Would we really disturb the frozen life? As far as I see it, Alaska is huge and not every streatch of land is populated by some creature. Oil is there, we need oil.... Why don't we drill there?
2006-06-20 06:34:20 · 9 answers · asked by delusionalenigma 2 in Environment
As with any venture, in Alaska or New York City, there is always a chance of an accident, so I guess that would be the downside. However, when the Alaska pipeline was built, the opponents raised every conceivable horror story to stop it. When the pipeline was done, and there were no disasters, they went away, once again proven wrong.
The upside is that we would have much more cude oil available to us to stabilize the oil markets. The additional supply would buy us time to find alternatives that are economical (none currently are), that are envinomentally friendly (research ethanol. It ain't all it's cracked up to be) and inexhaustible (hydrogen being the best bet so far).
Before the Alaska pipeline was built, environmentalists fretted about the migration of the caribou, elk, moose, etc. Come to find out, they all love the pipeline and graze right next to it during the summer months.
In otherwords, don't let fear mongers sway your opinions. Research ALL of the facts with an open mind. My grandmother used to tell me, "Sonny boy? Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see and you will be much closer to the truth". She was right then and is still right today, God bless her soul.
2006-06-20 06:45:31 · answer #1 · answered by Craig V 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Drilling in Alaska, there are so many downpoints, but to name a few: Alaska is one of our last great untouched places on earth. It's beautiful, clean and pure. When we drill there were disrupting the natural flow of the enviorment there. Not to mention the oil spills and pollution. It is beyond us to just leave things alone. It's not like we dont have other places where we can drill, Texas, the Middle East, all over the place. PLaces that have been urburnized. Let me put it this way, how would you like someone to come into your liveing room and just start drilling. Were killing the animals and the enviorment. They say that the oil indisturies are being safe and using every precaution, but accidents still happen. Nomatter how safe and careful you are accidents are still going to happen. But when the accident involves dumping hundreds of gallons of oil into the ocean and killing millions of animals, and poluting the world for years to come. How many accidents will it take for them to leave our enviorment alone. They should pack up leave Alaska alone, because when it comes to our Grandchilderen and there Grandchilderen, dont we want something untouched and special for them also.
2006-06-20 21:23:42 · answer #2 · answered by Angela H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The down-point in drilling for oil in Alaska is that it is being used
as a political tool. To scare uninformed people into thinking that oil companies and drilling are all bad. I used to think that way until I did a little research. The process of drilling and the equipment itself has changed so much in the past 20 years, you would be surprised.
While everyone cries about the cost of a gallon of gas, the demand for gas has risen from countries such as China who is now importing millions more. It's all really simple.
SUPPLY and DEMAND. If we don't start supplying more oil for ourselves from our own country resources, then we need to stop crying about prices and learn to ride a bike. But guess what, we wont unfortunately. My suggestion is to keep yourself informed and vote in the people YOU believe is telling you the truth. Not some 30 second political ad on t.v. from someone who is just as uninformed and only wants your vote.
2006-06-20 15:11:49 · answer #3 · answered by Benjamin C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oil drilling would cause environmental damage. The argument is all about how much. The oil industry says they can minimize the damage but always seem to cause more that they said they would. Environmentalists always complain about any amount of environmental damage and the mostly extreme ones say the no benefit, no matter how large, is justification for even the smallest environmental damage. Somewhere in there is a possible middle ground, maybe.
2006-06-20 14:19:13 · answer #4 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Alaska is one of the few places we have left with actual landscape and animals, it is also the home of many endangered animals, and when they say they want to drill in Alaska they mean, all over, I live by an oil plant here in kansas and its not so pretty, I'm suprised I haven't mutated yet.
2006-06-20 13:39:27 · answer #5 · answered by thehabit87 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Down points are the drill bits used to cut through rock so the oil can be reached.
2006-06-20 13:41:42 · answer #6 · answered by quad jockey 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hate to say this, but the oil wells are already drilled and have been for 20 years or more (Alaskan Pipeline sources) so the damage is already done - people don't seem to hear that part... all the govt. wants to do is turn them on, which won't do any more harm to the earth than it has already - I say turn 'em on, get our gas prices down.
2006-06-20 14:01:57 · answer #7 · answered by Ruester 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does "Valdez" ring a bell. Alaska is pristine wilderness. We don't need to ruin it just so we can destroy more of the ozone with the fumes caused from oil consumption!
2006-06-20 13:42:58 · answer #8 · answered by peaches 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Alaska is not ALWAYS frozen....it is called SUMMER! There are also people living there, and believe me EVERY inch of it is used by something whether it be people, animals, and especially birds. Hundreds of different bird species migrate there to nest!
2006-06-21 21:07:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