Jump to content

Senate rejects drilling in Alaska wildlife refuge


BigSqwert

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 11:18 AM)
What do you find interesting in that post?  Perhaps I missed some news snippet about Martha's Vineyard.  Did they pitch a fit about offsore wind turbines or something?

 

Actually, a lot of power alternatives will make things much more pleasant, if you ask me (though that's just a nice side effect).  Every one of the new generation of alternative energy producers (wind, solar, hodroelectric, hydrogen cells, etc.) has drawbacks of course.  That's why a combination of them is ideal.  The payoff would be huge, in reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, reducing our needs in the Middle East, cutting polution and the problems that causes, etc.

 

The Kennedy's blew a gasket because of talk of erecting wind turbines in the sound off of their play pad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 05:19 PM)
How do you think they refine the oil from prudhoe bay? Pipe it down to New Orleans?

Having all the oil in the world sitting in Louisiana and to a lesser extent Texas wouldn't have mattered, we all still would have to go through what we did with the supply. Where it came from, Saudi Arabia, or ANWR, or somewhere else Alaska, or West Texas, it would not have mattered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 11:10 AM)
Yea, I find that a bit interesting as well.  GREEN GREEN GREEN friendly... but it better not effect ME!

 

Unfair comparison. Just like everyone who supports drilling, probably doesn't want to see pipelines and pumps in his backyard, there are better locations for wind and solar plants.

 

Kap, have you been out to west Texas and seen the windmills out on 10? Quite a site, but I wouldn't want to see them on a daily basis out my backyard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 05:28 PM)
Unfair comparison. Just like everyone who supports drilling, probably doesn't want to see pipelines and pumps in his backyard, there are better locations for wind and solar plants.

 

Kap, have you been out to west Texas and seen the windmills out on 10? Quite a site, but I wouldn't want to see them on a daily basis out my backyard.

Yea... and I agree. However, it's ironic that they scream and scream for alternative fuels - and then when it hits them, uhhhh, no... we can't do that THERE... off shore ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:32 PM)
Yea... and I agree.  However, it's ironic that they scream and scream for alternative fuels - and then when it hits them, uhhhh, no... we can't do that THERE... off shore ...

NIMBYism knows no political boundaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 09:16 AM)
I just read an article a couple of weeks ago that said there may be in excess of 100 billion barrels of oil in the shale deposits of colorado,utah and wyoming.

Yes, there probably is something like that much stuck in the Eocene age Green River formation. However, it's even less concentrated than the stuff in Canada. Which means...higher costs for extraction, more pollution, and it even has the negative part of being right in the middle of the U.S., so that all the pollution those plants would belch out would float east and wind up right over Chicago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 11:51 AM)
Yes, there probably is something like that much stuck in the Eocene age Green River formation.  However, it's even less concentrated than the stuff in Canada.  Which means...higher costs for extraction, more pollution, and it even has the negative part of being right in the middle of the U.S., so that all the pollution those plants would belch out would float east and wind up right over Chicago.

 

WindyCity will blow east baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:51 PM)
Yes, there probably is something like that much stuck in the Eocene age Green River formation.  However, it's even less concentrated than the stuff in Canada.  Which means...higher costs for extraction, more pollution, and it even has the negative part of being right in the middle of the U.S., so that all the pollution those plants would belch out would float east and wind up right over Chicago.

 

Not to mention that the Yampa/Green river complex has a lot of federally protected wilderness, park area and other restricted space. Plus that area is an gold mine for archaeologists, paleantologists, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 09:59 AM)
Not to mention that the Yampa/Green river complex has a lot of federally protected wilderness, park area and other restricted space.  Plus that area is an gold mine for archaeologists, paleantologists, etc.

Yeah, I actually visited a privately owned mine in that shale complex last summer, got myself a couple of really nice well preserved fish fossils. None of that would survive the process of extracting oil. None of it. You'd have to destroy the entire region to get the stuff out. You ever see a countertop with a fish fossil in it? That's where they come from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...