Do you think America should be drilling here for oil?

[Dayle in Guatemala]

Yes. I think we should stop our foreign dependence on oil. But, if we do start drilling, I think it should researched to make it as safe as possible. There should also be a concerted effort to make us more conservative in our uses of oil--biofuels, nuclear energy, hydro-energy, wind energy, etc.

[mcconnellboys]

I'll play devil's advocate. I think using resources that we have available to us is a good thing, HOWEVER, we need to insure, not just SAY we're going to insure, but actually insure that the handling of these resources is done in such a way that we do not buy more trouble for ourselves later. South Louisiana wetlands have been undermined by oil pipelines for years with huge, gigantic loss of land area as a result. This damage contributes greatly to a higher incidence of destruction in the event of any major storms (not just hurricanes) and can be catastrophic to coastal areas in the event of a major hurricane, such as was seen with St. Bernard Parish - which basically is no more - during Katrina.

 

Loss of buffer zones and coastal areas then leads to heavier future losses for more inland areas, such as New Orleans, Hammond, Baton Rouge, etc. The same could be true for other areas that take up off-shore drilling with use of such pipelines, as well; so Florida could see similar results over time.

 

Tundra areas and arctic bog areas could be similarly affected with drilling. Loss of buffer zones means more damage during major wind/water storms and towns that may be protected from the coast now, could find themselves ON the coast and unprotected in decades to come. So I'm not whining over some namby-pamby possible aggrevation of wildlife in some remote area; I'm talking about major land loss and impact to established settled areas over time. That's a very real concern for me.

 

I also tend to agree with Parabola that not taking the opportunity NOW to undertake a much needed change in our system of doing things will only lead to greater pain in future. No one involved in the business wants to change the manufacture of cars, parts for those cars, tires, batteries, configuration of gas or other energy supply stations, car repair/servicing centers, etc., etc., etc. No one wants to change our power stations or the way our homes hook up to and use power. It's a major pain to do a large scale switchover.

 

If you'll remember, however, only about 5 years ago anyone in the business was swearing up and down that a fuel cell car could NEVER be built. WOULD NOT WORK. Does anyone recall that? Now there are adds on TV and in major newspapers and magazines for fuel cell cars, as well as for hybrid cars. The truth is, it CAN be done, but it's hard and so no one wants to do it and they WON'T do it unless forced.

 

I tend to think we need to use this opportunity to safeguard our future. There is not an unending supply of oil in the ground. We might drill all over and be okay for a few decades - maybe even up to a couple of centuries if we cut back (which I don't believe we will do) - then what? Just don't worry about it if it's outside your own lifetime? What about your grandchildren and their grandchildren? I tend to think we need to get smart and make smart changes NOW to stay ahead of the end game. Oil is playing out all over the world....

[StaceyinLA]

We need to be dependent on NO ONE but ourselves!

[newbie]

You know I really am not bothered at all when I see oil platforms off the coast of CA. Nor do I mind the nuclear plant in San Onofre. I believe that we have to have all kinds of energy, not just oil! But we will always need oil.

 

Personally, I am scared to death of San Onofre and would not be happy going to the beach and seeing drill platforms. That would probably make Sea World a lot busier trying to save more animals off the coast. We already have major sewage spills, let alone who knows what would be in the water after drilling.

 

Does this mean you are pro Sunrise Powerlink, too. The health risks are way too high for all of the above.

 

What is wrong with wind and solar for electric. And alternative sources for fuel.

 

These are nonrenewable sources. We need to focus our attention and monies elsewhere.

 

Jet

[Soph the vet]

from the link ljf posted -

 

ANWR is the size of South Carolina. Its narrow coastal plain is frozen and windswept most of the year. Wildlife flourish amid drilling and production in other Arctic regions, and would do so near ANWR facilities. Inuits who live there know this, and support drilling by an 8:1 margin. Gwich’in Indians who oppose drilling live hundreds of miles away – and have leased and drilled nearly all their own tribal lands, including caribou migratory routes.

Drilling and production operations would impact only 2,000 acres – to produce 15 billion gallons of oil annually. Saying this tiny footprint would spoil the refuge is like saying a major airport along South Carolina’s northern border would destroy the entire state’s scenery and wildlife.

