I mean...its hecka stupid...who like high gas/oil prices?
2007-01-14
09:00:09
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
I say we drill there anyways and tie them to the drills...
2007-01-14
09:07:27 ·
update #1
Driling in alaska would not destroy all of the wildlife. it would take out a very little portion of it
2007-01-14
09:11:05 ·
update #2
Yeah i heard about that. it happened in the altamont windfarm.
2007-01-14
09:29:10 ·
update #3
Why bother destroying that wildlife reserve for six months worth of oil. That doesn't make any sense and it will not lower the price of gas.
2007-01-14 09:08:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Its Hero Dictatorship 5
·
5⤊
1⤋
There is a certain argument to be made to use all of the rest of the world's reserves of oil before we use all of our own. If we are completely cut off from other sources of fossil fuels before our dependency wanes then we would drill it in a heart beat. In the meantime, it wouldn't help for a few years, because it would take that long to develop. Secondly It won't last long because it is about 1/10 the size of the deposits of the middle east. Lastly, It would be about 3 or 4 times as expensive to drill and operate as the middle east reserves. Best hope is alternative fuels, hopefully developed from waste products.
2007-01-14 09:13:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by AAed 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
If you'd drill in Alaska - one of the last beautiful and pristine places on Earth - just so your gas price will go down 2 cents, then I've got to question your ethics. Where WOULDN'T you drill? What if we found out that there was a ton of oil directly under the Grand Canyon? Yellowstone?
It's silly - oil is running out. Instead of furthering our dependency, why not invest the money it would take to drill in Alaska to develop new energy technologies?
2007-01-14 09:10:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by maguire1202 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
For one big thing, British Petroleum screwed up the pipeline and I believe it is still in repair.
An issue that fails to ever see light is the lack of a decent contingency plan to counteract a major spill UNDER the Ice Shelf! Oil spreads out very thin and the presence of a large spread out film of Black Oil could make Big Gay Al Gore's worries about any previous ice melts seem laughable-OK, more Laughable!
This is a concern that affects the drilling under the ice!
Better question is why have we not got into the large reserve off the coast of Florida(That China is moving into) or advanced production of Coal to Oil refineries-We have more Coal than God!
2007-01-14 10:02:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Carribou would love it. I heard the wind farms in California got sued by the environmentalists because of all the dead birds. That's just classic. I say stop the drilling. Nuclear is the way to go. Don't say that would kill people. More people died in Waco than 3 mile island. And we are not cold war russia so don't bring that up either.
2007-01-14 09:20:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by mferunden 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
"TREE HUGGERS" and the environmental concerns - I'm being as "PC" as possible on this one!
I think we SHOULD be drilling our own oil in our own country!!!!
In addition... MY PERSONAL BELIEF is that it has a lot to do with Big Business! When the oil prices still don't drop as much as they should, then the American public WILL blame the Big Business owners of our country. The problem is that the billions of dollars of industrial gain that they continue to make each QUARTER is far exceeding their desire to help out the working class!
2007-01-14 09:29:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Glory 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Alaska is not a wasteland. It contains biota and an environment specific only to this region of the earth. The Alaskan landscape needs to be protected from the kind of overdevelopment that has already devasted the more industrialized sectors of the U.S. When someone posts a question that indicates his or her ignorance regarding environmental issues, it just makes it more clear that the most important thing to too many Americans is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
2007-01-14 09:08:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by What I Say 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
oh, didn't you know, we might hurt the teensy little caribou. they're so precious!
ya know, i read the other day that over 90% of the USA is undeveloped. i had a very hard time putting any stock in that number at all, until i thought about all the times i've driven through states on the interstates. cause you know what i've seen when i've done that? trees, trees, and more trees. talk about boring. i've driven from Ohio down through Florida. nothing but trees the whole way, with the exception of one big city in each state. (and not even that in KY. didn't go through Louisville.) i've also went west all the way to Nevada. nothing but trees. came back from Nevada further south through Arizona and Texas. nothing but trees.
my point is, does anyone know if that number is true?
2007-01-14 09:11:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by political junkie 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Its the principle. Once we destroy our wildlife reserves in Alaska whats next? The last thing we want is a dystopian industrial society.
2007-01-14 09:05:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by The Savage Jaw 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
Democrats stopped the drilling in Alaska.
Because they want high gasoline prices.
Because the Environmental Wackos give them millions of dollars in campaign money.
2007-01-14 09:05:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