not possible now.
Sure, and it's more expensive than the oil we get now from the Middle East.
Talk about your oil prices going up.
AnWR is NOT 7 months of US oil consumption because we
do NOT use only 1 location for oil demand. ANWR could be 20 years of oil
or more just like Prudhoe Bay has been almost 30 Years of Oil so far
numbnutts.
Lets just cap off every well in the US now because any given well produces
such miniscule ammmounts of oil based on annual consumption.
Using that imbecilic Liberal logic, we would NEVER have any oil wells
then.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maaxx" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:41:44 AM |
|
|
(Al Dykes) wrote in news:d1ej3p$qnr$1@panix5.panix.com:
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
ANWR has about 10e9 bbl of oil (low estimate). They will likely pump it
out at a rate of about 1e6 bbl per day. That means about 27 years worth of
oil. If they step it up and do 1.5e6 bbl/d you'd still have about 18 years
worth.
The 7 months figure is misleading and derived by dividing the estimated
reserve in ANWR by total world production (82e6 bbl/d). That gives you
only a couple of months worth (however less than 6 by my calculations). So
if you could pump 82e6 bbl/d from ANWR and if all other oil fields
suddenly stop producing, then ANWR would last less than 6 months. In other
words, that 7 months figure is *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:40:43 AM |
|
|
In article <423b04c8$0$13881$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net>,
Maaxx <maaxx@xrs.net> wrote:
adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote in news:d1ej3p$qnr$1@panix5.panix.com:
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
ANWR has about 10e9 bbl of oil (low estimate). They will likely pump it
out at a rate of about 1e6 bbl per day. That means about 27 years worth of
oil. If they step it up and do 1.5e6 bbl/d you'd still have about 18 years
worth.
Wrong. From USGS:
"The estimates of the technically-recoverable oil (i.e. ignoring the market
price) in the 1002 area are as follows: There is a 95% probability of being
able to technically recover 4.254 billion barrels of oil, and a 5%
probability of recovering 11.8 billion barrels of oil. The mean expected
estimate is of being able to technically recover 7.7 billion barrels of
oil. Using the graph on the right we see that at an oil price of below
$13/barrel no oil is commercially recoverable, while at an oil price of
$30/barrel the 95% probability estimate is 3.2 billion barrels of oil, the
5% probability is 10.4 billion barrels of oil, and the mean expected
estimate is 6.4 billion barrels of oil."
The 7 months figure is misleading and derived by dividing the estimated
reserve in ANWR by total world production (82e6 bbl/d).
No, the US consumption.
That gives you
only a couple of months worth (however less than 6 by my calculations). So
if you could pump 82e6 bbl/d from ANWR and if all other oil fields
suddenly stop producing, then ANWR would last less than 6 months. In other
words, that 7 months figure is *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ANWR Oil Worker Ready : Lets Roll Ready to drill ANWR@ Alaska .gov" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:05:53 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:d1feah$gec$24@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <423b04c8$0$13881$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net>,
Maaxx <maaxx@xrs.net> wrote:
adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote in news:d1ej3p$qnr$1@panix5.panix.com:
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
ANWR has about 10e9 bbl of oil (low estimate). They will likely pump it
out at a rate of about 1e6 bbl per day. That means about 27 years worth
of
oil. If they step it up and do 1.5e6 bbl/d you'd still have about 18
years
worth.
Wrong. From USGS:
"The estimates of the technically-recoverable oil (i.e. ignoring the
market
price) in the 1002 area are as follows: There is a 95% probability of
being
able to technically recover 4.254 billion barrels of oil, and a 5%
probability of recovering 11.8 billion barrels of oil. The mean expected
estimate is of being able to technically recover 7.7 billion barrels of
oil. Using the graph on the right we see that at an oil price of below
$13/barrel no oil is commercially recoverable, while at an oil price of
$30/barrel the 95% probability estimate is 3.2 billion barrels of oil, the
5% probability is 10.4 billion barrels of oil, and the mean expected
estimate is 6.4 billion barrels of oil."
The 7 months figure is misleading and derived by dividing the estimated
reserve in ANWR by total world production (82e6 bbl/d).
No, the US consumption.
============================
I remember in the 70's radlibs telling us the Alaska pipeline would be
worthless as not much oil could be drilled up in that frozen wasteland.
30 yesr later we are still pumping oil from it and now radlibs have
started the same mantra over ANWR.
they will be proven wrong again.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde That he not busy being" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 02:08:42 PM |
|
|
Al Dykes wrote:
In article <W8A_d.130$Ab.113@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
soup <1@slartibartfarst.com> wrote:
JEDIDIAH popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said
we should keep our
own oil and let everyone else use theirs up.
Nah keep your oil AND use up everyone elses.
Then when you are the only ones left with any oil
charge as much as you want for it.
--
yours S
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione
We don't have enough oil to be self-sufficient. The rest of the world
will be illuminated and warm when we are freezing in the dark.
ANWR is _7 months_ oil for the US. What do we do when that's the last
oil we have ?
You have no idea how much oil is in ANWR. It doesn't have to supply all
our needs. It only has to supply some of them to reduce our dependence
on imported oil.
