Alaska Oil

[kubedawg]

Well I searched the boards to see if I could find a thread regarding the release of the ban in Alaska to drill for oil, but alas, I couldn't find one. Well? What do y'all think? Good move? Bad move? Why?

I think it has it's benefits such as less reliance on foreign oil, but at the same time, it shows our addiction for oil will continue to go very far. Another plus is gas prices. Already in 2 days, it went from 2.09 to 1.99 at the pumps! And as much as I like this price drop, I'd also like to have the government spend a lot more time and effort on finding a better energy source, possibly one that's very renewable.

Ethanol
Hydrogen
Electricity
H2O
HHO

These are many of the energies that can be produced currently. Why aren't all vehicles equipped with any of this stuff? There is a lot of money in oil, but once we take from our own stash, that's it. Time to call it quits. We need a new energy, not nuclear, and I've got my bets on ethanol and/or electricity although I've heard HHO is very promising.

Anyone have any thoughts on this subject?

[Technosoul]

One large country in South America is already independant of forien oil, they grow certain crops and convert the plant oils into automoble fuel and other uses.

It only takes an inexpensive converter for your car to use their viggie gas.

California might become the first state to take a step in that direction here in the USA.

Hemp would be the best plant to use for our fuels because it is a weed that can be planted and harvested anywhere in the USA no matter what the climate or alittude is. But the Feds fear the use of that plant for good purposes because some of it might get smoked by "stupid" people.

The big downside to drilling for oil in Alsaka is that the area they want to use is an important wildlife area and is one of the few places left on earth where you can look in all directions and see no man made structures. It would take ten years for the oil wells to yeild productive results and they estimate that the wells would only give us enough oil to last for three years of use before the oil fields are abandoned. The area they wish to explore for oil is close to important wetlands and if oil got into those waterways that would greatly impact nesting locations of many birds and other critters. It is an area containing many animals that would be forced to relocate because they have a natual fear of human beings and our machines.

The Republicans feel that oil production and nature conservation can work hand and hand without conflicts. That is a bunch of hogwash if you concider all things that would be effected in nature by the oil industry trying to operate in Alaska. Although the local political leaders of Alaska favor the new business there because of economic perks being offered to them by the oil interests. They "sold out" and no not care about the concerns of environmentalists, who by the way would take action to stop and prevent the oil companies from setting up camp. That action would bring in a new era for what the Homeland Security Department would term "Domestic Terrorism" and so that department would need to spend our tax money to send agents to Alaska to arrest Americans on charges of "terrorism". Agents that would otherwise be employed to monitor or catch real terrorists from Bin Laden types.

Also, the oil industry is an international business that operates world-wide, and so no matter where the oil is produced the internationals would still control the price of gas at the pumps - etc. Also, the cost of oil production here is more expensive then if we buy it from overseas due to local unions and so forth. That so-called independance from forien oil comes with no insurance that our local oil companies would sell the fuel at a cheaper rate.

So drilling for oil in Alaska, in my opinon, is 10 percent a good idea and 90 percent a bad idea, concidering all things.

[Praxius]

I guess diesel engine cars are easier to convert to safer gas then regular vehicles which use petrol.

I think it's a good idea to stay away from it, but then again, if you got another country who's in need of oil, it's running low, and you got a big reserve stashed away in Alaska, which is almost practically separated by us here in Canada, from the rest of your nation..... it'd be an interesting target to some.

Come to think of it..... wtf are you guys doing with Alaska being a state anyways? How about we trade you Alaska for Quebec?

[brien]

There are really two important areas in energy: Fuel for cars, trucks, mass transit, and home heating, and fuel for electric generation.

Electrical generation can be handled by coal gassification. The US has several hundred years of coal supplies.

Transportation and HHO you have identified correctly by alternative fuels. We merely require the delivery system.


The US must get off the oil spigot for national security reasons, if not for enviornmental reasons.

[weasel]

Screw the caribou: drill Alaska!

[Scribbler1]

No matter where they get oil we are still going to use it like there's no tomorrow. Going after oil in such remote and environmentally sensitive areas would make some sense if we really NEEDED it.
If we actually tried to conserve the stuff they might be able to make a case for this, but at this stage it's just another twinkie for the fat man.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Scribbler1 No matter where they get oil we are still going to use it like there's no tomorrow. Going after oil in such remote and environmentally sensitive areas would make some sense if we really NEEDED it. If we actually tried to conserve the stuff they might be able to make a case for this, but at this stage it's just another twinkie for the fat man.

