TTORA Forum banner

1 - 20 of 98 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Surprised no-one has commented on this yet. A 51-49 vote made it official that the U.S. government intends to exploit the natural resources of ANWR. I wouldn't be surprised if the threat of the U.S. becoming less dependant on foreign oil gets OPEC to reduce oil prices. Being both an environmentally conscious outdoor enthusiast, and an exploration geologist, I have mixed feelings about it, but overall, I'm glad this is happening. To learn more follow this link:
http://www.anwr.org/
 

·
Stinks like fish
Joined
·
986 Posts
It is only a step in a long proccess. I wouldn't get to excited, I have a feeling tat the battle is just begining. Like the energy crisis in the 70's that facilitated the TAPS and the production of Prudhoe, this is completely a demand issue. It will happen when the deamnd dictates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
I may be the minority here, but I dont agree w/ the Senates decision. I think we should be working more on reducing demand for oil, rather than increasing supply. All the drilling in the ANWR is going to do is buy us time. Eventually we will suck that dry and still be at the whims of OPEC.
 

·
Stinks like fish
Joined
·
986 Posts
It is stupid not to use a resource. It's like someone who dies with a million dollars stuffed in their mattress. If you want an alternative produce it. Othewise we have to deal with the system and infrastructure we have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Bryanccfshr said:
It is stupid not to use a resource. It's like someone who dies with a million dollars stuffed in their mattress. If you want an alternative produce it. Othewise we have to deal with the system and infrastructure we have.

I do agree with you in a sense. If we have this oil up there, why not use it? What bothers me is that we HAVE and alternatives, were just no using them because our gas is still reasonably cheap. Hybrids are becoming mainstream, and hydrogen tech is visable on the horizon. This may sound cruel, but Id like to see gas prices go even higher. Placing a financial incentive on consumers to buy more fuel efficient vehicles will hasten the development of cheaper, better hybrids and would also speed the development of hydrogen fuel cells, etc.

I agree with you in the sense that if we have all this oil, we should use it. But I also feel that this is just a bandaid approach. We need to concentrate our efforts more on reducing demand rather than increasing supply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
TacoTaco said:
I do agree with you in a sense. If we have this oil up there, why not use it? What bothers me is that we HAVE and alternatives, were just no using them because our gas is still reasonably cheap. Hybrids are becoming mainstream, and hydrogen tech is visable on the horizon. This may sound cruel, but Id like to see gas prices go even higher. Placing a financial incentive on consumers to buy more fuel efficient vehicles will hasten the development of cheaper, better hybrids and would also speed the development of hydrogen fuel cells, etc.

I agree with you in the sense that if we have all this oil, we should use it. But I also feel that this is just a bandaid approach. We need to concentrate our efforts more on reducing demand rather than increasing supply.
Sorry about my sloppy spelling....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Anyone that knows me can already guess how I feel about this. I'll just add my 2 cents. :D

First Economics:
The notion that opening ANWR will reduce our dependence on foreign oil is just political hogwash designed to make you believe it’s your patriotic duty to drill. Fact is, Chevron and other large oil companies will own that oil, and that oil will enter the world market, not just the US market. Assuming we can get even the highest estimates out of ANWR, OPEC will still be the world's leading oil producer by far and all they have to do is lower the supply to keep the demand up. They will not lose any money, and if they really do fund terrorists, and I think the damn well do (bastards), they will still be able to do it with ANWR pumping. The largest segment of the world's population, the many 3rd world nations, are just now coming online into the petroleum based market. You think gas is high now? Wait until 6 billion screaming Chinamen want gas for their cars. Bottom line, it's a world market and ANWR won't make a noticeable dent in that market. It will take at least ten years before we actually get any oil out of ANWR if they started today. They need to build thousands of miles of roads and pipelines, docks for ships, and the actual wells. They can only work and build when the ground is frozen, otherwise the tundra is too soft and you can't drive anything on it or you sink. Used to be that the areas stayed frozen >200 days per year, the last few years the opposite has been true and the areas has been staying thawed >200 days per year. And people think global warming is a joke. ha

Alt Fuels and Conservation:
Governor Swarzeneggar (sp?) already has begun a hydrogen fuel network delivery system in California. http://hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/ The technology is here and in use now. There are buses that run on hydrogen, they emit ZERO emissions, in fact, they actually clean the air. Hydrogen is readily available, worldwide, we just need the infrastructure in place. Once we have the infrastructure in place for both making hydrogen through electrolysis and have a delivery system, the automakers will follow suit with the market. We will always have gasoline driven cars, but once we start converting just a small percentage of our national fleet of cars to alt fuels, the barrels of oil we'll save will far outnumber the barrels we would have gotten from ANWR.

