House Drops Arctic Drilling From Bill

Post Reply New Topic

House Drops Arctic Drilling From Bill
The House is seeing the first signs of dissension as the moderates move to distance themselves from their party leardership and George W.'s watchful eye. Personally I'm glad to see that oil companies will have a much tougher time getting what they want out of Washington DC. as President Bush begins to lose all political credibility.

Woohoo! I'm sure the caribou and musk ox will be relieved.

Actually, the drilling is, in the short term, good for the large herbivores.
As seen in the National Petroleum Reserve, drilling disrupts the habitats of large predators, but large herbivores don't mind so much.

Large predators go down so large herbivore herds go up.
As long as you leave some large predators to prevent overgrazing, the caribou and musk ox would therefore much appreciate a bit of disruption.

Unfortunately, for caribou at least, pipelines across their migratory route can disrupt their migration patterns totally.

They had thought of that in the 70's when they built the first pipeline, so they elevated the whole thing off the ground so the animals could go underneath.

The last West Wing Episode hit on this a bit, but I'm tired of seeing our nationaly preserved arease between turned into a playground for ranchers, miners and foresters. It's about time we stood up and said no. What I am most excited about however is the GOP moderates sending a message to the White House that they are no longer willing to play nice with George W.

Hooray for the Caribou!

We need the oil! We're still getting screwed on OPEC's prices and if there was a new source of oil in the US, it would be harder to for oil companies to cook the books to hide price gouging.

Disprupting the habits of carnivores but not herbivores would cause imbalances in the popuaiton. More hunting licenses would need to be issued to correct the imbalance. The boundaries of the refuge might need to be shifted as well someday when drilling there become critical.

If we can find and use oil in the ANWR, the estimated potential reserves will last us no more than six months.

Now alternatively, we could look at alternative sources of energy. It's possible to gassify and liquify coal. Does nothing for the environment but would save on the issue of foreign oil.

Nuclear power, as all of my science teachers even in the People's Republic of Amherst point out is pretty much the ideal source of power from every perspective but cost. Now maybe if we stopped subsidizing fossil fuels and actually used our plutonium. . .

Going into that class I was the only libertarian, I think we'll see a lot more coming out.

Then there are renewable energies.
They're working on making solar power non-biohazardous.
Wind power has no negative side effects except the improvement of the gene pools of a few species of birds.
I don't see how tidal and geothermal power can be anything more than a novelty, but when done properly hydro's still safe and efficient. Waves, meh, really have no clue about that, I'm gonna go with novelty.
Biofuel produces no net increase in pollution.

Then there are all sorts of ways that we waste energy. I don't mean use it to ensure a better standard of living, I mean flat out waste it. Shoddy craftmenship and design costs us untoldfold more in the long run.

Anywhen, the world's full of idiots and nothing sane'll ever be done, so why bother. Once I'm an adult I'm buying some land by a stream, installing some water and wind turbines, (and perhaps a couple solar panels) and letting the world destroy itself.

LOL Quin, sounds like a worthy endeavor.
You forgot hydrogen cell technology.
Also, you forgot zero point energy devices.

Sean thank you so much for chirping in.
Political discussions on WP would be far less entertaining without you.
Once again I have to disagree whole heartedly, but that's what's so enjoyable about having you here.

Predator-prey models are highly suceptible to error due to human interference.

Hydrogen fuel cells are just fancy batteries.
I figured this out first time I read an article on this, my environmental science teacher confirmed this.

Zero point?
You mean like cold fusion?


Human interference is what we're trying to measure here though, no?

I hate agreeing with you.

Okay. So spell it out simply for me. We're not raping a frigid winter wonderland and siphoning billions of dollars in revenue from its corpse?

Dammit. That ruined my week.

It would ruin mine only if the moderate Republicans back down.
Mankinds over reliance on fossil fuels does more damage to the environment then good.
If it is not a renewable resouce, then it will run out eventually.
So, we need to invest in inventing alternative technologies any how.

And Sean, if the President were to take action against the oil companies they would not be able to continually overcharge for fuel while making record profits. They are doing so because the market allows them to, and a lack of government oversight.