That's all it is... were still trying to keep the oil industries a float with their wonderful money and will milk it as long as they can and as long as they control the government with donations. What should be happening is converting them to natural energy, and bio fuels, which they could easily use their experience in a new long lasting. productive career.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Praxius That's all it is... were still trying to keep the oil industries a float with their wonderful money and will milk it as long as they can and as long as they control the government with donations. What should be happening is converting them to natural energy, and bio fuels, which they could easily use their experience in a new long lasting. productive career.

When people mention biofuels and alternative energies I don't think they are looking at the big picture.

I'm not completely worried about us scrambling for a substitute for gasoline when the oil wells run dry. I'm MORE concerned about the unavailability of all the OTHER things that are made from petroleum. Such as:
Ink, Floor Wax, Ballpoint Pens, upholstery, Sweaters, Boats, Insecticides, Tires, Sports Car Bodies, Nail Polish, Dresses, Tires, Golf Bags, Perfumes, Cassettes, Motorcycle Helmet, Caulking, Petroleum Jelly, Transparent Tape, Faucet Washers, Antiseptics, Clothesline, Curtains, Food Preservatives, Basketballs, Soap, Vitamin Capsules, Antihistamines , Purses, Shoes, Antifreeze, Football Helmets, Awnings, Eyeglasses, Clothes, Toothbrushes, Ice Chests, Footballs, Combs, CD's, Paint, Detergents, Vaporizers, Balloons, Sun Glasses, Tents, Heart Valves, Crayons, Parachutes, Telephones, Enamel, Pillows, Dishes, Anesthetics, Artificial Turf, Artificial limbs, Bandages, Dentures, Model Cars, Folding Doors, Hair Curlers, Cold cream, Movie film, Soft Contact lenses, Fan Belts, Car Enamel, Shaving Cream and Ammonia! (and that's a short list)

I'm not too worried about needing to start taking an electric bus to work as much as I am about our entire society collapsing from the lack of some of the simplest things which we take for granted every day.

[Praxius]

Most of those things can be made with hemp and hemp oil. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think it was either WWI or WWII where the military made the belts and other equipment out of hemp, prior to it being prohibited.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Praxius Most of those things can be made with hemp and hemp oil. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think it was either WWI or WWII where the military made the belts and other equipment out of hemp, prior to it being prohibited.

I think hemp can substitute for petroleum in a lot of cases, but not nearly enough to take over for oil in most of the things we use that are. Now, hemp pharmaceuticals I can easily support.

[Osborn F Enready]

Scribbler said: I think hemp can substitute for petroleum in a lot of cases, but not nearly enough to take over for oil in most of the things we use that are.

A lot of that is due to the wealth of the few dictating the market of the many.

We waste resources now on goods that have little if any tangible value.

Hemp would allow us to provide fuel for necessity, and that is all I care about.
Nothing can support the market as it exists, because it is falsely inflated to comfort the few, at the expense of the many.

Scribbler said: Now, hemp pharmaceuticals I can easily support.

I support hemp legality, in full.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready A lot of that is due to the wealth of the few dictating the market of the many.

Perhaps, but it is the people who WANT what the people making this stuff provide. Case in point; what you and I are doing right now. Do we REALLY need computers with such advanced capabilities when most only use them for mindless games and Internet blather? We THINK we do, and it has made Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Steve Case, among others extremely rich men. They never forced anyone to buy these things.

We waste resources now on goods that have little if any tangible value.

Much of what you say is, of course true. However, as a society we can't go back to horse and buggy days and, should that happen when the oil runs out we will NOT go there voluntarily. It would take time and time is something the people seem not to have in abundance, or at least that is what they think.

Hemp would allow us to provide fuel for necessity, and that is all I care about. Nothing can support the market as it exists, because it is falsely inflated to comfort the few, at the expense of the many.

But the immediate collapse of society if the oil rug is pulled out from under us will be worse than what we have now.