Thank you for posting this. I signed the petition when it first came out. Drill here, build more refineries, and more nuclear power too. I am tired of the Sierra club dictating when and where we can do these things. Of course I believe in being a good steward of natural resources that is why we recycle, we have two cars and one is my dh small commuter car. We avoid unnecessary road trips, we set the thermostat cold enough in the winter to wear many layers and hot enough in the summer to not need A/C most of the time. I think it is good to conserve. Those are choices our family has made. We could own a cabin up north or a boat (very popular in MN) or a bigger house (ours is about 2,000s.f.) but we know those things would require more energy and we choose to not live that way. But I'll be darned if I'll tell someone else to live that way. If my neighbor wants to drive a Hummer at $4/gal. or live in a 10,000s.f. home and leave all their lights on most of the night it is none of my business even if I think they are being wasteful. America is a free country and they have the freedom to do that, even if I don't agree with their consumption. I wish everyone would abide by the mantra "with great freedom comes great responsibility" but unfortunately there are those who do not care. So to bring this tangent back to center, I could guarantee any increased supply of oil, natural gas, or nuclear power (or any others for that matter) would continue to be used in a responsible and reasonable way by our family so I am all for it.

[Sara R]

I also tend to agree with Parabola that not taking the opportunity NOW to undertake a much needed change in our system of doing things will only lead to greater pain in future. No one involved in the business wants to change the manufacture of cars, parts for those cars, tires, batteries, configuration of gas or other energy supply stations, car repair/servicing centers, etc., etc., etc. No one wants to change our power stations or the way our homes hook up to and use power. It's a major pain to do a large scale switchover.

 

Starting drilling doesn't mean that prices will go down immediately (see the other posts) and doesn't exclude heavy investment in alternatives. Drilling now means additional oil in 10 years. Prices will go up a lot between now and then. Besides, it takes oil to make the windmills, solar panels, and so on. Not to mention the plastics, clothes, fertilizer, medicines and so on.

 

If you'll remember, however, only about 5 years ago anyone in the business was swearing up and down that a fuel cell car could NEVER be built. WOULD NOT WORK. Does anyone recall that? Now there are adds on TV and in major newspapers and magazines for fuel cell cars, as well as for hybrid cars. The truth is, it CAN be done, but it's hard and so no one wants to do it and they WON'T do it unless forced.

 

It still doesn't really work, in the sense of it being energy efficient. It still takes more energy (fossil fuels, or solar or wind) to make the hydrogen than the hydrogen produces. That is a big fundamental problem.

[abreakfromlife]

 

Personally, I am scared to death of San Onofre

if you are that scared of nuclear plants, might I gently suggest you learn more about them? They are incredibly safe and we absolutely should be building more of them all around the country. They are much more practical than wind and solar for energy by far. We can not live and make our decisions based on fear. And that is the only reason this country is not using much more nuclear energy. Everyone that is so upset about the environment and wants to use solar and wind - look at the coal industry!! That is so dangerous, and such a pollutant. If we would get onto nuclear, we could ease off of coal, as well.

[newbie]

if you are that scared of nuclear plants, might I gently suggest you learn more about them? They are incredibly safe and we absolutely should be building more of them all around the country. They are much more practical than wind and solar for energy by far. We can not live and make our decisions based on fear. And that is the only reason this country is not using much more nuclear energy. Everyone that is so upset about the environment and wants to use solar and wind - look at the coal industry!! That is so dangerous, and such a pollutant. If we would get onto nuclear, we could ease off of coal, as well.

 

I have learned about them, hence the fear. I do agree, coal is as dangerous as oil and nuclear.

 

But, I dont understand the impracticality of solar and wind and other renewable resources.

 

Jet

[K-FL]

Alaska is three times as big as Texas, though, so I think it may be possible to find a small portion to drill and keep most of the rest of it untouched.

 

 

The area in ANWAR that they want to drill in is smaller than Dulles airport. We need to drill. The Cubans & Chinese are drilling 60 miles (+/-) off our coast now. WE have a better safety record. Why should the Communist get the oil & not us??? Hurricane Katrina didn't cause massive oil spills on all those rigs off Louisiana. I think we can manage a few off Florida. Not to mention the French run 80% of their electricity on Nuclear. We haven't been allowed a new plant since the Carter administration!

[mcconnellboys]

I understand that there are major problems - and I don't know the answer, which is why I'm playing devil's advocate here.

