Drilling in Alaska- good or bad?

Discussion in 'America Attacks!' started by Jezmund, Jun 3, 2004.

  1. Jezmund

    Jezmund Member

    Is drilling in Alaska such a bad thing? First of all Alaska is huge. as the population rapidly continues to grow in the continental US why not let Alaska develop a little bit? for fifty years its just been sitting there without even a little bit of commerce and industry. Alaska has a big potential to really thrive. Why let all that good land go to waste? I'm not saying it should be fully developed. theres enough land to set aside as wildlife reserves. If Alaska developed a little more just think about what that would do to its tourism industry. More importantly it would weaken our dependence on Middle East oil. We could get all of our people out of Saudi and harms way. the radicals in the region would not have any more reason to fight us well the Israeli thing. hell the only reason Al Queda was formed was to get us out of there.

    But what about ANWAR and all that prestine land? thats God's country and shouldnt be touched. Many species would be wiped out and the land scape would be ruined. it would be a sin to destroy all that. is there enough oil up there to even consider destroying it. experts say that we get get about a million barrells a day for the next thirty years from Alaska. 1.5% of what we get from OPEC! this is truly a moral dilemna

    its the oil men that have been running the country for the last fifty years that have caused all this grief. and now that we've gotten one of them in the white house its gotten worse. I hate to say it but Kerry will almost certainly yield to the oil lobby so an alternate energy source is not in the near future I'm afraid. so what are we gonna do? your comments please.
     
  2. mynameiskc

    mynameiskc way to go noogs!

    well, if we're going to destroy someone's land for our own oil greed, it might as well be our own. the gulf of mexico, anwar, places where we'll be forced to look at it. not that it did any good in SoCal, where they prettied up the rigs. you never saw a group of people so determined to drive EVERYWHERE. they'll drive someone to go for a walk. it's ridiculous.
     
  3. jesuswasamonkey

    jesuswasamonkey Slightly Tipsy

    First of all, wherever it is done drilling for oil damages the environment, be it Alaska, Kansas, the Gulf of Mexico or the Middle East. That being said, the damafge done by drilling is not as extreme as you probably think. I spend a lot of time in rural Kansas, where my Dad's family is from, and there are several wells on our family land. An oil well only really affects about 1/2 acre around itself, mostly just because of the neccesary human traffic to drill and run the well. Drilling an oil well isn't like you see in the movies, they don't let the stuff spray all over the place when they strike oil, that would depressurize the well and make it useless, so there isn't a bunch of crude around wells polluting up the place unless there is an accident.

    That being said, to drill in Alaska would require more than just wells, there would need to be roads for trucks and machinery, and settlements for the workers. But even with that, is it not better to dig up your own back yard than to force your neighbors to let you dig up theirs?
     
  4. mynameiskc

    mynameiskc way to go noogs!

    this area is a natural gas patch. there's gas wells everywhere, as well as the roads to and from them. and there's also the extremely noisy compressors pushing pressure into the lines to get more gas out of the ground. they're monsters. they really screw up the rut for the deer and elk, who have a hard time hearing each other over all the noise. then with all the trucks running around on all the roads, well, it's a mess. it's also pretty hard to get some of the guys to behave themselves with their garbage and their running around. it's pretty rough on the animals, though they learn to adapt to the noise and interference over time. but what herds you have left after all the trouble is dimished terribly and takes a long time to bounce back.
     
  5. DharmaBum

    DharmaBum Old Guard

    I Think we need to Start looking at Alternative Fuel Sources and If Alaska is Drilled for Oil then it Will Cause alot of Damage..More than what's Already been mentioned..The Oil Pipelines alone will Run Right through the Natural habitats of alot of Animal Species...How Long Before the World Run's out of Oil and What then?..we need to Change our way's Now..not Later..we have the Technology and the Ability..The Very Elements around Us can provide all of the Power we NEED..but i Doubt it will ever happen..*sighs*
     
  6. eirek

    eirek Guest

    My dad is part owner in 7500 acres in Alaska where there is Oil among other things so I've heard alot about this debate. They have enviromentalists breathing down their throats because "It will destroy the environment if you drill here" And so on. Personally I checked up alot on drilling in pristine lands and there is little to support their opinion's. The initial impact is what hurts the most because of the animals being scared, but after that most move back and live in peace around the plants. Also here in texas where I live(well more north west) there are tons of oil drills and mills and everything is fine. Let open up alaska slowly so we can get out of the oil wars and drop the prices to bring back part of our economy. Just my 2 Cents

    ~Matt
     
  7. MaxPower

    MaxPower Kicker Of Asses

    Of course we should drill in Alaske. I'm in favor of anything that gives U.S. oil companies an advantage over OPEC.
     