Why don't we have a conservation and alternative energy plan ?
Conservation is not a long term solution. Nuclear energy is available
whenever we choose to get with the programme.
--
Personal accounts are good because they lessen the liability against
future taxes of the retiree while sequestering the funds he's been
paying in so they cannot be used to mask current general fund deficits.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BlackWater" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 04:53:43 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:39:18 -0500, Maaxx <maaxx@xrs.net> wrote:
If you've cruised the net over the last day or so, on the right or left, you
can't help but see ANWR, ANWR, ANWR everywhere. The 51-49 vote in the Senate
to open drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is causing Liberal
Democrats to gnash their teeth in grief and conservative Republicans to get
more excited than the kid in that Numa Numa Dance video.
We can learn a lot about the priorities of conservatives and liberals by
watching their reaction to ANWR.
Conservatives are happy because they believe we're about to start tapping
into a major, new domestic source of oil even if it will take years to get
the crude flowing out of the ground. That means new jobs for Americans who
handle the drilling and build the pipeline to Alaska. It also means that
we're going to acquire more of the substance that powers our economy without
having to pay out our money to less than friendly countries like Saudi
Arabia & Venezuela. Best of all, the oil is in the absolute middle of
nowhere, so we don't have to inconvenience anyone to drill ANWR. To the
right, developing ANWR is all upside, all positive, an idea that is so
fantastic that they can hardly understand how any rational person could
oppose it.
On the other hand, liberals are enraged that it looks like we may be
drilling ANWR. Part of that is because of their free floating hostility to
the oil industry, but their real beef is that ANWR is such a remote area.
Conservatives may consider that a feature, but to liberals it's a bug. The
very fact that it's a godforsaken region that almost no one visits makes it
so rare and valuable to them that it's worth leaving billions of dollars
worth of oil in the ground and forsaking tens of thousands of jobs just in
case someone wants to ever see what the boonies are like in the future. Oh,
and we mustn't forget, they claim that the pipelines, roads, oilmen and
people going back and forth might -- and I say might because this is heavily
disputed -- disturb the animals. The fact that you could make the exact same
argument about every populated area in North America seems lost on them.
Now you tell me: who's looking out for everyday Americans on this issue?
Conservatives who want more jobs & oil for their fellow countrymen or
liberals who are concerned about future back-packing trips for an
infinitesimal percentage of the population and maybe happier caribou and
polar bears, maybe not. That's not a tough call.
Well ... you might call the GOP position 'short-sighted' and
the leftie position 'far-sighted' too. Immediate gratification
of material wants - even if the gratification is guarenteed to
be rather short-term - isn't the most "grown up" position in
the known universe. If said gratification involves destroying
something kinda grand that can't be replaced, it's even more
childish and selfish.
On the other hand, the libbies have never proven why a decent
oil-extraction operation in the ANWR is gonna 'destroy' it to
any noteworthy degree. I doubt the widdle furry animals will
even take much notice of a wellhead, pipeline or truck convoy
and spilt oil is WASTED MONEY - so I doubt much is gonna get
spilt. Their elevation of the ANWR to some kind of holy ground,
mostly to spite the business sector, even if it screws-over a
lot of people, is childish and selfish as well.
So, IMHO, go ahead and suck out the oil - but do it *right* so
there isn't a big mess afterwards. Once the oil is gone, the
things of man will rapidly disappear and all will be frozen
tundra once again ... well, until 'global warming' makes it
a prime spot for a condo & golf development :-)
Clearly the libbies aren't in a political position to prevent
the oil extraction. However, they likely ARE in a position to
force the "do it RIGHT" aspect - as they'd surely get a number
of Republicans on their side on that issue. Thus, BOTH sides
will get SOME of what they want - and the rest of us will
get our gasoline AND retain a nice wildlife refuge too.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ray" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 04:09:47 PM |
|
|
You're correct that it will take several years before any oil flows. IMHO
the biggest thing it does is send a message to OPEC that we're getting
serious about the issue of oil prices/dependency.
BTW - this relates to Linux how??
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Dykes" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 04:18:42 PM |
|
|
In article <pan.2005.03.17.22.09.45.454529@zianet.com>,
ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
You're correct that it will take several years before any oil flows. IMHO
the biggest thing it does is send a message to OPEC that we're getting
serious about the issue of oil prices/dependency.
BTW - this relates to Linux how??
Not implementing conservation tells OPEC that we will pay them top
dollar for every gallon of oil they can pump. We will suck them dry.
ANWR's total capacity is 7 months to a year'w worth of US oil and such
a small, expensive project that the oil companies would rather invest
elsewhere with a quicker, higher return on their money.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Arkansas Hillary Billarys" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 05:02:49 PM |
|
|
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1cvo2$btd$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <pan.2005.03.17.22.09.45.454529@zianet.com>,
ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
You're correct that it will take several years before any oil flows. IMHO
the biggest thing it does is send a message to OPEC that we're getting
serious about the issue of oil prices/dependency.
BTW - this relates to Linux how??
Not implementing conservation tells OPEC that we will pay them top
dollar for every gallon of oil they can pump. We will suck them dry.