 

I know that beginning to drill now won't be an immediate fix, but I think it will be placative enough to prevent/stop/stall other avenues of exploration *unless* Congress perhaps mandates some sort of plan to also force continuation of these other explorations. I mean, we were talking about wind and solar power when I was little and STILL nothing has been done with it. No one will ever push to see anything new done in the energy arena if it's not mandated, in my opinion, because it's just so much simpler on a day to day basis to maintain the momentum we have going - maintain the status quo.

 

With the Three Mile Island scare followed by Chernobyl, plans for further nuclear plants in America ground to a halt long ago, too. Don't get me wrong, I know personally from a potential lawsuit I worked on that there are some major problems with our nuclear power plants, so I'm just as happy not to have them unless safeguards are WAY more stringent than they have been. Nuclear power scares me because of the potential damage which can be done due to simple human error.

 

I realize oil is used to make a plethora of products we use today. How will we make those products when oil plays out in the future? I think that alternatives would be better sought now. Why not exclude oil usage, for instance, for anything but powering machinery and free up more of that oil now?

 

I just don't see change taking place in this area unless it's forced. And I don't see investment becoming any heavier in this area until there's a perceived benefit to the investors in the not-so-distant future. The U.S. was going to convert to metric when I was a kid, too....

 

 

I was merely using the fuel cell example as something that we were told only recently was not possible at all - and now we're being told that it is possible. If folks want to read more about fuel cells here's one interesting site:

 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/

[RebeccaC]

I

I realize oil is used to make a plethora of products we use today. How will we make those products when oil plays out in the future? I think that alternatives would be better sought now. Why not exclude oil usage, for instance, for anything but powering machinery and free up more of that oil now?

 

 

 

I think that this company is very interesting. I think it shows that we do not know as much about oil as we think we do. http://www.bellbioenergy.com It seems like a society we sing oil is not a renewable energy source and yet this company is making the so called fossil fuel out of biomass. Is it the total answer no but I really think we know a lot less about oil than we think.

 

And then there is this breakthrough http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece

 

Just these two links put a whole nother angle on the subject of fosile fuels.

 

I think we should drill and build more refineries and work on forms other energy from all kinds of angles not just solar and wind and.....

[Elaine]

yes, for crying out loud!!! No other country just SITS on their natural resources and pays out the wazoo for them from another country!!! It is insane that we are not drilling for our own oil.

 

What she said.:001_smile:

[sdWTMer]

I guess that I don't understand why you don't think that oil isn't always underground. So, we drill one place for a while, build another well somewhere else, let the original one rest for a while and so on.

[nakitty]

No drilling in Alaska....and people need to start trying to CONSERVE...also, time, money and energy should be focused on ALTERNATIVE forms of fuel...

[DB in NJ]

I just got an email from a friend directing me to this website where you can sign a petition for drilling in America for oil.

 

www.americansolutions.com

 

There is a video to watch, too. Apparently folks of all political persuasions have signed the petition.

 

As a Jersey girl who would rather sit on the beach and watch dolphins than do anything else on the entire planet, I say:

 

DRILL HERE.

DRILL NOW.

PAY LESS.

 

:D

 

The American Solutions bumper sticker is the *only* one my union-member sheet metal worker dh will put on his car. Jersey politicians gathered at the Jersey shore the other day to talk about how we should NOT drill off our coast; it's bad for our environment. Phooey. It's already being done elsewhere, and the environment in those places is just fine.

[mom2att]

It is not economically (or environmentally) rational for average Americans to be driving 5000 lb automobiles as passenger vehicles. The sooner we adjust to an era of high gas prices the better.

 

 

No, but there are plenty of us out there for whom driving such a vehicle is a necessity. My husband is a small business owner who must pull a trailer to get from job to job, and a 4 cylinder hybrid just isn't going to cut it.

 

In my opinion, the sooner we free up our own reserves of oil to bring prices down and make energy affordable again, the better. It's in a market of economic stability where the greatest energy advances will occur, not one of economic hardship. It might be a tightening of the belt for many of us, but for those on fixed or limited incomes, an era of high gas prices means a whole lot more. Let's see--feed the kids, or fill the tank?

 

Had legislation to drill at ANWAR been signed by then President Clinton 10 years ago, we'd be using that oil right now and miles away from $4 a gallon. Let's start drilling now--in 10 years you'll be awfully glad we did!