  8. Brocktoon

    Brocktoon Banned

    Like some other members posting here, I also live and work in and around the 'Gas and Oil' business.

    Lets start off by saying that ALL industry is 'doing something' to the environment ok.
    Highways cut massive borders into land.
    You like Electric cars eh? - then go take a look at the massive amounts of land cleared, animals too and heavy equipment it takes to lay down dams, and powerlines!
    Woodstock Festival did a lot of damage to a natural environment too.

    Now having said all that...

    The 'destroyed Alaska' myth is one of the biggest lies the 'city dwellers' in the USA have ever swallowed.

    First - the Alaska Oil projects would be done using NEW technology and make no mistake - they HAVE improved the efficiency beyond anything you have seen before.

    The days of huge ugly rigs sprawling around, drilling endless holes are gone.
    The modern Rigs proposed for Alaska are so small, portable and clean it would amaze anyone.

    To put it in a perspective people can relate to:

    Imagine someone proposed to build a tiny tiny little town in Alaska (or your neighbourhood)
    This little tiny 'town' of 5-600 people was portable and made of the most modern energy efficient houses and sewage and power.
    In fact its so efficient it will grow for a few years and then leave the area.
    It would actually be quickly assembled on top of the ice and even that ice will be cleaned before it melts!

    You will be able to visit the area after its gone and unless you knew exactly where it had been - you would NEVER find a trace of it anywhere.

    That is what the modern drilling Rig is like.

    Will a few Caribou get hit by trucks. Probably.
    Will it require a large hole be dug in the ground? Yes.
    Will it 'destroy Alaska's pristing environment'? Absolutely not.

    Just to put this into another perspective - People need to realise that every single DAY, THOUSANDS of Rigs (most far more environmentally 'destructive') are pounding away throughout the US of A!
    Thousands of Rigs like this are keeping your house lit, your computer going, your car moving and the economy going so that you can buy those shoes next week.
    Thousands and thousands of them all day and night.

    One project in Alaska is NOT going to suddenly end the world... or make any signifigant difference on the environment.

    Yes.. I wish we lived in a world where we didnt use any oil either, but this 'Alaska' controversy has gotten down-right silly.
     
  9. mynameiskc

    mynameiskc way to go noogs!

    and don't get me started on the electricity plants and what they do to the environment to keep running. yikes. it's truly awful.
     
  10. Brocktoon

    Brocktoon Banned

    Oh its terrible!

    The massive destruction to animals that happens because of hydro-electric dams is truly spectacular.
    The next step is mowing down hundreds of Km's of wilderness to lay the power lines to the cities.
    Its ugly, messy and causes massive upset to the natural environment.

    The 'up-side' is that city people think its 'clean' and 'magic' and 'easy' when they only see the 'clean plug' attaching to their car and cant 'smell dirty fumes'.

    Ha!.. Ed Begley actually seems to believe electricity is 'made in a waterfall factory' - probably having never seen hundreds of dead deer washed up on shore thanks to a dam.

    I only wish people would re-consider Nuclear power. If it wasn't for the whole 'radioactivity' issue we would have it made!
     
  11. seamonster66

    seamonster66 discount dracula

    It couldn't be good, the best that can come out of it is a few more years of oil, it's destroying pristine land and just postponing the inevitable.
     
  12. Brocktoon

    Brocktoon Banned

    Could you explain a little more about what you considering 'destroying pristine land'?

    Are you refering to a sheet of ice the size of a typical shopping mall in width?

    Or are you talking about the ice that will be driven on to get to and from the site?
     
  13. mynameiskc

    mynameiskc way to go noogs!

    the problem with nuclear power is where to store the waste. the people storing it out in there supposed wastelands are going to be mainly native americans.
     
  14. eirek

    eirek Guest

    Or for that matter Utahn's or Nevada'ns. I recently moved from utah where they are trying to move all the nuclear waste to right now. Nuclear power could be the awnser minus the waste byproduct. We'll see what happens in the future. There is also speculation about mag cars coming soon so that we wont be wasting anything. We already have the technology, but the whole building all the roads over would be a monumental undertaking and I'm sure our government would rather have billions of dollars instead of better air and longer life.
     