Automakers also have the technology available now to greatly increase gas mileage, but they choose not too. It's America, everything is market driven here, and the market the public wants are SUVs and Hummers getting 8 mpg. If the government raised standards for gas mileage, even if just for sedan style cars, the automakers could do it no problem. But, we choose to drill instead.

Aesthetics:
The entire north coastal plain is already heavily dotted with oil development. The only place free from this is the small section of coastal plain in ANWR. As the leader of the free world, why can't we choose to protect the last few wild places in this nation? The analogy used is that the whole drilling footprint will be the size of a municipal airport in a place the size of North Carolina. This small postage stamp will be of little impact. This again is just plain rhetoric by those wanting drilling. There will have to be roads, there will have to be pipelines and more roads for the pipelines and these will stretch across vast stretches of land. It's completely misleading to say it will be a small impact. Some people, like the local Gwich’in Native American tribe, need the ANWR to stay wild and they have a connection with the land. It's not right to ignore their pleas.

The Future:
I'm sure the drilling will pass, the house is an easy pass and of course Bush will sign. It was pretty sneaky to put it in the budget rather than a stand-alone bill, but hey, it's politics. In ten years, gas will be so high, but all the pumping in ANWR and everywhere else will mean little to the average American consumer, but the oil-execs will be as rich as the Middle East terrorists. Nice how that works. Hopefully we'll have more alt fuels coming on-line. Once we get a nice Toyota truck in an alt fuel model, I'll get one. I trust Toyota. But, all the drilling won't mean a thing except environmental damage.

We have so many important things that we make out of petroleum, plastics, surgical tools and implements, etc., etc. I hope we will someday stop wasting the stuff in our inefficient cars.

That's all I got to say. :)
 

·
Re-Member 9/11
Joined
·
292 Posts
Ursidae69 said:
We have so many important things that we make out of petroleum, plastics, surgical tools and implements, etc., etc. I hope we will someday stop wasting the stuff in our inefficient cars.

That's all I got to say. :)
I agree. Now, where can I find the cheapest supercharger for my truck?????? LOL
Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
The American people are being mislead on this one. First pumping a million barrels of oil a day out of ANWAR will do nothing to change the price. There are several reasons. First, compare a million barrels a day to what OPEC produces. It ain't nothing. Around here, we say we're just one OPEC decision away from hard times. With China and other countries growing appetites for oil, OPEC will only need to turn down the tap a bit and the price won't change. Second and this is the biggest misconception on why drilling ANWAR won't change anything is refinery capacity. Its been 15 or 20 years since a new oil refinery has been built in this country. Our refinery's are currently at full capacity. Until you build a dozen more or so, you can pump another billion barrels of oil a day and the price won't change. You'll just have to build more storage tanks to hold it all as gasoline production is maxed out. What we're hearing now is nothing more than political rhetoric and an attempt by BoyGeorge to fatten the wallets of his buddies in the "ol bidness". And this is coming from a card carrying republican who lives in oil and gas country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
For all of you that have such strong opinions against...where are you getting your facts from? If you actually read UNBIASED scientific publications, that's one thing, but please don't sucomb to ecoterrorist propoganda just because they claim that they have the best interest of the world's population in mind....they don't. The fact is that man does contribute to global warming, but our effects on global climate change are negligable in comparison to the Earth's natural geologic cycles. Seasonal drilling and seismic surveying can be done in ANWR and you would never know anyone was there come summer. Yes, there will have to be pipelines, but they can also be constructed with minimal impact to the environment. Will ANWR make a dent in domestic energy prices?.....who can honestly say, but I'm willing to bet that we will not see dramatic global implimentation of alternative energy until nearly all of the petro resources are used up. ANWR will get drilled eventually regardless. I will concede that we do have a refinery shortage in the U.S., and I honestly have no idea why. Since most of our oil comes from Mexico, Canada, and Venezuela, North America has no excuse for not being able to process the crude.
 