[teamturner]

Yes, yes, yes.....Please drill now! They've been saying if we drill in all these new domestic places we won't see oil for another 10 years for almost 10 years now! SHEESH!!!!!

[Spy Car]

No, but there are plenty of us out there for whom driving such a vehicle is a necessity. My husband is a small business owner who must pull a trailer to get from job to job, and a 4 cylinder hybrid just isn't going to cut it.

 

In my opinion, the sooner we free up our own reserves of oil to bring prices down and make energy affordable again, the better. It's in a market of economic stability where the greatest energy advances will occur, not one of economic hardship. It might be a tightening of the belt for many of us, but for those on fixed or limited incomes, an era of high gas prices means a whole lot more. Let's see--feed the kids, or fill the tank?

 

Had legislation to drill at ANWAR been signed by then President Clinton 10 years ago, we'd be using that oil right now and miles away from $4 a gallon. Let's start drilling now--in 10 years you'll be awfully glad we did!

 

Barbie, I fully understand some people need large and powerful trucks as part of their job requirements, but let's not underestimate the number of folks who (thanks to formerly cheap gas) just decided to get a mammoth vehicle 'cause they wanted one. Or one with 300 hp instead of 150. Or decided to jack-up the truck and put on huge knobby tires just 'cause it looks cool.

 

I see people driving around solo all day in Hummers and Excursions that to all appearances are not "work-trucks". IMO you don't need a military vehicle to take the kiddos to soccer practice. And until the price of gas starts to hurt a little most people won't get the message.

 

Bill

[newbie]

Barbie, I fully understand some people need large and powerful trucks as part of their job requirements, but let's not underestimate the number of folks who (thanks to formerly cheap gas) just decided to get a mammoth vehicle 'cause they wanted one. Or one with 300 hp instead of 150. Or decided to jack-up the truck and put on huge knobby tires just 'cause it looks cool.

 

I see people driving around solo all day in Hummers and Excursions that to all appearances are not "work-trucks". IMO you don't need a military vehicle to take the kiddos to soccer practice. And until the price of gas starts to hurt a little most people won't get the message.

 

Bill

 

It is all about demand than supply. My dh does use a large truck for his small business. But, to get to work which is 45 mi. away he uses a sml. four cylinder, not his huge truck he bought five yrs ago.

 

Matter of fact, I told him to pick up groceries other day in truck and he refused. He used sml. four cylinder.

 

I think he put the truck in storage.

 

Jet

[Phred]

I guess that I don't understand why you don't think that oil isn't always underground. So, we drill one place for a while, build another well somewhere else, let the original one rest for a while and so on.

Oil is the remains of biomass... tons of dead algae from two periods in our planet's history, 300 million and 90 million years ago. They died and piled on top of each other, then were buried under tons of rock were the pressures turned their complex carbons into oil. (short version) Once the fossil fuels are used up there aren't any more. Once an oil well is dry it's dry... you don't let it rest and then go back and magically it's full again.

 

As to ANWR...

Arctic Drilling Wouldn't Cool High Oil Prices

[mcconnellboys]

I guess because I was taught that oil, like all fossil fuels, is a finite resource that will end at some point in time, particularly at the rate that the developing world is beginning to use it today....? There is only a certain amount recoverable with current drilling and recovery methods. Perhaps there could be more if different methods are developed, but at some point, our use of fossil fuels, which take billions of years to form, outpaces our usage of those fuels. Am I off-track somewhere in this thought process?

 

Now, if we all convert our cars and begin using cooking oil to power them, then maybe.... But I tend to think we'd starve ourselves to death doing that. The little we've done using corn as fuel has already created a shortage for us - and it's just in use in the mid-West in very limited ways....

[RebeccaC]

Oil is the remains of biomass... tons of dead algae from two periods in our planet's history, 300 million and 90 million years ago. They died and piled on top of each other, then were buried under tons of rock were the pressures turned their complex carbons into oil. (short version) Once the fossil fuels are used up there aren't any more. Once an oil well is dry it's dry... you don't let it rest and then go back and magically it's full again.

 

As to ANWR...

Arctic Drilling Wouldn't Cool High Oil Prices

 

 

Well I don't know but does seem to be evidence that wells do refill, this is from a NewsDay staff writer reporting on that, http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm New day is not the only place that I have read or heard about this. My father's undergrad degree was in petroleum science. His Ph.d is from the U of Chicago in Fertile Crescent languages but he has kept up with the petroleum science as a hobby.