  15. DharmaBum

    DharmaBum Old Guard

    Tis a Shame alot of you Can't see Past "Oil" enough to understand that it wont be around for Much Longer(In Global Terms) with the Increase in population and Overall Use of the "Black Gold" , All this talk of Power stations Nuclear Fuel...It's all nonsense..i Personally need None of this to Survive in my everyday Life ,Nor does anyone else NEED it ,but let's Carry on along This Runaway Train and see Where it takes us..Disaster.
     
  16. mynameiskc

    mynameiskc way to go noogs!

    okay, this from a guy using electricity and a computer most likely made form fossil fuel by-products.

    no, we don't need it, and eventually, we won't have it anyway.
     
  17. Day Dreamer

    Day Dreamer Member

    I'm looking at the locations of the posters....Tennessee, New Mexico, Ireland, Texas, NewYork... Why don't we ask someone who actually LIVES in Alaska(which one poster so affectionately implied is nothing but ice) their opinion on the subject. Regardless of your past occupations in the oil buisness, you don't really have any legitimate argument, unless you've actually been to Alaska.

    A couple pictures of the "barren frozen wasteland" that is Alaska:
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG] The northern lights


    [​IMG]
     
  18. luvndrumn

    luvndrumn Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    There IS a reason that ice is there and why it is as (you said width - did you mean thick?) thick as it is. The same reason that there are rain forrests. The same reason for hurricaines and El Ninos. They are all part of the global ecosystem. The one that the world's industry is stepping on, that short-sighted people are stepping on. Before anyone pounces on the fact that people need this industry (and I agree - we do), let me point out that at one time the Cuyahoga River in Ohio was so polluted that it caught fire. It is fairly clean now, so that shows what can be done when we keep thinking beyond the attainment of the dollar. This IS a better way to produce the needs and the wants of this world. We have only to do it. And we can. After all, there are footprints on the moon.

    Drilling in ANWAR can be done with a very small footprint. And, yes, the caribou herds will get used to the rigs and the pipelines and the relatively infrequent incursions of trucks into the region, but all that will do is just continue the addiction to oil. The ANWAR oil field is like a fix to a junkie. It stops the pain, feels good, and diverts the junkie's attention from the fact that one day, the pusher ain't gonna be on that corner.

    What this country needs to do is to start to wean itself off oil now because it is going to take a very long time to do it. Better a twelve step than cold turkey. The withdrawal pains are gonna be a bitch.


    BTW daydreamer, I was born in Fairbanks, 150 miles south of the Arctic Circle. I'd like my birth state to remain as pristine as it was 50 years ago, maybe even more so.
     
  19. Brocktoon

    Brocktoon Banned

    Nobody here suggested that Alaska was a 'barren wasteland' or was made of ice.

    The area in question will be covered in a thick sheet of ice during the winter.
    The 'damage' will be done to the ice.
    The Ice will melt leaving little or no trace of the Rig.

    Do not bother posting pictures of mountains and forests or Northern lights because the proposed Oil rigs will NOT BE ANYWHERE NEAR ANY SUCH THING.

    Also.. do some of you have ANY CLUE AT ALL what happens when you drill for Oil?
    Do you understand that some of your Walmart parking lots are taking up MORE space than the entire drill site will?

    WHY are you talking about comparisons to The Rain Forest or entire areas of land?
    The Rig itself including all the buildings and surrounding area is WAY SMALLER than a tiny village.
    Period.

    This is not forestry.
    This is not a new subdivision.

    This is a huge mobile 'tower' which will sit on top of the ice and and drill A HOLE into the ground.

    To put this into perspective again (not that its helping):

    If you held a Woodstock sized festival in the exact same location - that festival would take up FAR MORE ROOM and probably as much traffic in and out as this entire RIg would.
     
  20. luvndrumn

    luvndrumn Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    To bring to light, or at least to try to bring to light (and your response tells me that it IS needed) that we, in our finite wisdom, mess around with ecosystems that we do not have a good understanding of. That's why I brought up the rain forrest. It's had a lot of press. A lot of research has been done on the effects of its deforrestation. A number of species of animals, insects, and plants are becoming extinct because of this intrusion.

    The arctic is a delicate area, just like the rain forrest. We don't learn very quickly from our mistakes and our mistakes are usually huge. The benefit we can get from drilling in ANWAR might outweigh the harm that might come from drilling. Then again, it might not. Trouble is, we don't get a second chance.

    Clearer now?
     

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice