ANWR drilling vetoed (again)

[randhail]

First of all let me just say that, I don't often come across as an understanding individual in this forum with my attempt at off color humor, but the ANWR issue is one that I am quite passionate about. While I'm confessing, I will also up front state that I drive an SUV.

Thankfully the United States senate (or at least a portion of it) had the sense to veto this attempt at drilling. To tie this issue and Katrina debt relief in with a defense with was completely reprehensible.

Ted Stevens, the man behind this, is quickly becoming my most despised gov't official. He states (along with supporters of the bill) that drilling in Alaska is a matter of national security by reducing America's dependence on foreign oil. I agree that foreign oil dependence is the achilles heel of this country, but why do people think drilling in Alaska is the solution?

Can't anybody see past oil to alternative energy sources? Why can't we put money into that rather than attempting to put a temporary bandaid on things? Studies differ on the potential oil supply in ANWR, but it is pretty clear that it is not a long term solution. The complete lack of foresight into things beyond the near future is appalling. I honestly believe that if we continue this trend of only worrying about the present, then we are completely screwed.

 

[Irvine511]

First of all let me just say that, I don't often come across as an understanding individual in this forum with my attempt at off color humor, but the ANWR issue is one that I am quite passionate about. While I'm confessing, I will also up front state that I drive an SUV.

Thankfully the United States senate (or at least a portion of it) had the sense to veto this attempt at drilling. To tie this issue and Katrina debt relief in with a defense with was completely reprehensible.

Ted Stevens, the man behind this, is quickly becoming my most despised gov't official. He states (along with supporters of the bill) that drilling in Alaska is a matter of national security by reducing America's dependence on foreign oil. I agree that foreign oil dependence is the achilles heel of this country, but why do people think drilling in Alaska is the solution?

Can't anybody see past oil to alternative energy sources? Why can't we put money into that rather than attempting to put a temporary bandaid on things? Studies differ on the potential oil supply in ANWR, but it is pretty clear that it is not a long term solution. The complete lack of foresight into things beyond the near future is appalling. I honestly believe that if we continue this trend of only worrying about the present, then we are completely screwed.

 

[cydewaze]

Can't anybody see past oil to alternative energy sources? Why can't we put money into that rather than attempting to put a temporary bandaid on things?

Because there's no quick money for the oil companies in researching alternative energy sources. The goal is to keep us oil-dependent for as long as possible so they can milk the hell out of a supply-demand crisis when the oil finally does run out.

Slowly weening ourselves off of oil before we run out of it would mean billions in lost "panic" profits for oil companies.

 

[deep]

thanks a lot liberals


2164 young men and womens deaths were not horored

you let them die in vain

 

[nbcrusader]

I love how we complain about dependency on foreign oil, prohibit drilling for oil in our own country, then sit around and wonder why someone hasn't developed an alternative source.

 

[A_Wanderer]

High prices = more exploration and research into alternative energy sorces.

 

[the rockin edge]

High prices = more exploration and research into alternative energy sorces.

i sure hope so

 

[melon]

I love how we complain about dependency on foreign oil, prohibit drilling for oil in our own country, then sit around and wonder why someone hasn't developed an alternative source.

The exploration alone will take a minimum of 10-20 years before even one drop of oil ever reaches anyone's gas tank. Money would be better spent on squeezing more fuel efficiency out of our existing automobiles and furthering hydrogen fuel cell technology. A lot of progress has already occurred with the latter, with automakers promising consumer-ready fuel cell vehicles by 2009. Granted, they'll be expensive and not very efficient probably, but we've had HDTVs since 1998 and no one remotely believed they'd be affordable and efficient anytime before 2009--the deadline for the switchover to the digital spectrum. That would thus make commercially viable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles likely by 2020--which is just about the earliest we could expect the exploration period for the ANWR drilling project to end.

It makes little sense in the larger scheme of things to destroy the ANWR for oil.

Melon

 

[Irvine511]

GAS TAX!!! GAS TAX!!! AT LEAST $1 MORE PER GALLON!!!

 

[Jamila]

thanks a lot liberals


2164 young men and womens deaths were not horored

you let them die in vain

As far as news reports are stating tonight, the Defense bill should be passed tomorrow without a major battle.

The people who are responsible for the deaths of the soldiers in Iraq are those in the government (not liberals) who were willing to go and fight in Iraq partially to gain control of Iraqi oil.

 

[Jamila]

Oh btw, on the issue of the Arctic Wildlife vote -

(maybe you can tell I'm happy?)