Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
howlostami
Trad climber
Southern Tier, NY
|
|
ANWR is just a bandaid, not a viable long term solution to oil dependence. The root problem is the same whether we drill it or not, so we does it keep coming up as a smoke screen? Solve the problem of cheap, long distance, fast travel for humans and their goods, and here's a hint, it's not going to be hydrocarbon based internal combustion engines. And for the record I don't want to drill ANWR for one simple reason: When the world runs out and everyone wants a piece of what we've got left I'd like to have some jet fuel around just in case. Keep that ace in our sleeve, if you know what I mean.
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
San Fernando Lamas
|
|
Maybe drilling will, at best, keep gas from hitting $80 a gallon until 2032 instead of 2030?
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) in their Annual Energy Outlook 2007, reported:
"The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."
Oil produced in Florida, California, Alaska, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, etc., goes into a big pool called THE WORLD MARKET. We produce a little more, they produce a little less, the demand keeps leaping forward; guess which way the price keeps going.
Our mantra should not be "independence from foreign oil." It should be "independence from fossil fuels."
Drilling is attractive because people can feel like we're doing "something", facts be damned. But the fact is, it won't do "anything".
Drilling more just prolongs our dependence. And twenty years from now, everyone will be saying we should have made real changes a long time ago, like back in '08.
The longer we put off real, substantial change, the more necessary and painful it will be.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
let's just say, for the sake of argument, somebody introduces TOMORROW a solar-rechargeable (even with overcast skies) battery that can run a full size suv with the same effectiveness (speed and power) as an internal combustion engine...would that end our dependence on oil? i'd say it will take at least 20 years before that technology becomes affordable for the average american...plus we'll still "need" oil for all those other goodies we "need"--like ropes and harnesses and cams and biners and slings and packs and rock shoes and approach shoes and mountain boots and wind jackets and rain jackets and snow jackets and guide books and jet fuel...
now, obama's plan for alternative energy, by his own estimates, will take at least 10 years BUT there's no guarantee that the next 10 years of research and development will provide enough energy to replace oil...drilling, on the other hand, guarantees at least a supply of fuel
will drilling on our own land lower oil prices? well, W overturned the executive ban on drilling (signed by his father) and prices dropped...coincidence? maybe, so let's test that theory by having congress overturn its ban on drilling and see what happens to the price of oil
allow the oil companies to drill...require that all operations be monitored by a third party (i.e. not the industry and not the gov) like the nature conservancy...and, instead of taxing oil's profits, which are a measly 8.3% of revenues, redirect some of the 49% of state and federal taxes on those revenues toward research and development on alternative fuels
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
Oil is part of the energy equation. Instead of focusing on more oil, we should be developing more sources of energy, especialy those with less environmental impact, then the oil we have can be used where other energy sources are less efficient.
BTW enviromental impact doesn't just mean oil spills that kill wildlife and hurt local tourism or fishing, the environment is everything around us, e.g. the atmosphere and altering it's chemistry and function which may cause way more dollars in damage (hurricanes/crop failures/floods, etc) than then value of the oil.
Yes it was a coincedence that oil prices dropped. How's this for an experiment that may actually work, release some oil from the strategic oil reserve when prices are spiking? Oh yeah that doesn't help the oil companies make more money, we better not do that...
We can drill everywhere in the US. It's a global market and it won't be a drop in the bucket compared to what the increase in China's consumption will be by the time the new wells are on line.
We've got to be smart enough to do something new. But of course the people making lots of money off the status quo are fooling the sheeple again.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
Why not just invade China and Russia. We have the upper hand on them right now so why not nip things at the bud? It would kill two birds with one stone. They have lots of oil and China will use too much if we let them.
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
Wow Skip, are we even able to invade China and Russia?
How do you think that would turn out Skip, given how difficult our little Iraqi adventure has been?
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
No Skip, you wanted to make a point that we don't invade countries for their oil cause we have not invaded Russia or China.
How amazing stupid of you Skip.
Do you really believe that?
