»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
| The Alley |
|
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge |
|
|
Jaime Fradera Senior Member
since 2000-11-25
Posts 843Where no tyranny is tolerable |
Could someone educate about what exactly this is, and what is the feared or probable impact drilling operations on wilelife habitat? Like animal migration patterns and fishing and hunting needs of aboriginal peoples? What is the geologic structure of the North Slope? If they are laying pipe through permafrost, can petrolium be piped away without contaminating or disrupting the local ekosystem? What safeguards or precautions are being taken? Or is it just environmental waco types who don't like oil and hate the President? Is it understood that petrolium that fuels the industrialized world and that without it wouldn't have the inordinately high standard of living to which we've got accostumed ... Like a warm house ... like puters and micros ... like keyboards with which to post this stuff on Pips? When you clock the human race with the stopwatch of history, it's a new record every time. |
||
| © Copyright 2005 The Sun - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Or is it just environmental waco types who don't like oil and hate the President? That just about says it all, Jaime. There will come a day in the future that defeating this action will be considered the dumbest thing the United States congress ever did.....and you really have to go some to achieve that!!1  |
||
Mistletoe Angel 
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
It's really a mixture of all you've said. As I have specified multiple times in previous ANWR-related threads, I am absolutely opposed to ANWR drilling. With that said, I want to make some points clear here. You have to understand the big picture here, beyond the rhetoric of "This oil will move Maryland for 100 years", etc. None of us know exactly how much oil is there, but by the most accepted estimations, the oil in the ANWR is such a small amount, that it's only approximately more than 2% of the U.S oil supply? In terms of the nation at large, this oil in ANWR is not enough to last us any more than 6 to 11 months, as well as the understanding that the oil will take 10-15 years to put on the market. "Energy independent" doesn't just mean ending the reliance of our oil from foreign nations. It also means looking toward renewable sources, not expanded oil drilling. The ANWR consideration just seems to be a defeatist proposition to me; another red herring in trying to solve the inevitable issue; how we're going to move toward a more sustainable energy economy once we do reach the "peak oil" day. * Beyond that, history often reveals to us the understanding that once you start scratching at any surface, you keep scratching at it. Some ANWR drilling proponents insist that a microscopic portion of the land will be open to drilling and a vast majority will remain off limits. Believe me, this is not going to stop there. Inevitably there will be starving for more...and more...and more...until one day we turn our heads and see there really is nothing left, and all the magic is gone for both tourists and the oil barons. The jobs created from this are merely temporary jobs. It's far more economical, and creates far more jobs, in working for environmental sustainability. Too often do we look at the short-term benefits, which truly are a blessing in disguise, and discount the long-term deficiencies. They say that only 2000 acres will be drilled on along the Coastal Plain. According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), oil under the Coastal Plain is spread across the entire 1.5 million acres. The 2000-acre limitation would not require that the 2000 acres of production and support facilities be in one compact contiguous area. That limitation only addresses "surface acreage covered by production and support facilities." It only includes where oil facilities will actually touch the ground. The USGS also estimates that the amount of oil likely to be recovered from the Arctic Refuge would be no more than 0.3% of the World's reserves, and would do nothing to help secure the nation's energy independence. * I am a deep lover of my environment, but my opposition from drilling doesn't come merely out of overall robust disagreement with the president's policies. I simply believe when you look at the whole picture, it just isn't worth it, and what we ought to be doing more of right now is following more of John McCain and Bill Richardson's example in beginning to customize a more sustainable energy economy, for I'm sure the last thing any of us would want to see is future generations wake up and find both scarred eecosystems and no natural resource necessities available to them so they can go about their everyday lives just as we do. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
I just saw this post, Jaime, but will return later to comment. I'm heading off to snoozeland for a while, up all night working means sleeping in middle of day. later amigo |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179005,00.html enjoy . . . |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
