Just wondering what you guys thought, i had a class discussion bout it today and it ended up with basically everyone saying lets go hunting... lol
2006-09-05 17:35:00 · 15 answers · asked by eppinizer 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
No we shouldn't but we should repair the pipeline that now exists.
2006-09-05 17:39:18 · answer #1 · answered by Marcus R. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Out of the several million acres of reserve, the oil sits under only about 5,000 acres. What's more, the wildlife thrive around the oil pipelines already in use in Alaska. No reason not to drill and take advantage of natural resources in Anwar province. It was reported today that there is a huge lake of oil under the gulf of Mexico, but this would mean drilling in the ocean in an area subject to hurricanes. Much safer to drill in Anwar.
http://judgeright.blogspot.com
2006-09-05 17:40:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If we can't find an alternate source of fuel, then the choice is to lower gas prices by increasing our production. If we can drill for oil with a minimal effect on the wildlife preserve, I say go now.
We really need to find alternate sources of fuel pronto.
2006-09-05 17:53:08 · answer #3 · answered by jkahwaty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haha.. nice class. but Its a Wildlife Preserve. So lets keep it taht way... America should just buy its oil from foreign countries.. wehn tehy run out the Americans can charge them. lol
tahts the way I c it, many people think of it being cheaper but no, BP had to shut down so when not just permanently shut it down
and keep the PRESERVE?
2006-09-05 17:39:59 · answer #4 · answered by scshah123 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I want to preserve the gorgeous wildlife in Alaska. instead of destroying a beautiful territory that took literally millions to create we should explore more safer opportunities to replace oil. and we don't need to burn more fossil fuels and jepordize the health of earth with global warming.
2006-09-05 18:15:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely, no question about it. We should also build additional refining capacity.
A number of new nuclear power plants would also be a step in the right (essential) direction. Unfortunately they will not help us in the near future since they take so long to construct and get online.
2006-09-05 17:49:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why put off 'til tomorrow what we can do today? The cost of EVERYTHING goes UP with every passing year. The longer we wait to drill, the more expensive it's going to be later. It's not the PERFECT solution, but then again nothing is.
2006-09-05 17:44:44 · answer #7 · answered by gpicon7 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Heck no, save the animals and the wild life. What can we trade to these oil rich Countries for oil, Hmmmmmm, let's trade them the Liberals.
2006-09-09 15:12:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, we should phase out the federal reserve system and our reliance on oil and start using the alternative energy sources and technology we have already ... and we should stamp out the oil mafia and find ways to eliminate big corporations and the military-industrial complex from influencing policy in our govt ... thats what we SHOULD do ... any president that tries that will be summarily executed like kennedy was though....
2006-09-05 17:39:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What we are doing is using up all the world's reserves first, after the rest of them run out ; then we will drill like mad. You think we are making a killing off oil now? Wait till we have the monopoly!!!
2006-09-05 17:40:04 · answer #10 · answered by mr.phattphatt 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its what the majority of Alaskans want. Digging on1/10th of 1% of ANWR isnt going to harm the stinking caribou.
2006-09-05 18:26:58 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