When are they gonna drill Alaska?

[Da Skinna]

When are they doing it? Do they have to kill all the environmentalists first? New legislation? Polars bears need to die off first?

Or when peak oil has been reached?

[Erik]

Peak oil has already been reached.

All I can say is: the longer you wait, the more it will be worth to you.

[John I Tzimisces]

When are they doing it? Do they have to kill all the environmentalists first? New legislation? Polars bears need to die off first?

Or when peak oil has been reached?

Why? So gas can cost a whole 5 cents less and then go up another 4 dollars inevitably??

[Da Skinna]

Nations need oil do they not?

[Chipp]

Nations need oil do they not?

Or instead of subsidizing oil companies, nations could invest in renewable energy resources. You could drill in Alaska, but eventually the price will rise again. Then what?

[Senno]

They are already drilling in alaska. The oil industry supports the state government of Alaska to a large degree.

And, gasp, they havent killed off wildlife to do the drilling and exploration.

Placing the polar bear on the list endangers the Alaska economy. The governor of Alaska agrees, and is suing the feds.

[Каие]

So they leave a tiny bit of salvation relief for our descendants whom we have royally screwed in the ass by leaving them the monumental task to deal with global warming, dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear warfare.

[Senno]

So they leave a tiny bit of salvation relief for our descendants whom we have royally screwed in the ass by leaving them the monumental task to deal with global warming, dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear warfare.

We are moving towards that now. There is tons of "green tech" investment going on, and growing. Just because the money is not spent by the Federal government doesn't mean it's not happening. And the Feds are spending more and more money as well, and encouraging capital investment with policy decisions. You can see this in article after article, if you are actually interested in the subject.

State governments are also pursuing strategies for green investment.

Some discussion of specific issues would be welcome. But all I see is poisonous generalizations to prove some point that isn't actually true if you do any basic research.

Do you people ever do basic research before pontificating? Seems not. Bias shield in place. Fire away. And it's a miss......

[Каие]

We are moving towards that now. There is tons of "green tech" investment going on, and growing. Just because the money is not spent by the Federal government doesn't mean it's not happening. And the Feds are spending more and more money as well, and encouraging capital investment with policy decisions. You can see this in article after article, if you are actually interested in the subject. State governments are also pursuing strategies for green investment. Some discussion of specific issues would be welcome. But all I see is poisonous generalizations to prove some point that isn't actually true if you do any basic research.
Do you people ever do basic research before pontificating? Seems not. Bias shield in place. Fire away. And it's a miss......

You;re missing my point, my point was our descendants have a lot of work to do to reverse our dependence on fossil fuels, and limit our green house emissions. Your evidence did not address my point, as my point was quite clearly there is a lot of work to do, and its going to be done by our descendants. All you did was list a bunch of measures taken up (too late, too little) now, as though you think all of this will be solved quickly.

The point is its gonna take a hell, i repeat, a hell of a lot of investment to reverse all this BS. More than China (!) and the EU(!!)

1990-2000


2004 - 19%


2008 - 20.2%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions


Its gone up over the last couple of years, perhaps its because the rest of the world is cutting theirs much much quicker, or perhaps your measures are not working. The only way you can annoy people into cutting their crap is with money, green taxes, because thats all people understand, money.

I am yet to understand why the US uses more fuel and causes more problems then china a country 4times its population, ten times more population density, has more factories and other old waste producers and apparently a whole bunch of measures aimed at stopping it.

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environ...-tech-47011602
According to this, people are only investing becasue the economy is in gloom and they've been told the potential is great to make money, not to save the environment or cut emissions. Plus this is a recent thing, while Europe has been growing for a while, and the capital put forward by Americans is less than half that given by one European one. http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9947198-54.html


I fear we are going way off topic.

[Senno]

You;re missing my point, my point was our descendants have a lot of work to do to reverse our dependence on fossil fuels, and limit our green house emissions. Your evidence did not address my point, as my point was quite clearly there is a lot of work to do, and its going to be done by our descendants. All you did was list a bunch of measures taken up (too late, too little) now, as though you think all of this will be solved quickly.

The point is its gonna take a hell, i repeat, a hell of a lot of investment to reverse all this BS. More than China (!) and the EU(!!)

I know this. You infer a lot more from what I say than what is literally said on the page. The money IS starting to flow into "green tech" investment, it is not static. It will increase, and measures are starting to be taken, and those are increasing daily as well. I show you a bit of evidence, it is not the sum total of all evidence available. That is a huge amount. Google is useful for research.

What other country has limited where it's oil industry may drill for 30 years? Not let nuclear reactors be built in the last 12? And that was only 1 built. Other than that, it's been 30 years.

Alternative energy sources are growing daily. And R&D is occuring as well. There are many windfarms here in CA, for one small example.

How do you infer I think it will be quickly solved? That is a conclusion that fits your point of view. So from point of view, you work backwards and apply evidence that fits your ready-made conclusion.