"Only the flat and featureless coastal plain would be affected, and even there only a small portion of its 1.5 million acres. The current version of the bill limits the surface disturbance to 2,000 acres, a small piece of a big coastal plain in a very big wildlife refuge in the biggest state in the Union." That's just it, that's the first counter-myth being projected by the pro-drilling crowd; that the Arctic coastal plain is "featureless". It's not. Even 13-year old Sierra Pell of Marlboro, Vermont understands this, who researched ANWR and filed a petition against oil drilling. She wrote the following in her essay: * "Each Spring, one of the worlds biggest Caribou herds travels over 400 miles just to give birth in ANWR'S almost perfect nursery. Pregnant or nursing Caribou can be very sensitive and, at any disturbance, may leave the nursery and their calves. Each Summer, millions of graceful Snow Geese, Sand Hill Cranes, Red Throated Loons and many other bird species come to nest in this precious place before starting their long journey south. Each Fall, more pearly Polar Bears than anywhere else, come ashore to birth their cubs and build their dens. Pregnant and nursing Polar Bears are very sensitive and if disturbed they might leave their dens, resulting in fatal consequences for their cubs. All throughout the year, over 350 cumbersome Musk Oxen (one of our few survivors of the ice age) roam the fragile plains that they depend on so much, the plain that gives them shelter, food and a place to be! They depend on this land! If we let the Bush administration destroy this land that the animals depend on, our age old survivors may die! It may sound strange that they can survive the NATURAL ice age and yet not survive UNNATURAL land destruction; but it's true! All year round, along with the Musk Oxen, Grizzlies, Wolves, Arctic Foxes, Golden Eagles, Snowy Owls and many others live off the hospitable land of ANWR. Do we really want to see such magnificent animals or their homes become destroyed?" * There's a mountain of research that shows how the Arctic coastal plain is a fertile crescent of sorts for many migrational routes of species. * "Again, the vast majority of ANWR will be completely unaffected by drilling. It would occur only on a small part of the coastal plain where there already is some human habitation. There are plenty of truly pristine places in Alaska worth preserving, but ANWR’s coastal plain isn’t one of them." Again, as I made clear earlier, historically we have seen before how early "promises" have always been made to ensure that only a particular site would be excavated, and in time it has been shown how it never stops there, that curiosity and the insatiable thirst for more has happened, and that soon enough if ANWR is opened up to drilling, eventually the operations will be carried out beyond the coastal plain. It's plainly inevitable logic. * "It is worth noting that another wildlife refuge in Alaska, the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, has had drilling onsite for decades. The oil production there rarely makes the news because it has not caused any problems, even though Kenai has far more wildlife than ANWR." http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Pollution/oil-pipes-example-2.htm Perhaps Ben Lieberman has forgotten about the history of pipeline spills within the Kenai Refuge, particularly in the Swanson Oil Fields. According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service studies, oil drilling in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska has resulted in more than 350 spills, explosions and fires and is linked with abnormally high numbers of deformed wood frogs. The oil production there has barely ever made the news because of poor reporting and poor management of the pipelines, including the 1972 Compressor Plant Explosion which went virtually unreported for 14 years. * "Environmentalists have been particularly excessive in predicting dire harm to the herd of migrating caribou that passes through ANWR. But the caribou herd that migrates through Prudhoe Bay has increased from 3,000 to 23,000 since drilling commenced there in 1977." They fail to add that the overall Central Arctic herd has been in decline since 1992. * "In fact, polls regularly show 75 percent or more of Alaskans support drilling. This includes the native Alaskans who live in the vicinity of the area where ANWR drilling would occur, although the few who oppose drilling get most of the media attention." There's no doubt that ANWR is a polarizing national issue. Most polls will show you a slight majority of Americans oppose ANWR drilling, and there is clear polarization on the issue across party lines; most Republicans support the drilling, most Democrats oppose it, most younger voters oppose it, most older voters support it, etc. The bottom line is, the polarization is most understandable, and I agree Alaska, which has long been a staunch Republican state traditionally, does lean very much in support of the drilling. But this brings me back to one of my main points. This IS a national debate because this is not merely about environmental politics, it's about sustainability as well. The big oil companies and the Bush Administration in particular are using the ANWR token as a red herring, an excuse to that we can continue to hold off on contemplating ideas as we approach the inevitable; the