WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines Alaska oil drilling back on agenda

Jung

???
Premium
13,979
1,397
487
#1
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/10/bush.energy.ap/index.html

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-New Mexico, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he will press to open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) as part of the government's budget deliberations early in 2005. That would enable drilling proponents to skirt an otherwise certain Democratic-led filibuster that would be difficult to overcome.

"With oil trading at nearly $50 a barrel, the case for ANWR is more compelling than ever," said Domenici. "We have the technology to develop oil without harming the environment and wildlife."
Try this one on for size instead:

"With oil trading at nearly $50 a barrel, the case for ALTERNATIVE FUEL SOURCES AND INCREASED HYBRID CAR PRODUCTION is more compelling than ever," said Carr. "We have the technology to develop these things without harming the enviroment and wildlife."
 

BrIONwoshMunky

EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY!
Staff
9,586
1,278
387
#2
Amen

I love the fact that our engines still run on pure dinosaur concentrate... we are using technology that has been around for millions of years.... it's old... we need something new.

Or we could just burn it all up and have to find something else anyways.
 

ReiMeishin

Dreaming to live
585
0
0
#3
brainwashmonkey said:
I love the fact that our engines still run on pure dinosaur concentrate... we are using technology that has been around for millions of years.... it's old... we need something new.

Or we could just burn it all up and have to find something else anyways.
Not necessarily. In the rock granite, of which there is a huge abundance, there is a small amount of oil. If tech is developed to extract oil from the rock, we could go on for millenia. Or at least until fusion reactions replace every other energy source.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#4
The oil companies have been suppressing technology for years. about 4-5 years ago I heard that the first hybrid petrol/fuel cell vehicle would be ready for the public by 2005. It was a joint project between Ford & Toyota. Now that date has been pushed back to 2008.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#5
brainwashmonkey said:
I love the fact that our engines still run on pure dinosaur concentrate... we are using technology that has been around for millions of years.... it's old... we need something new.

Or we could just burn it all up and have to find something else anyways.
Fresh, clean burning dino squeezin's...
 

DanGeo23

Resident Conservative
1,218
0
0
#6
Alaska oil drilling back on agenda
:clap: :banana: :woot:
lessen the dependance...
but we need to seek out viable alt. fuels... I think if both sides of the issue.. came together and were willing to meet half way.... we would be better off... but with the lobbiests and stuborness of politicians.. it will prolly never happen... prolly has about as good of odds as Israelis and Palistinians celebrating Christmas together...
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#7
I dont see why anyone would be against this... The oil companies ask for something like one half of one tenth of a percent of the land in Alaska to drill on.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,979
1,397
487
#8
tzedek said:
I dont see why anyone would be against this... The oil companies ask for something like one half of one tenth of a percent of the land in Alaska to drill on.
Gee, I wonder.
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=exxon+valdez&spell=1 (you might also remember that)

I agree with Dan, to an extent though. There are far better places to do drilling. Serious alternative fuel research is far past due, this is only ignoring the problem. It's a quick fix.
 

bigck3000

The Iron Lung
1,684
1
0
#9
nothiing like a dead duck to sober you up...eh? Decreasing our dependance on foreign oil, doesnt mean we will stop taking foreign oil....Alaska just means MORE oil...Low gas prices would be cool..but its not really worth an extra fifty cents in my pocket to kill a baby duck...dont you remember the little baby duck in the Tom and Jerry cartoons....he looked like he enjoyed life, not being covered in oil...then again Tom was trying to eat him...I have no idea where this is going...
 

ReiMeishin

Dreaming to live
585
0
0
#10
breakology said:
The oil companies have been suppressing technology for years. about 4-5 years ago I heard that the first hybrid petrol/fuel cell vehicle would be ready for the public by 2005. It was a joint project between Ford & Toyota. Now that date has been pushed back to 2008.
Oil companies, needless to say, have TONS of cash. Whenever someone comes up with a practical alternative fuel or energy saving device the oil companies offer crazy amounts of money to buy the patent. Only if someone who truly wants to help the environment and can't be bribed comes up with the invention will alternative fuels and fuel-saving devices come to the market.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,979
1,397
487
#11
bigck3000 said:
nothiing like a dead duck to sober you up...eh? Decreasing our dependance on foreign oil, doesnt mean we will stop taking foreign oil....Alaska just means MORE oil...Low gas prices would be cool..but its not really worth an extra fifty cents in my pocket to kill a baby duck...dont you remember the little baby duck in the Tom and Jerry cartoons....he looked like he enjoyed life, not being covered in oil...then again Tom was trying to eat him...I have no idea where this is going...
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#12
junglizm said:
Gee, I wonder.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=exxon+valdez&spell=1 (you might also remember that)

I agree with Dan, to an extent though. There are far better places to do drilling. Serious alternative fuel research is far past due, this is only ignoring the problem. It's a quick fix.

what are you trying to prove here? That we should pass up millions of barrels of crude on our own land becuase of ducks?
 

DanGeo23

Resident Conservative
1,218
0
0
#13
Ducks are sooo over rated... especially baby ones...
 

RageAgainst

Chaotic Neutral
7,540
506
257
#14
bigck3000 said:
nothiing like a dead duck to sober you up...eh? Decreasing our dependance on foreign oil, doesnt mean we will stop taking foreign oil....Alaska just means MORE oil...Low gas prices would be cool..but its not really worth an extra fifty cents in my pocket to kill a baby duck...dont you remember the little baby duck in the Tom and Jerry cartoons....he looked like he enjoyed life, not being covered in oil...then again Tom was trying to eat him...I have no idea where this is going...
omg lol..
someone, ANYONE!!! PLEASE think of the baby ducks!!!
moe style
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,979
1,397
487
#15
tzedek said:
what are you trying to prove here? That we should pass up millions of barrels of crude on our own land becuase of ducks?
Not ducks specifically, rather the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and all of it's wildlife. I'm just saying; in my opinion we should seak other means first, or in addition to this. I think this shuold be a last resort, because ducks and the enviroment are important. This also ties directly into the 'global warming' issues.
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#16
junglizm said:
Not ducks specifically, rather the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and all of it's wildlife. I'm just saying; in my opinion we should seak other means first, or in addition to this. I think this shuold be a last resort, because ducks and the enviroment are important. This also ties directly into the 'global warming' issues.
ok then, i totally agree with you there.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#17
tzedek said:
I dont see why anyone would be against this... The oil companies ask for something like one half of one tenth of a percent of the land in Alaska to drill on.
Sorry, you are being naive. Once they get in there, they will completely destroy it. You have WAY too much faith in oil companies...
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#18
voiceofreason said:
Sorry, you are being naive. Once they get in there, they will completely destroy it. You have WAY too much faith in oil companies...

More like optimistic I think, but you may be correct in that i am giving the oil companies too much credit. I dont think it will pass anyway.