 

That is not even going into the Abiotic theorists theories on oil. Not saying that I totally buy it but I think it again shows how little we really know. That the standard mantra theory about oil maybe wrong or not totally correct.

 

Of course folks making new oil out of new biomass is another indication that we do not know as much as we think we do http://www.bellbioenergy.com or this new break through http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece

[HRAAB]

No. That was easy. For the same reasons that most of the other opposed to drilling stated.

 

And I was just discussing this with my brother-in-law who has lived in Alaska most of his adult life, and is opposed to drilling there.

 

Janet

[mcconnellboys]

Thanks for this. I do think it looks interesting. I will have to say that I have grave reservations about use of GMO's as we don't understand them well enough to control them, in my opinion.

 

While it would certainly be interesting to extract oil from plant wastes, I'm not entirely certain that we'd have enough plant wastage to make oil for the world's use on a yearly basis (or even a single country's). And what if these bugs go astray of controls and jump to living plants and destroy all the plant life on earth, leaving us in a pool of oil, yes, but can we live to use it?

[Janice H]

(nt)

[3lilreds in NC]

No, I do not. I think we should be researching alternative energy sources. I don't know a ton about it, but my dad does. He informed me that cars in South America run on ethanol. The reason ethanol has gotten a bad name in the US is that they wanted to make it from corn, which is too expensive to produce. Ehtanol needs a high cellulose content, which corn lacks. We could use switch grass, which is high in cellulose.

 

Using a fossil fuel, which is a finite resource, is only going to end up forcing a switch to something renewable sooner or later. I vote for sooner. That way we don't have to worry about messing up the environment in Alaska, or anywhere else.

[Phred]

Well I don't know but does seem to be evidence that wells do refill, this is from a NewsDay staff writer reporting on that, www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm New day is not the only place that I have read or heard about this. My father's undergrad degree was in petroleum science. His Ph.d is from the U of Chicago in Fertile Crescent languages but he has kept up with the petroleum science as a hobby.

 

That is not even going into the Abiotic theorists theories on oil. Not saying that I totally buy it but I think it again shows how little we really know. That the standard mantra theory about oil maybe wrong or not totally correct.

 

Of course folks making new oil out of new biomass is another indication that we do not know as much as we think we do www.bellbioenergy.com or this new break through www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece

Making a hydrocarbon and making 200 million barrels a day are completely different animals. Wouldn't you agree? And that's just the US daily usage today, not in the future.

[mom2att]

I see people driving around solo all day in Hummers and Excursions that to all appearances are not "work-trucks". IMO you don't need a military vehicle to take the kiddos to soccer practice. And until the price of gas starts to hurt a little most people won't get the message.

 

And many people will continue to drive them despite the cost. Others will as well because they have to--for work or because they have a large family or whatever. Drive what you want--I'm pro choice when it comes to vehicle selection. I will say that on the rare occasion we use the work vehicle for non-work trips I feel a whole lot safer zipping down the highway in that big ol' Excursion than the much more gas-friendly Lincoln. I can't even imagine having to drive one of the tiny "smart cars." They are about the size of the door on our Excursion . . . smart until you crash, I guess!

[cricket1178]

I am for drilling.

[RebeccaC]

Making a hydrocarbon and making 200 million barrels a day are completely different animals. Wouldn't you agree? And that's just the US daily usage today, not in the future.

 

 

Yes I agree but I think it just shows that we do not have all the answers. What amount we can make remains to be seen, how the technology advances remains to be seen, and if we can control the bugs also remains to be seen.

 

Wells do refill my grandfather worked the oil fields all of his life. Why they refill is a mystery. My dad has ideas and I have listen to him. There are different theories in the field as to why. The conclusion that I have come to is we don't know all that we think we do and no one has the all the answers.

[mcconnellboys]

I have read about some wells refilling to some extent. But I'm under the impression that it was thought that this was due to some degree of seeping from oil still within rock layers down in the well and was not anything like a total refilling of the space that had previously been filled with oil.

[CindyH in NC]

No drilling.

[RebeccaC]

I have read about some wells refilling to some extent. But I'm under the impression that it was thought that this was due to some degree of seeping from oil still within rock layers down in the well and was not anything like a total refilling of the space that had previously been filled with oil.

