McCain
Obama
Vishnu
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Sorry, inferior mouthfeel.
Best ice cream ever is from the University of Wisconsin's Agriculture School (Dairy division), sold in the student union hall in Madison.
Supposedly, the U. of Pennsylvania's is equally as good but I can't confirm this.
If I lived in Madison I'd be a bleedin blimp in no time.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Okay, in order:
The 700K number comes from a 1997 study commissioned in response to the original decision to remove ANWR from consideration for drilling.
Currently ANWR.org estimates job generation could/would fall anywhere between 250K and 735K.
Check here, if you like:
http://www.anwr.org/topten.htm
Never mind "dumping" a fraction of those people into a wildlife refuge - dump twice that many, and they'd still be lost in an area that size.
700K divided by 3K = 230-odd people per acre.
Not many at all, considering it as an industrial site.
Besides which, what "adverse" effect do you refer to, and, on top of that, who are you (or Uncle Sam, for that matter) to tell Alaskan citizens they can't do something that is good for them and the rest of our country?
Really, now - what's it to you, as long as it's done right?
As to precisely what type of oil is under ANWR, I'm sure some forecasting can be done, but again, if whatever-it-is roughly fits the definition of "oil", it will be of benefit, even ignoring the boon of jobs.
Gasoline isn't the only consideration; we have tons of other uses for petroleum, as you know.
As to this...
-"The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.
...I would ask, if you claim it cannot even be known what type of crude you will find, how can this info be treated as gospel?
Bottom line:
We know there's a shitload of oil, but we cannot know anything else to any degree of precision, apart from the fact it will have a beneficial effect on prices, and we have no further to look for evidence of that than the reaction (price-wise) to Bush's statement urging more drilling, and that's a fact.
As to the rest, China and India aside, I daresay even the Canadians might be offended at being equated with Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and the like.
The more we do for ourselves, the less we'll need done by others - fact.
I'd also like an answer to this question:
What is the point, even if we are running short of oil, and need to develop alternatives, of leaving a single drop of it in the ground?
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Why ask me?
Ask the oil companies.
Currently, less than a quarter of the 40 million acres of land that they already lease is under development.
Why is that?
Bush/Cheney have already overridden environmental protections, loosened licensing procedures and provided tax incentives - effectively given the land away (the average cost to the oil companies is approximately $3 per year per acre for these leases) and what have they done with it?
Absolutely nothing.
You want to drill for every last drop...fine, let's start with land that oil companies already control- land that's within the continental US (lower transportation cost) and far less challenging climate-wise.
Edit:
In addition...
You do realize that there is absolutely no prohibition against exporting oil from any of the US sites?
Given that all our refineries are privately owned by multinational corporations whose #1 priority is profit, what guarantee do we have that oil produced from ANWR will even end up in US gas stations?
Last edited by clocker; 09-06-2008 at 03:22 PM.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Bookmarks