·
Stinks like fish
Joined
·
986 Posts
Ursidae69 said:
Anyone that knows me can already guess how I feel about this. I'll just add my 2 cents. :D

First Economics:
The notion that opening ANWR will reduce our dependence on foreign oil is just political hogwash designed to make you believe it’s your patriotic duty to drill. Fact is, Chevron and other large oil companies will own that oil, and that oil will enter the world market, not just the US market. Assuming we can get even the highest estimates out of ANWR, OPEC will still be the world's leading oil producer by far and all they have to do is lower the supply to keep the demand up. They will not lose any money, and if they really do fund terrorists, and I think the damn well do (bastards), they will still be able to do it with ANWR pumping. The largest segment of the world's population, the many 3rd world nations, are just now coming online into the petroleum based market. You think gas is high now? Wait until 6 billion screaming Chinamen want gas for their cars. Bottom line, it's a world market and ANWR won't make a noticeable dent in that market. It will take at least ten years before we actually get any oil out of ANWR if they started today. They need to build thousands of miles of roads and pipelines, docks for ships, and the actual wells. They can only work and build when the ground is frozen, otherwise the tundra is too soft and you can't drive anything on it or you sink. Used to be that the areas stayed frozen >200 days per year, the last few years the opposite has been true and the areas has been staying thawed >200 days per year. And people think global warming is a joke. ha



First off your too wordy for not having a clue, typing too much text and misrepresenting them as facts seems to be a trend on this forum lately.. The infrastructure is already up here in prudhoe bay which is not far fron ANWR(get a map). The Ground is frozen much of the year and gravel Roads along the flow lines will provide access the days that ice roads cannot be used (which will be used primarily for heavy equipment) Ships & docks? Your a tool Get a clue before you spout off your ignorant bullshit, 40 miles of flow line to connect most the fields to the Badami Sattelite field and another 40 miles of existing infrastructure to the production centers in Prudhoe, then it gets sent down more existing pipe TAPS to an existing terminal and shipping facility (Valdez). . You are posting on second hand knowledge and what youv'e picked up is quite questionable. In the 4 years I have bveen working here break up is in june and freeze up is no later thanthe second week of septmenber on averge. How many fucking days is that?? I bet you never have been to the Arctic.

I can't take anything else you talk about seriously becasue you started off with lies, desception and ignorance. The rest of your post is probably the same.

Alt Fuels and Conservation:
Governor Swarzeneggar (sp?) already has begun a hydrogen fuel network delivery system in California. http://hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/ The technology is here and in use now. There are buses that run on hydrogen, they emit ZERO emissions, in fact, they actually clean the air. Hydrogen is readily available, worldwide, we just need the infrastructure in place. Once we have the infrastructure in place for both making hydrogen through electrolysis and have a delivery system, the automakers will follow suit with the market. We will always have gasoline driven cars, but once we start converting just a small percentage of our national fleet of cars to alt fuels, the barrels of oil we'll save will far outnumber the barrels we would have gotten from ANWR.

Automakers also have the technology available now to greatly increase gas mileage, but they choose not too. It's America, everything is market driven here, and the market the public wants are SUVs and Hummers getting 8 mpg. If the government raised standards for gas mileage, even if just for sedan style cars, the automakers could do it no problem. But, we choose to drill instead.

Aesthetics:
The entire north coastal plain is already heavily dotted with oil development. The only place free from this is the small section of coastal plain in ANWR. As the leader of the free world, why can't we choose to protect the last few wild places in this nation? The analogy used is that the whole drilling footprint will be the size of a municipal airport in a place the size of North Carolina. This small postage stamp will be of little impact. This again is just plain rhetoric by those wanting drilling. There will have to be roads, there will have to be pipelines and more roads for the pipelines and these will stretch across vast stretches of land. It's completely misleading to say it will be a small impact. Some people, like the local Gwich’in Native American tribe, need the ANWR to stay wild and they have a connection with the land. It's not right to ignore their pleas.

The Future:
I'm sure the drilling will pass, the house is an easy pass and of course Bush will sign. It was pretty sneaky to put it in the budget rather than a stand-alone bill, but hey, it's politics. In ten years, gas will be so high, but all the pumping in ANWR and everywhere else will mean little to the average American consumer, but the oil-execs will be as rich as the Middle East terrorists. Nice how that works. Hopefully we'll have more alt fuels coming on-line. Once we get a nice Toyota truck in an alt fuel model, I'll get one. I trust Toyota. But, all the drilling won't mean a thing except environmental damage.