 

Not all wells refill and no one knows if they would totally refill given enough time. Seeping is one idea. The other is the abiotic theory which is debated. There are probably other ideas being bantered around in the field that have yet to reach those outside the field. Bottom line is no one knows for sure why. I have no idea except like I posted that I am of the opinion that we don't know all we think we know.

[mcconnellboys]

Rebecca, what is the abiotic theory? Is it thought that oil might come from something other than fossilization?

 

Thanks,

[StephanieZ]

;) I don't think so. I think we should hoard our oil as long as possible and use up the rest of the planet's oil first. Cynical perhaps, but it works for me.

 

I think we should get more serious about efficiency, renewable energy, hybirds, public transit, sustainable agriculture, eliminating ethanol subsidies, etc.

 

I don't think we should trash our beaches, wilderness areas, etc drilling in order to make a small dent in the world's access to petroleum products and deplete our limited national resources. Wait a few more decades and there will be ever safer ways to extract those resources when we do want or need to do it.

[RebeccaC]

Rebecca, what is the abiotic theory? Is it thought that oil might come from something other than fossilization?

 

Thanks,

 

 

I only know a bit about it but yes. The theory is that oil is produced in the core and is a renewable source. Google abiotic and you will get a ton of stuff. Here is a link to get you started http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/1130.html This is just the first link that came up when I googled it. My dad and brother who is a chemist at Dow debate/talk about this a bit. I mainly listen in. I have not read extensively on it but it is interesting. There are other ideas that piggy back off of this but again I don't know enough to discuss it well. Have fun looking.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I think the U.S. should become the leader in alternative fuel before another country looks forward a few generations and sees that oil is not the future. Something else must replace it. Let's do it now, let's do it right.

 

When future generations look back on our time, I fear they will see how terribly short-sighted we are being.

 

Interesting Opinion piece in the NYT: link

 

People forget, wind and solar power are here, they work, they can go on your roof tomorrow. What they need now is a big U.S. market where lots of manufacturers have an incentive to install solar panels and wind turbines — because the more they do, the more these technologies would move down the learning curve, become cheaper and be able to compete directly with coal, oil and nuclear, without subsidies.

 

Of course, we’re going to need oil for years to come. That being the case, I’d prefer — for geopolitical reasons — that we get as much as possible from domestic wells. But our future is not in oil, and a real president wouldn’t be hectoring Congress about offshore drilling today. He’d be telling the country a much larger truth:

 

“Oil is poisoning our climate and our geopolitics, and here is how we’re going to break our addiction: We’re going to set a floor price of $4.50 a gallon for gasoline and $100 a barrel for oil. And that floor price is going to trigger massive investments in renewable energy — particularly wind, solar panels and solar thermal. And we’re also going to go on a crash program to dramatically increase energy efficiency, to drive conservation to a whole new level and to build more nuclear power. And I want every Democrat and every Republican to join me in this endeavor.â€

[hs_gram]

We should drill here and in Alaska. We have the technology to drill more precisely that before and to do it with minimum harm to the environment.

 

We are buying oil from many other places in the world where they ARE drilling and doing it with much greater harm to the environment and to people who reside closely to where the drilling is taking place. We don't seem to have as much objection to the drilling as long as it isn't in our own country.

 

Other countries are drilling off our coasts, yet we have tied our own hands. It is absurd. It's time to drill and do whatever it takes to become energy independent. At the same time, we should also persue viable alternative fuels which do not create a shortage of food and drive prices higher.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I only know a bit about it but yes. The theory is that oil is produced in the core and is a renewable source. Google abiotic and you will get a ton of stuff. Here is a link to get you started http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/1130.html This is just the first link that came up when I googled it. My dad and brother who is a chemist at Dow debate/talk about this a bit. I mainly listen in. I have not read extensively on it but it is interesting. There are other ideas that piggy back off of this but again I don't know enough to discuss it well. Have fun looking.

 

But even if oil was renewable, its controlled by the few (rich, powerful oil companies - foreign and domestic) and it's dirty pollution is making us sick and damaging our environment.

[RebeccaC]

But even if oil was renewable, its controlled by the few (rich, powerful oil companies - foreign and domestic) and it's dirty pollution is making us sick and damaging our environment.