ANWR's total capacity is 7 months to a year'w worth of US oil and such
a small, expensive project that the oil companies would rather invest
elsewhere with a quicker, higher return on their money.
=======================
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
But Wednesday's vote represents a breakthrough for the oil industry, which
has been trying since 1987 to gain access to the refuge's coastal plain, in
the northeastern corner of Alaska. It is the first time that the Senate, the
House and the president agree on the proposal.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050317/1a_lede17.art.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "chrisv" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:48:50 AM |
|
|
Arkansas Hillary Billarys wrote:
(snip)
*plonk*
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 05:38:11 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Arkansas Hillary Billarys" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 06:11:28 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now isn't
it?
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry ,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:16:02 AM |
|
|
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
"Arkansas Hillary Billarys" <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe
Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now isn't
it?
No. Oil is sold on the global scale.
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry
,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
A nation that consumes 25% of the world's oil and has 5% of the world's oil
supply cannot drill itself to self-suffiencency.
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ANWR Oil Worker Ready : Lets Roll Ready to drill ANWR@ Alaska .gov" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 10:10:48 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:d1fcs8$gec$9@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
"Arkansas Hillary Billarys" <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe
Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles
there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now
isn't
it?
No. Oil is sold on the global scale.
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry
,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil
demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
A nation that consumes 25% of the world's oil and has 5% of the world's
oil
supply cannot drill itself to self-suffiencency.
===========================
No one ever made that claim . Becoming less dependent was the only point
made. But then outcomes based education liberalsdo not have the best
reading comprehension skills.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Dykes" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 06:20:24 PM |
|
|
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
Arkansas Hillary Billarys <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now isn't
it?
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry ,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
It's a year's oil. It will take 7 years to pump it. It will
take years for any of it to get south of the Arctic Circle.
Why don't we have national conservation goals and standards ?
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Arkansas Hillary Billarys" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 08:54:45 PM |
|
|
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1d6s8$hv7$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
Arkansas Hillary Billarys <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe
Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles
there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now
isn't
it?
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry
,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil
demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
It's a year's oil. It will take 7 years to pump it. It will
take years for any of it to get south of the Arctic Circle.
Why don't we have national conservation goals and standards ?
=====================
So, it took 3 years to build teh Prudhoe Bay pipeline to valdez, and 30
yeasr later we are getting oil from it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
18 Mar 2005 09:19:05 AM |
|
|
In article <dbadnSciaexo36ffRVn-jg@adelphia.com>,
"Arkansas Hillary Billarys" <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1d6s8$hv7$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
Arkansas Hillary Billarys <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting
to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already
have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is
"next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between
them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe
Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles
there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now
isn't
it?
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell
Harry
,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil
demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
It's a year's oil. It will take 7 years to pump it. It will
take years for any of it to get south of the Arctic Circle.
Why don't we have national conservation goals and standards ?
=====================
So, it took 3 years to build teh Prudhoe Bay pipeline to valdez, and 30
yeasr later we are getting oil from it.
Do you have any idea how much?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Dykes" |
|
| Title: Re: We Can Learn A Lot From Where People Stand On ANWR |
17 Mar 2005 09:42:33 PM |
|
|
In article <dbadnSciaexo36ffRVn-jg@adelphia.com>,
Arkansas Hillary Billarys <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d1d6s8$hv7$1@panix5.panix.com...
In article <R5qdna8dptosgaffRVn-1Q@adelphia.com>,
Arkansas Hillary Billarys <Clintons@trailertrash.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:t25k31dh7vknqjiee0v0mrsnpdmkialq1d@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:02:49 -0500, "Arkansas Hillary Billarys"
<Clintons@trailertrash.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
It is bad enough you radlibs spew BS, but when you lie about Oil
companies
then is just shows your desperation. Oil Companies have ben wanting to
drill
there for 17 years. It is next door to Prudhoe Bay and we already have
infrastructure there to pipe it down south.
Wow. Someone with no clue about Alaska. Let me enlighten you.
The ANWR is "next door" to Prudhoe Bay in the way Little Rock is "next
door" to Miami, Florida. There is several hundred miles between them.
================
Wow , what an obsticle. Gee 800 miles of pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez took 3 years to build. 300 miles of pipe from ANWR to Prudhoe
Bay
should take about 16 Months and we already have the other 800 miles
there
to pump it down to Valdez
Piece of cake.
The Pipeline doesn't even come close to the targeted area.. another
miss of several hundred miles.
And all this doesn't address the fact that even the oil companies
admit there is at *most* about seven years worth of recoverable oil
there.
-- ===========================
Thats 7 more years of oil we don't have to but from thje Arabs now
isn't
it?
Lets point at any given oil well in the US now and say " well hell Harry
,
that there well only recovers about 3 weeks of annual US Oil
demand
so we may as well cap the worthless thing off now should't we?"
It's a year's oil. It will take 7 years to pump it. It will
take years for any of it to get south of the Arctic Circle.
Why don't we have national conservation goals and standards ?
=====================
So, it took 3 years to build teh Prudhoe Bay pipeline to valdez, and 30
yeasr later we are getting oil from it.
And your point is ?
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
