Iran vs US & Israel

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by Big Red 11

Christ Scuba, quit it with the "but the LIBERALS etc etc" stuff - this isn't a matter of A vs B. Don't blame our nation's problems on some vaguely defined group of people. Yes, many people would like to preserve what little natural habitats this planet has left. And I disagree that tapping into Alaska would buy us time to develop alternate energy. You know as well as I do that if the price of gas were to drop any significant amount, public pressure would ease up on developing alternative energy. Though, I would agree with the idea of keeping gas prices from rising too dramatically.

I said it twice in response to people's posts. Did I ever say I was blaming them on all of our problems? No, just one. Don't take something an inch long and blow it up to a mile.

Alaska is more or less a barren wasteland when compared to other natural habitats we have.

I doubt the pressue would ease, as we have all been pushed to five bucks a gallon.

[Big Red 11]

Originally Posted by Scuba Steve

I said it twice in response to people's posts. Did I ever say I was blaming them on all of our problems? No, just one. Don't take something an inch long and blow it up to a mile.

Alaska is more or less a barren wasteland when compared to other natural habitats we have.

I doubt the pressue would ease, as we have all been pushed to five bucks a gallon.

You said it in three consecutive posts. But I really don't feel like arguing with you - I know how you get.

Alaska isn't a barren wasteland - it's one of our most pristine natural treasures, and it should stay that way. I'm not saying no drilling at all, but full development of Alaska would be a sad sight.

And for your last point, that's partly what I'm saying. If we drill enough to keep gas prices as they are, or to prevent them from going much higher, then that would be ideal. However, if we flood ourselves with Alaskan oil and the price of gas drops to something below 3 bucks (not really possible, but bear with me), then Americans all of a sudden will largely forget about alternative energy.

[OME6A]

Red's nailed it.

Tapping Alaska would destroy the environment, would be a temporary solution, would further inflate the profit margins of oil companies, and would completely nullify the pressure placed on renewable energy.

If someone like GM installed refueling stations at all of their dealerships, and made ALL of their new models hydrogen or electric, it'd take awhile, but it'd take off. In time gas stations would follow suit.

[Big Red 11]

I agree with Omega. I don't see something as drastic as what he said happening, but what we need is a dedicated pioneer to get hydrogen off the drawing boards. If a company like BP were to truly ignore profits for a few years and spent everything they could on developing infrastructure (not likely), it would give us that needed boost.

[OME6A]

Yeah, a nationwide chain like that would be great. I say GM though because they've been on the ropes for years. My proposal would potentially make them heroes.

Just my liberal American pride.

[DSHFilut]

Originally Posted by Big Red 11

Please explain this. More fuel efficiency means less demand for oil, which is what you're trying to support.

It will help the people who actually buy these fuel efficient cars but not the majority of people. Yea it will decrease the demand for oil but not enough for everyone to see a noticeable difference at the pumps. Eventually we would see a difference but that would take a long time. In that amount of time we can develop an energy source that is even cheaper than just making more fuel efficient cars. Your right I do support lowering demand for oil, but making fuel efficient cars can't be are main way of doing that. We need a more effective way which I believe is drilling in Alaska.

p.s Gov. Schwarzenegger has already started putting hydrogen fuel stations in California and i guess it is going very well. It is only a matter of time before the rest of the U.S follows suit(hopefully)

[Big Red 11]

I see your point, but even if car manufacturers were to increase efficiency standards by just a few mpg, it would make a big difference.

And I don't believe the way to decrease our oil dependency is by drilling for more oil.

[Scuba Steve]

Drilling wouldn't "ruin" Alaska. Not only would drilling help all of us, but it would make our importing of foreign oil reduced to nothing (if done properly). We don't depend on the ME for oil at all. If we were entirely cut out from them, we would be fine.

Drilling would severely help us. Billions of more dollars would be made by drilling our own oil than buying it from overseas, which could help funding for hydrogen type projects.

We'll be the last ones to run out of oil. God only knows what will happen to the rest of the world when they run dry.

Sure, we can come up with other forms of fuel, but not everyone else can.

[Big Red 11]

Originally Posted by Scuba Steve

Drilling would severely help us. Billions of more dollars would be made by drilling our own oil than buying it from overseas, which could help funding for hydrogen type projects.

If only that's the way it worked. I doubt an oil company would drill Alaska for the sole purpose of turning the resulting profits into alternative energy development. Sure, a small part of it may go to that, but realistically I doubt it would be any appreciable amount.

We'll be the last ones to run out of oil. God only knows what will happen to the rest of the world when they run dry.

Sure, we can come up with other forms of fuel, but not everyone else can

We're going to be the ones who are truly screwed once the oil runs dry, assuming we haven't completely switched to alternative energy by then. Our entire nation is built on oil and has none of the railroad infrastructure that Europe has. They had been around for a long time before oil became king, and I have no doubt that it will be not all too difficult for Europe to survive once it's gone. The US, on the other hand, uses trucks, planes, and boats to distribute and import most of our goods. The railroads may run to distribution centers, but goods won't get farther than that without oil-based transportation.

[OME6A]

Originally Posted by Big Red 11

I doubt an oil company would drill Alaska for the sole purpose of turning the resulting profits into alternative energy development.

They've already proven they won't. Take Exxon for example. Last year they made 40 BILLION dollars in profit. Know how much they put towards renewable energy research?

$100 million. That's 1/4 of a percent of their profit.

Drilling in Alaska would have a negative impact on the environment, and there's no way around it. If you truely believe otherwise, go spend the rest of the day digging holes in your backyard and then let us know how good it looks afterwards.