WASHINGTON September 21 2005 - Over the din of beating tom-toms, surrounded by activists wearing antlers and dressed as polar and grizzly bears, Senator Clinton yesterday dismissed high gas prices and the destruction wrought by Hurricane Katrina as a "diversion," cautioning that proponents of arctic drilling were exploiting recent crises to make their case for a long-term anti-environment agenda.
And I love this.
Bemoaning the fate of the porcupine caribou resident in ANWR, New York's junior senator said the solution to "$65-a-barrel oil" was not increasing domestic petroleum output but instead devising alternative fuels. "The answer to our energy challenge does not lie under the plains of the arctic refuge," she said, "but in the minds that are ingenious in America."
Evidently the lawyers and environmental wackos' minds aren't "ingenious" because the problem remains. In fact, it has gottem much worse.
But we should remember these are the people and their children who, during their Vietnam demonstration dasys, opined that "Food is." I have always thought that defined them better than anything else. They believe it is their right to be supported by the rest of us while telling the rest of us what to do!
As for the Demos,you gotta love this:
Over the din of beating tom-toms, surrounded by activists wearing antlers and dressed as polar and grizzly bears,
Did you ever stop and think that the country is in big trouble and here we have Clinton and Kennedy associating with such as these?
FDR, Truman, JFK... they all must be spinning in their graves.
Link
ReplyDeleteIn total, the oil deposits in ANWR contain as much oil to solely support U.S. consumption for 7 months (4.3B estimate) to 2 years and 2.3 months (16B estimate).
You are wrong on several levels.
ReplyDelete1. Historically reserves have been much larger than forecasted. No one knows.
2. Obviously if you can drill in ANWAR you can drill in other areas, especially off shore.
3. The real hit would be psychological on OPEC and the soeculators. Shaking their confidence would probably be worth a $40.00 decrease...
Historically reserves have been much larger than forecasted. No one knows.
ReplyDeleteHistorically, geologists didn't have the tools avaliable today to find and estimate what oil reserves do remain, and I would take their science over your uninformed opinion about the subject any day of the week.
This is what I'm talking about:
Oil exploration in Alaska's Northern Slope has revealed an estimated 20.7 billion barrels of oil. Unfortunately, most of this oil, according to a US Geological Survey, is in "a multitude of small reservoirs" which are not economically efficient to exploit. The feasibility of oil exploration is given as two percentages. For example, there is a 95% chance that developing the North Slope will yield only 5-7 billion barrels of oil, and there is a 5% chance that it will yield 16 billion barrels. People who are pro-drilling like to quote the high statistic while those who are anti-drilling quote the low end. Something in between the two is most likely, and the according to the US Geological Survey, there is a 50% chance that 10 billion barrels of oil will be recoverable.
2. Obviously if you can drill in ANWAR you can drill in other areas, especially off shore.
Not proven.
3. The real hit would be psychological on OPEC and the soeculators. Shaking their confidence would probably be worth a $40.00 decrease...
This chart shows the difference ANWAR would make to the energy supply of this country, FWIW.
I'm just here to help you understand and accept the truth of the matter at hand.........