time of "peak oil", and our natural resource strongholds begin to dry up worldwide. We ought to be working to prepare for a "post-petroleum economy" (it's not to say an economy totally free of oil, but one where we can assure our children and our children's children that there will be plenty of resources available to them in the near future, because we had the ability to sit down, discuss, and plan and prepare for a more sustainable economy for the future. The drive to drilling in ANWR is distracting this crucial dialogue from formulating, it's putting us back in that "naive comfort zone" that ANWR is the answer to all our energy independence prayers, when there's much evidence as it is pointing the other way. * This is one issue I love talking long hours about, but for now I'm off to celebrate Christmas, yay! A most very merriest Christmas to you too, my friend!   Love, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
It stands to reason that the majority of Alaskans wouldn't mind a bit. See, it's long been a perk that full time residents of that state get a portion of the petroleum and natural gas revenues, and it's been that way since oil was first discovered in Alaska as an incentive to encourage people to move there. I know my Uncle Eric and Aunt Jill, along with their two young boys, moved there from Oklahoma in the early 70's and only moved from there in the mid 90's to care for my ailing Grandfather in Texas. While there, they received several nice checks a year from the state government while living/working on Kodiak Island, off the Kenai Penisula, for oil and gas revenues. And no, they were in no way connected with the oil or gas industry. Fishing tenders in the summer, caretakers of a cannery, homeschooling the boys, and doing gigs at local bars when the boys were old enough to play reliably. |
||
|
majnu
since 2002-10-13
Posts 1088SF Bay Area |
how about you guys read some science before calling those who think the anwr should be preserved environmental whackos. the question is not whether the imapct will be greatly detrimental to one of the few ecosystems of its type surviving today, but rather are we willing to plunge into this place for oil, or divert realistic funding to alternative energy sources. to me this seems like more politicians who are willing to do whatever is necessary to stay in power, even if it means hurting the environment, using a potential last ditch resource, and ignoring a problem. it is easy for politicians to get people to vote their wallets, they should lead better than that. the answer to the energy problem is not finding more oil. THE SUPPLY IS FINITE!!! we must find better energy sources. the science for the latter is there, i work partially in that field, i know. what is needed is funding to push it forward and to provide for sheer brainpower. it is easy for unthinking idiots to call environmentalists whackos, but the FACTS and SCIENCE are rather clear; it is ignorance (sometimes willful), shortsightedness, greed, and the politics that jumbles things up. yuan hi's post from fox news is hyperconservative propaganda. it is an editorial written by ben liberman who is a bigwig at the heritage institute. this institute is an extremely conservative think tank, funded in large part by the rnc and associated organizations. it is not a balanced look at the issue at all. this institute also thinks that margaret thacther was a good pm and person as well as saying that domestic surveillance of private individuals is acceptable. i say people should read the journals for themselves and decide. science journals are only biased towards logic. they do not have political or economic agendas. -majnu -------------------------------------- Timid thoughts be not afraid. I am a Poet. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4555210.stm |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
It might take me an entire day to address this issue adequately, but I only have a few minutes. There are many safeguards put in place by the oil companies regularly to 'protect' the environment from disasters due to oil spills. And nearly every single protection method has failed, some multiple times. I commend Sierra, the young lady who did her homework, saw the truths revealed, and stands opposed to the drilling. Alicat? it isn't true that MOST Alaskans favor the drilling. Many do, many don't. I've addressed this issue in the past, but it's amazing how many choose to ignore what they don't want to acknowledge. I've been accused of such myself, and it's probable true to an extent.  But it is not true that it's a barren plain up there in ANWR, that the protections will guarantee anything even remotely close to safe drilling/delivery. And the methods of delivery of said reserves? SHEESH, how many times do we see that pipeline under assault? You don't even read about half of the incidents that happen daily. It's miles and miles of pipeline that is 'observed' by recon planes. But by the time a problem is discovered, it's already too late. and the whole issue does absolutely nothing to get us off our collective butts to use our resources wisely.I am 100% opposed to ANWR drilling, for so many reasons. But protecting the 'bous' habitat alone is enough of a reason for me to say NO ANWR DRILLING! |
||
|
ice Member Elite