But if we COULD somehow force a gradual change to a less wasteful way of living, who would enforce it? The government? All you would see is a HUGE divide between the haves and have-nots. And I fear civil war, anarchy and ultimate destruction of this country will be the result.

The only way to change the mindset of an entire people is through education, and unfortunately the idiot sheep only like to learn what is convenient or what will enable them to become richer and MORE wasteful.

I support hemp legality, in full.

Every time I think of this stuff I feel like smoking some, that's for sure.

[The Architect]

Speaking of national security, if we ride ourselves of foriegn dependence on oil what kind of instabiliy will that add to an already unstable region. Beside the fact that we wouldnt have to rely on them for oil what national security benefits would that have?

[Osborn F Enready]

Scribbler said: Perhaps, but it is the people who WANT what the people making this stuff provide. Case in point; what you and I are doing right now. Do we REALLY need computers with such advanced capabilities when most only use them for mindless games and Internet blather? We THINK we do, and it has made Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Steve Case, among others extremely rich men. They never forced anyone to buy these things.

The internet is one of the best business tools out there, and in a lot of places you could use it as opposed to telephone as well as its many offline business capabilities. I agree with your point, there are a lot of "non-necessary" computer users, and I have nothing against that. Everything we purchase could be more resource conscious however, at the manufacturing and distribution level, and we as consumers need to better understand the impact of our spending on resources, such as luxury vs necessity. I don't want the market to have to suffer, simply to be more conscious of their impacts and conservative in their "throw-away" mentality that plagues so many modern goods. I should have said that more clearly, but you make a valid point also.

Scribbler said: Much of what you say is, of course true. However, as a society we can't go back to horse and buggy days and, should that happen when the oil runs out we will NOT go there voluntarily. It would take time and time is something the people seem not to have in abundance, or at least that is what they think.

I don't think we should go back to the horse and buggy days (unless people choose that lifestyle for themselves of course), but I do think our manufacturing corporations and major industries who do most of the resource and enviromental damage, need to take serious steps to curb the damage and at the same time become more profitable by being more efficient. For example, look at the UPS truck fleet around the world. Just that company making the statement that its new trucks will only be purchased if there is a bio-fuel, or renewable fuel cells available, alone would provide incentive to drive the market research into this area both fuels and engine development.
The U.S. Postal Service Fleet, could do the same market push.

HELL, even if we could convince these bonehead car manufacturers to stop wasting energy, time and money on re-tooling every car every year, and instead do it every 2-3-4 or 5 years, that alone would cut energy costs substantially, and would allow them to get much more profit and usefulness out of each new R&D development, since the platforms would be more stable after successive years of "bug" fixing.

Scribbler said: But the immediate collapse of society if the oil rug is pulled out from under us will be worse than what we have now.

I fully and totally agree. Between Peak Oil, middle east wars, and our next national market threat (china), the U.S. consumer needs to wake up and demand more from their car manufacturers, their fuel providers, and their government fleet vehicles are a grand way to start this by retrofit or regularly scheduled new purchases as old vehicles are retired.

Scribbler said: But if we COULD somehow force a gradual change to a less wasteful way of living, who would enforce it?

If it isn't by an educated market, it won't much matter, but there is nothing wrong with the people demanding their federal fleet that is bought, paid for, maintained and retired using their dollars are meeting their standards of acceptance. We need to educate the people, so they demand the change that drives the market.

It isn't the markets fault, its the sheeples fault for not seeing the forest for the trees.

Scribbler said: The government? All you would see is a HUGE divide between the haves and have-nots. And I fear civil war, anarchy and ultimate destruction of this country will be the result.

Agreed. Government alone would only cause a counter movement.

Scribbler said: The only way to change the mindset of an entire people is through education, and unfortunately the idiot sheep only like to learn what is convenient or what will enable them to become richer and MORE wasteful.

In the majority, I agree. I think the educated minority is growing though, and the internet has been a huge boon to reaching the average sheeple. Even sites like this one make a large scale impact with its viewing base.

[Technosoul]

[quote=brien;327365]There are really two important areas in energy: Fuel for cars, trucks, mass transit, and home heating, and fuel for electric generation.

Electrical generation can be handled by coal gassification. The US has several hundred years of coal supplies.

Transportation and HHO you have identified correctly by alternative fuels. We merely require the delivery system.