Its gone up over the last couple of years, perhaps its because the rest of the world is cutting theirs much much quicker, or perhaps your measures are not working. The only way you can annoy people into cutting their crap is with money, green taxes, because thats all people understand, money.

I am yet to understand why the US uses more fuel and causes more problems then china a country 4times its population, ten times more population density, has more factories and other old waste producers and apparently a whole bunch of measures aimed at stopping it.

It's hard to generalize the world. The rest of the world is industrializing quickly, we see this in Russia, China, India, Brazil most directly. Are their emissions going down? Not really.

We use more because we have had more growth. As a result we use more when expressed as an average. But what use are averages as a specific statistic? Not much.

Now actions and debate are taking place to cut emissions.

I can't even tell if Britain's actions are effective. To many contradictory news stories. And I am not there to see for myself. Why does everyone presume they have an educated opinion on things occuring here?

I think I will start generalizing all UK citizens by what I see of "soccer hooligans". It looks like they may be silenced, that would be funny.

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environ...-tech-47011602
According to this, people are only investing becasue the economy is in gloom and they've been told the potential is great to make money, not to save the environment or cut emissions. Plus this is a recent thing, while Europe has been growing for a while, and the capital put forward by Americans is less than half that given by one European one. http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9947198-54.html


I fear we are going way off topic.

That's one specific article about one little specific project.

Do you accept the spin of every article? It fits your point of view, so it doesn't jar you, I suppose. People invest in "green tech" because it's a rational choice now. Government grants, and tax breaks, and a low capital gains tax means it makes sense now. It's also rational from an environmental point of view. And from a legal point of view: Regulations that impact investments are being cleared up.

Specifically filings for nuclear reactors are way up. If environmentalists will let them be built, that's a good thing. Environmentalists and nimby's have blocked these actions for 30 years.

They have been blocking everything they oppose for 30 years. No compromise. Just oppose. People don't invest in what they cannot accomplish. Threats of litigation, and complex regulations the lend uncertainty to whether anything might actually even be built stop the process before it even starts.

That is changing now fortunately. The environmentalists cannot so openly oppose everything since we feel we must change now. So it makes sense, financially, legally, and environmentally to proceed.

And we are, across a broad front. And the amount invested grows almost daily.

Returning to Alaska:

We don't know when the "green tech" will arrive. Should we not cover our bases by digging up a bit of oil while we go for the "green tech."?

Did you know oil companies invest back into their own companies as much as they gain in revenues? What other segment of the economy anywhere does that? They had 100 billion in revenues, and 100 billion in capital investments. They took profits of 7 billion. If they take 7 million out of 100 million, is it so jarring? No, it just looks bad because the real numbers are huge. And some of that investment is "green tech", it's not all oil related.

[CDMan477]

A consensus needs to be found on this issue in Congress. Knowing full well that Cuba is drilling a few dozen miles off the U.S. coast because regulations prohibit companies from doing so here is just ridiculous. Both sides pander to the oil companies and the environmentalists knowing full well they won't lose their votes regardless of the outcome. Drilling in Alaska and offshore near the U.S. coast can obviously be both profitable and safe to the environment at the same time. It simply needs to be done if not to increase supply and possibly lower gasoline prices no matter how marginal than to be purchasing less oil from Canada and Mexico let alone Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.

[Pontifex Maximus]

I suppose we will start drilling when gas is 10$/gallon, or until it is so desperately needed we just have to have it. Before that happens, it will remain protected because of green groups hellbent on 'protecting' earth.

[Ahlerich]

I suppose we will start drilling when gas is 10$/gallon, or until it is so desperately needed we just have to have it. Before that happens, it will remain protected because of green groups hellbent on 'protecting' earth.

you make it sound like 'protecting' earth is a bad thing

oil will never get cheaper again on the long run anyways.. i think too sooner or later they will drill there but whats the consequence of using oil faster then its created should be clear

[Chaigidel]

the amount of oil in alaska is not that grand-- we have more oil in shale in the dakotas.

[Icefrisco]

What's so necessary about drilling in Alaska? Is it worth the environmental destruction?

[Big War Bird]

What's so necessary about drilling in Alaska? Is it worth the environmental destruction?

What makes you think there will be any destruction worth noticing? Its a barren frozen wasteland. As far as anyone can tell, the caribou like the Alaskan Pipelin, it keeps them warm.

[Ahlerich]

i am not aware of a "clean" way of harvesting oil

[zznɟ ǝɥʇ]

What makes you think there will be any destruction worth noticing? Its a barren frozen wasteland. As far as anyone can tell, the caribou like the Alaskan Pipelin, it keeps them warm.

*cough* sure... *cough*

[Big War Bird]

*cough* sure... *cough*

Typical ignorance. That's not where they are looking for oil.

Where they want to drill (the Coastal Plain) looks like this:

[Chaigidel]

it isnt necessary at all is the point, its a red herring.