since 2003-05-17
Posts 3404Pennsylvania |
"NO ANWR DRILLING!" No more globalization of the worlds resources! No more empire building by the worlds commercial armies! No more destroying the earths health for the sake of business economy! No more working only by a system of numbers with the false pretense of endless zeroes.. No more believing in the dangerous senario promised by proponents of an ever expanding economy! (Listen to Edward Abby- "The ideology of a cancer cell is the exact ideology of unlimited economic growth") No more believing that destruction can bring human harmony, that it can be measured on a practical scale! No more allowing greed to destroy local communities..animal-vegetable- human, and their environs! No more believing in the outdated superstition-fallacy, that our super comfortable, modern life is not had at the expense of someone else's spiritual and or bodily ruination...! Leave the wilderness alone, as an example of reason for hope-- as an example of what human life really is! Knowing that only by acting on a smaller scale can humans act responsibly! "NO (more) ANWR DRILLING!" |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
BRAVO! thank you, ice  |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Yes, Ford, and your passionate heart for preservation just reminded me of some other crucial points, and in fact reminded me of some of the notions from my mother's side of the family, which much of it is influenced by Cherokee and a trace of Lakota blood. * I am often minded by something profound Charles A. Lindbergh wrote in a May 23, 1971 edition of the New York Times magazine: "Our ideals, laws and customs should be based on the proposition that each generation, in turn, becomes the custodian rather than the absolute owner of our resources and each generation has the obligation to pass this inheritance on to the future." I feel we can definitely be making more of an effort to begin developing a model of a more sustainable economy for our children not merely dependent on foreign oil, and the more that we procrastinate, we are literally robbing from our children. Expanding oil drilling doesn't alleviate the problem, it's merely just holding back the inevitable twelve to eighteen months longer. I also feel despite a strong majority of Americans believing in greater efforts to preserve our most precious environments and ecosystems, there's a lack of sensitivity and understanding of the environment in the greater picture in both the media and our government. The environment, whether it be the trees, the water, or the land that are all God-given creations, influences and impacts culk=tures far more often than most immediately realize. Water, for instance, truly is the bloodstream of the planet. Often when we think of water used as a resource in our everyday lives, we often envision water parks, gardening, spa resorts and bottling plants. But, being part-Cherokee Indian, I have learned from my mother and other ancestors that water also serves as a vital importance in rituals and ceremonies as well. It has long been believed that the waters of the river, (known to them as “Long Man”) are sacred to the Cherokee people, for they believe that water is a sacred messanger, thus water has always been used by the Cherokee tribe in a wide number of ceremonies, from purification to the Knee Deep Dance of the Spring Frog, celebrated in April during the Flower Moon Kawoni when ritual observances are made to “Long man” and the medicinal plants which protect against sickness blossom. In their most popular purification ceremony "Going To Water", each morning each tribesman/woman would wade out into the waters, gaze toward the rising sun in the eastern sky, and have their prayers heard while dipping themselves seven times in the water. To this day, this tradition continues. You see, our environment influences life in every facet, much deeper than any of us can ever realize. In fact, we often tend to treat our ecology as though its dependent on the economy, when it is actually the other way around, where all our monetary relationships are in fact dependent on living organisms' relationship to each other and the Earth. I see much more that could go wrong with drilling in ANWR than good, where, because we always tend to think in the short-term, it can seem so tempting to make a buck, but in the long-term the misfortune just catches right up and you only lose ultimately. Those jobs the oil companies give citizens are only temporary, whereas preservation can be far more economical in long-term cycles. And I think the single worst con about ANWR is that it is running against the value of inheritance and teaching our children a bad example for when they will eventually become the stewards/stewardesses of the land and will train to pass it on to their children and so forth. This is particularly why I'm opposed to this drilling and why I volunteer often in environmental activism; it's not because I'm challenging a president's notions, but because I'm working to rejuvenate the understanding of how much preservation is vital to ensuring a better quality of life for all, and hoping to teach this generation and the next just how extraordinary the environment is beyond just material means. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