The US must get off the oil spigot for national security reasons, if not for enviornmental reasons.[/QUOTE).

I remember the 1950s when our big house was heated by coal. The truck would arrive every other month and they would pour coal into our basement where my dad had to shovel it into the furnace that was also in the basement, that would heat up the pipes that would bang and clang wiht noise until the steam radeators warmed up.

Meanwhile the mine workers were dieing of lung ailments or due to cave ins, and paid poverty wages. But they sang some good hillbilly songs.

Then they did strip mining which was the environmentalist's worse nightmare, hundreds of miles of surface ground turned into wastelands. Where once stood nice looking woodlands and fields.

I man not much in support of that old hillbilly technology called coal mining, not when we have much better resources to select from.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Scribbler1 When people mention biofuels and alternative energies I don't think they are looking at the big picture. I'm not completely worried about us scrambling for a substitute for gasoline when the oil wells run dry. I'm MORE concerned about the unavailability of all the OTHER things that are made from petroleum. Such as: Ink, Floor Wax, Ballpoint Pens, upholstery, Sweaters, Boats, Insecticides, Tires, Sports Car Bodies, Nail Polish, Dresses, Tires, Golf Bags, Perfumes, Cassettes, Motorcycle Helmet, Caulking, Petroleum Jelly, Transparent Tape, Faucet Washers, Antiseptics, Clothesline, Curtains, Food Preservatives, Basketballs, Soap, Vitamin Capsules, Antihistamines , Purses, Shoes, Antifreeze, Football Helmets, Awnings, Eyeglasses, Clothes, Toothbrushes, Ice Chests, Footballs, Combs, CD's, Paint, Detergents, Vaporizers, Balloons, Sun Glasses, Tents, Heart Valves, Crayons, Parachutes, Telephones, Enamel, Pillows, Dishes, Anesthetics, Artificial Turf, Artificial limbs, Bandages, Dentures, Model Cars, Folding Doors, Hair Curlers, Cold cream, Movie film, Soft Contact lenses, Fan Belts, Car Enamel, Shaving Cream and Ammonia! (and that's a short list) I'm not too worried about needing to start taking an electric bus to work as much as I am about our entire society collapsing from the lack of some of the simplest things which we take for granted every day.

Some of the items you noted could be made from rubber that somes from trees (sap). Other items could be replaced with newer technology ( re: film could be replaced by computer chips or DVD like disks). Plastic was not widely used before the early 1950s and guess what - they made dishes out of real glass. We did have a lot of those things before the 1920s when the oil industry here in the USA started to boom following the invention of the Ford automoble.

When oil gets really short on supply the government will do doubt step to control how it is being used. Mainly because the militrary is dependant on oil and oil related products. And the government will allow so much to be used for other important purposes. But the main user, the auto driver, will no longer be able to gas up with fosil fuels. And no doubt science will come up with ways to make toothbushes out of other stuff or with viggie oil or even fish oil. Oil like substances are all over the place, in plants, fish and animals, and even in fat people. What if weight watchers were able to save all the fat people loose getting slim and then make gasoloine out of it. (the last line was one of my stupid jokes).

But you make a good point. We have nature conservation so why not also have some oil conservation (as it is a endangered resource of nature). We can put on the list with the Spotted Owl. Oil works best for many items in the private sector and gasoline is not one of them. But first we got to get those viggie fuels marketed before we can start to conserve oil for those other purposes. We cannot expect people to walk, bike, or to ride those electric trains when they want to take the family for a Sunday vacation trip.

Meanwhile we should put science busy inventing other ways to make those things you mentioned, other then out of oil, so we can move in the direction of oil conservation. The scientists seem to have time to waste creating modern myths such as the Big Bang so why not do something useful.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Praxius I guess diesel engine cars are easier to convert to safer gas then regular vehicles which use petrol. I think it's a good idea to stay away from it, but then again, if you got another country who's in need of oil, it's running low, and you got a big reserve stashed away in Alaska, which is almost practically separated by us here in Canada, from the rest of your nation..... it'd be an interesting target to some. Come to think of it..... wtf are you guys doing with Alaska being a state anyways? How about we trade you Alaska for Quebec?

Hmmm, what's wrong with Quebec, other than that they don't really consider themselves canadian? I wouldn't mind Quebec, of course, that's because I'm of french canadian descent and speak french, but so?

