View Single Post
  #3  
Old June 28th 08, 09:01 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !

http://home.att.net/~meditation/ANWR.html

The costly symbolism of ANWR

The United States is in serious energy crisis today, in part
because of the triumph of symbolism over substance in the United
States Congress. Our political pundits have elevated the 19.6 million
acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR (see map),
into a sacred mythical land that no man dare tread upon, least they
spoil its great natural beauty forever (picture of drilling area). In
reality, any future ANWR oil exploration would only take place in the
desolate, treeless area designated as "10-02," which represents just
8% of ANWR's land area, and which encompasses the Coastal Plain north
of the Sadlerochit Mountains. Of that 8% of ANWR land, federal law
states that only 2,000 surface acres could ever be used for actual
drilling purposes. This 10-02 area was set aside specifically for oil
and gas exploration and is not legally defined as a "wilderness" or a
"refuge." None of Alaska's ANWR region is legally defined as a
"park." We allow roads, campgrounds, hundreds of toilets, hotels, and
hoards of tourists to violate the sanctity of Yellowstone (2.2 million
acres) and Yosemite (.76 million acres), which are both legally
defined as "parks," but do allow much needed oil drilling on just
2,000 acres of ANWR, which has 3.7 times the land area of the State of
Massachusetts (5.3 million acres).

Does any member of the United States Congress really believe that
drilling for oil on just 2,000 acres will destroy all wildlife and
vegetation, leaving behind nothing but a smoldering toxic wasteland?
Using directional drilling techniques, one single oil drilling station
can snake underground pipes out to 8 miles in all directions, so the
tiny footprint of oil recovery operations in ANWR would be
inconsequential to the local ecology. When the oil is gone and the
drilling equipment removed, any evidence that there was once oil
exploration at ANWR would soon vanish. Drilling in ANWR would be like
throwing a single peanut on the wall-to-wall carpet of a very large
living room floor; hardly a cataclysmic event.

Why are we paying Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia so much money
for imported oil when we could be producing that oil ourselves and
giving Americans high paying jobs in the process? Some of the same
environmentalists who oppose ANWR drilling support wild solar power
schemes that would cover 21.76 million acres (34,000 square miles) of
our beautiful Southwestern desert with of solar panels. Solar panels
on a roof are fine, but when you cover virgin land with them you
create a DEAD ZONE that will remain dead until the panels are removed
and the land has time to heal itself. Other environmentalists support
the building of thousands of wind turbines, which in addition to being
unsightly are very effective bird and bat killing devices that end the
lives of many thousands of our flying friends every year. Why is
damage done by solar and wind power schemes politically correct, but
benignly extracting oil from Alaska politically taboo?

The Congressional Research Service (see 76kb pdf) estimates that
if oil recovery was allowed in the 10-02 area of ANWR, it would be
worth at least $94.8 billion in federal income taxes and $42.8 billion
in royalties, totaling $138 billion. This study uses the most
conservative estimate of recoverable oil; 10.4 billion barrels. The
actual oil treasure could climb to well over 20 billion barrels as new
discoveries and improvements in oil drilling technology increase the
size of extractable reserves. Oil drilling is supported by the
Alaskan Native communities that live in ANWR, the State Government of
Alaska, and over 75% of Alaskan residents. Declaring a huge area of
land untouchable to oil recovery at a time of national energy crisis
is irresponsible energy policy. As long as so many American political
leaders place symbolism above substance, we will never solve our
strategic national energy problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------
SEE http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html - Why
biofuels are a total global disaster, and how clean nuclear energy can
provide 10,000 years of $2.00 per gallon synthetic gasoline.

Christopher Calder

Ads