 

 

That might be true however like it or not our society runs on it and our economy is based on it. Until they come up with an alternative that works as efficiently or better we are stuck with it. Right now there is not an alternative that works as well, much less better.

 

Actually I think oil is controlled by rich foreign countries and the oil companies are their well paid lackeys but that is my opinion and probably not worth 2 cents. I was in Saudi during Gulf War I and our unit was inspected by one of those powerful heads of state. I did not have a high opinion of of the guy.

[Chris in CA]

Yes!

[mcconnellboys]

Thanks! I did google it after I got off the boards and found some initial stuff to read. I'm interested in what I've read thus far about Russia accepting the theory, so I'm going to look for more on why they've taken this stance.

[Jugglin'5]

No thank you. I don't want the one thing that sustains life to be used as fuel. We have limited clean, fresh water in this world as well. Can you imagine the suffering if the cost of water went up to the same as gas is now?

 

:iagree: Water is scarce enough as it is.

[sarah in tenn]

I think we should spend the money developing long term sustainable energy solutions rather than drilling. Electric /hybrid cars, solar panels , clean coal, public transportation so more people can afford them. Oil will only go so far, and we need to plan for that know.

The percentage of change that these drilling projects will achieve is in the single digits. No matter where we drill the price of oil is determined globally. Our oil here cannot make a large percentage change on the global oil market price.

It is not as if oil from Texas is $50 a barrel and from Saudi Arabia is $140. It will be 10 years before the drilling gets oil on the market.

 

We can save more oil more quickly by implementing conservation strategies and less competition for oil bring the price of oil down for everyone.

 

food for thought.

sarah

[Phred]

The price of oil is set on a world market. Every barrel that is found in the US is going to go on that market and be sold at the price of every other barrel of oil in the world. Now, the US uses millions of barrels of oil every day. ANWR, even at the best estimates, would put out about 700,000 barrels of oil a day. The Saudis could, and would, just diminish their output by that amount to keep the price high. If they didn't... Iran would.

 

Drilling in the US is not a quick fix for oil prices.

[Margaret in GA]

;) I don't think so. I think we should hoard our oil as long as possible and use up the rest of the planet's oil first. Cynical perhaps, but it works for me.

 

I think we should get more serious about efficiency, renewable energy, hybirds, public transit, sustainable agriculture, eliminating ethanol subsidies, etc.

 

I don't think we should trash our beaches, wilderness areas, etc drilling in order to make a small dent in the world's access to petroleum products and deplete our limited national resources. Wait a few more decades and there will be ever safer ways to extract those resources when we do want or need to do it.

 

I totally agree! That oil in ANWR is our emergency oil-- it's the oil we'll need to run our jets, tanks, and ships on when oil hits $500 per barrel. When that happens, it won't take us 10 years to get it, we'll use our military might and extract it in 2. And it'll be ours for use exclusively by our military, not dumped on the international market to drive that price down $1.44 per barrel as this article states:

 

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html

 

"But the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent statistical agency within the Department of Energy, concluded that new oil from ANWR would lower the world price of oil by no more than $1.44 per barrel"

 

This "drill now" movement is all about making the American people feel like we have easy fixes to complex problems. We do not.

 

Margaret

[Sara R]

I totally agree! That oil in ANWR is our emergency oil-- it's the oil we'll need to run our jets, tanks, and ships on when oil hits $500 per barrel.

 

At the rate prices are increasing (from $70 to $145 this past year), oil could easily be $500 per barrel by the time the oil gets out of the ground in 10 years. :eek:

 

It takes oil to make oil, and world oil production is decreasing. Now is the time to get started getting that oil out of the ground, if we want it to ever get out of the ground. If we want to save it for future generations, we should pump it out and save it in a storage tank.

[Jumping In Puddles]

The price of oil is set on a world market. Every barrel that is found in the US is going to go on that market and be sold at the price of every other barrel of oil in the world. Now, the US uses millions of barrels of oil every day. ANWR, even at the best estimates, would put out about 700,000 barrels of oil a day. The Saudis could, and would, just diminish their output by that amount to keep the price high. If they didn't... Iran would.

 

Drilling in the US is not a quick fix for oil prices.

 

QFT

[Colleen]

And I don't advocate short-sighted, supply-side economic "solutions".

[LadyAberlin]

I think we should. I've also read where someone said the real reason we don't drill here is because we have to use our oil reserves a collateral for our national debt.