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
HAHA, you mean we don't invade big countries, that might just kick our asses or bloody our noses, for their oil.
Small countries that we think we can crush like a bug (like Iraq), that's another story.
BTW, last time I looked, both Russia and China had a lot of nukes.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
I believe that if make the effort to invade a country we should take its oil. Why not endanger Iraq's environment instead of our own coast?
We made them all free and democratic, it's the least they could do.
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
YOU mean you missed all those oil service company contracts re Iraqi territory that went to US oil biz recently?
IF that ain't dividing spoils of war, what is?
|
|
Mtnmun
Trad climber
Top of the Mountain Mun
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 1, 2008 - 07:18pm PT
|
Lucky for the Iraqi's George W. Bush is in charge.
600,000 Iraqi civilians dead, millions of refugees living away from their homes. The women must sell their bodies or their families will starve.
Bush even f-d up the oil grab.
Skipt that is amazingly stupid.
|
|
Trippel40
Social climber
CO
|
|
NO DRILLING!
Everyone should be forced to move by FAIR MEANS!
Traditionally powered transportation only and if you don't like it you are wrong! No single pitch trips either, all traditional movements must be grade III or longer to be worthy.
Of course, there would be a grey area involving trips that are fueled by stance drilling for oil along the path as one proceeded in a strictly linear fashion from the orin to the destination. You'd also be able to get away with smaller drilling apparati than is commonly accepted in such cases.
Of course this couldn't be done when travelling through certain areas with "wilderness" designations as it would violate the ban on fixing in such locations.
It could get much messier than this Im sure but thankfully there would always be internet forums on which to resolve these issues in a mutually satispactory manner where all could agree on the final, best, and only solution as is usually the case.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
I can't wait until the airline and trucking industries, and car manufacturers, come begging for handouts in Washington. The only question is whether it'll be before or after the election.
It does help to include a few facts in the discussion. The ones that I think are interesting are that world oil production may have already or soon will peak. The U.S. consumes 25% or more of world oil production. The real price of oil is still only slightly higher than it was in 1980. The transition to an economy that uses less oil per capita will be rocky, especially in the U.S., where the public and politicians have almost always favoured short-term decisions. Other countries, especially in Europe, have been more forward-thinking, and may weather change better. And there must be a significant government role for the U.S. federal government in managing the change there.
My guess is that once enough desperate state governments push the federal government, and the economy is in rough enough shape, the federal government will be forced to act. For all the over-blown rhetoric and dogma, pragmatism and results usually win out in politics. Nation-wide problems that have evolved over decades don't get solved by pretending they don't exist. And this one is so closely tied to so many other issues - climate change, Iraq, fantasy federal budgets - that it may finally force the U.S. public to pay attention, and make some difficult decisions.
Much the same up here - except Canada is a net oil exporter, which makes it easier for the government and public to put off the inevitable. There may be substantial oil and gas reserves off the coast of B.C, and in much of the Arctic, too.
|
|
Ihateplastic
Trad climber
Lake Oswego, Oregon
|
|
The answer is...
no.
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
San Fernando Lamas
|
|
Maybe it will, but the question is "should we?"
Go back and sniff some more cat sh#t Woodrow.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
Wanda... is in a snit. Well, I can understand. When one doesn't like the realities of this world constantly slamming you in the face and blowing holes in your delusions.
|
|
Russ Walling
Social climber
Out on the sand.... man.....
|
|
mtnmun: The women must sell their bodies or their families will starve.
In all fairness, this is going on probably within one square mile of every one of us.... except FakeBlinny?
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
San Fernando Lamas
|
|
Woody believes we should live our lives like the toxoplasma cysts--the parasites--that infect Woody's brain.
Woody is proud that Woody has figured out how to make something out of a dead-end, destructive reality. Woody can't understand why everyone else can't suck blood with gusto like Woody.
Wanda, on the other hand, isn't delusional; Wanda knows the difference between the ideal and the reality. As part of this dysfunctional society Wanda too, is a parasite of future generations; just don't ask Wanda to like it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!