We have so many important things that we make out of petroleum, plastics, surgical tools and implements, etc., etc. I hope we will someday stop wasting the stuff in our inefficient cars.

That's all I got to say. :)

Don't state an opinion based on BS and represent it as fact.
 

·
Stinks like fish
Joined
·
986 Posts
Triple BB said:
The American people are being mislead on this one. First pumping a million barrels of oil a day out of ANWAR will do nothing to change the price. There are several reasons. First, compare a million barrels a day to what OPEC produces. It ain't nothing. Around here, we say we're just one OPEC decision away from hard times. With China and other countries growing appetites for oil, OPEC will only need to turn down the tap a bit and the price won't change. Second and this is the biggest misconception on why drilling ANWAR won't change anything is refinery capacity. Its been 15 or 20 years since a new oil refinery has been built in this country. Our refinery's are currently at full capacity. Until you build a dozen more or so, you can pump another billion barrels of oil a day and the price won't change. You'll just have to build more storage tanks to hold it all as gasoline production is maxed out. What we're hearing now is nothing more than political rhetoric and an attempt by BoyGeorge to fatten the wallets of his buddies in the "ol bidness". And this is coming from a card carrying republican who lives in oil and gas country.
We need to expand our refining capacity, I agree. The problem is no one wants to build a new one under current environmental regulations. Their is no incentive. There is no financial benefit for the investment at this time for those who would invest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
We have so many important things that we make out of petroleum, plastics, surgical tools and implements, etc., etc. I hope we will someday stop wasting the stuff in our inefficient cars.

Instead why don't we stop wasting our oil on this stuff, which can be made from other materials and use our oil to run our cars.
 

·
Stinks like fish
Joined
·
986 Posts
Ursidae69 Some people said:
You should research this more. You will find the answers(if you can shift through all the layers of misinformation) quite enlighteneing. This is not on that tribes land. They will not get any financial benefits from it. It is human nature to not want to see your neighbors enriched.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Bryanccfshr said:
First off your too wordy for not having a clue, typing too much text and misrepresenting them as facts seems to be a trend on this forum lately.. The infrastructure is already up here in prudhoe bay which is not far fron ANWR(get a map). The Ground is frozen much of the year and gravel Roads along the flow lines will provide access the days that ice roads cannot be used (which will be used primarily for heavy equipment) Ships & docks? Your a tool Get a clue before you spout off your ignorant bullshit, 40 miles of flow line to connect most the fields to the Badami Sattelite field and another 40 miles of existing infrastructure to the production centers in Prudhoe, then it gets sent down more existing pipe TAPS to an existing terminal and shipping facility (Valdez). . You are posting on second hand knowledge and what youv'e picked up is quite questionable. In the 4 years I have bveen working here break up is in june and freeze up is no later thanthe second week of septmenber on averge. How many fucking days is that?? I bet you never have been to the Arctic.

I can't take anything else you talk about seriously becasue you started off with lies, desception and ignorance. The rest of your post is probably the same.

Okay, smart guy, yeah Prudhoe Bay is relatively close based on the size of Alaska to ANWR So, does the analogy that all the poiticians use that says this whole footprint will be the size of a municiple airport fit?? How big is a small airport compared to the hundred miles of road and pipeline needed to get from ANWR to Prudhoe?? The slick lies you people tell are sad.

Yes, I have been to Alaska, spent two weeks in Fairbanks a couple years ago, drove up to the Arctic Circle. These gravel roads, how long will that take to make hundreds of miles of them??

If you're argument was half as good as the useless insults, you might be worth debating with. People that shit-talk in place of making a good point are annoying. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Bryanccfshr said:
You should research this more. You will find the answers(if you can shift through all the layers of misinformation) quite enlighteneing. This is not on that tribes land. They will not get any financial benefits from it. It is human nature to not want to see your neighbors enriched.
Well, I met and heard a talk from a Gwich’in Native elder not more than 3 weeks ago. Is that misinformation? Their tribal history on the land goes a lot further than the short time ANWR has been there. They actually will get benefits, lots of them. Any of the Gwich'in people actually living in Alaska will get a larger check each year if we drill. They will also have more jobs during the contruction and their people are divided now as to the cost versus benefit, but overall they are against it. You need to work on your talking points. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
A voice of reason. Nice to see someone who thinks rationally about these things. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do up there? Do you work for an oil company or are you up there coincidentally?
 
1 - 20 of 98 Posts
Top