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready The internet is one of the best business tools out there, and in a lot of places you could use it as opposed to telephone as well as its many offline business capabilities. I agree with your point, there are a lot of "non-necessary" computer users, and I have nothing against that. Everything we purchase could be more resource conscious however, at the manufacturing and distribution level, and we as consumers need to better understand the impact of our spending on resources, such as luxury vs necessity. I don't want the market to have to suffer, simply to be more conscious of their impacts and conservative in their "throw-away" mentality that plagues so many modern goods. I should have said that more clearly, but you make a valid point also.

I'm not really coming down on computer users. It was just the first thing that popped into my mind. I should have kept my mouth shut, actually, because I have FOUR of them sitting next to my desk. But they are not new, not the fastest and three were made with old parts. So I plead "semi guilty".
Your point about the throwaway society is correct. In that ONE area we can save a lot on our resources. When it takes twice as much plastic to package a CD than the CD itself, you have a problem.

I don't think we should go back to the horse and buggy days (unless people choose that lifestyle for themselves of course),

That's fine for the Amish but it would drive me crazy in a week.

For example, look at the UPS truck fleet around the world. Just that company making the statement that its new trucks will only be purchased if there is a bio-fuel, or renewable fuel cells available, alone would provide incentive to drive the market research into this area both fuels and engine development. The U.S. Postal Service Fleet, could do the same market push.

UPS, FedEX, the Postal Service AND forced school busing could save a lot right there.
As for Biofuel, I'm not completely sold on that. There isn't enough old oil from restaurants and such and I think if we start going wild for Ethanol it will only create a food shortage. I figure we eat and/or export all the corn we grow as it is.
I may have mentioned it before, but my favorite alternative to oil has always been thermal depolymerization

HELL, even if we could convince these bonehead car manufacturers to stop wasting energy, time and money on re-tooling every car every year, and instead do it every 2-3-4 or 5 years, that alone would cut energy costs substantially, and would allow them to get much more profit and usefulness out of each new R&D development, since the platforms would be more stable after successive years of "bug" fixing.

The sheep need things that are shiny and new or the Earth will stop turning on its axis.

I fully and totally agree. Between Peak Oil, middle east wars, and our next national market threat (china), the U.S. consumer needs to wake up and demand more from their car manufacturers, their fuel providers, and their government fleet vehicles are a grand way to start this by retrofit or regularly scheduled new purchases as old vehicles are retired.

Agreed 100%. The only thing consumers seem to be good at demanding is MORE.

If it isn't by an educated market, it won't much matter, but there is nothing wrong with the people demanding their federal fleet that is bought, paid for, maintained and retired using their dollars are meeting their standards of acceptance. We need to educate the people, so they demand the change that drives the market.

Unfortunately I figure they will start demanding changes a week after it is too late. It kind of has a precedent.

It isn't the markets fault, its the sheeples fault for not seeing the forest for the trees.

Agreed once again. But if they knew half as much as the combined people on this forum alone, their brains would short out. I really believe that. They would defensively tune out anything that upsets them, even more than they do now.

In the majority, I agree. I think the educated minority is growing though, and the internet has been a huge boon to reaching the average sheeple. Even sites like this one make a large scale impact with its viewing base.

With its base, I agree. However, any impact we may have on each other doesn't seem to extend much past the digital confines of the forums. Sadly, we ain't changing the world THIS way. The only way this, or any other political gabberia will make people notice anything is when the government starts telling the idiot sheep that people in forums who disagree with the government are terrorists.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Technosoul Some of the items you noted could be made from rubber that somes from trees (sap). Other items could be replaced with newer technology ( re: film could be replaced by computer chips or DVD like disks). Plastic was not widely used before the early 1950s and guess what - they made dishes out of real glass. We did have a lot of those things before the 1920s when the oil industry here in the USA started to boom following the invention of the Ford automoble.

I quoted that list as an example of what we use that might go away if the oil dries up. It won't be just driving you'll worry about. You won't have jobs to drive TO or stores to buy FROM.
And as for new technology, where do think the raw materials will come from? We can make a lot of things from other materials, but not THAT many.

But you make a good point. We have nature conservation so why not also have some oil conservation (as it is a endangered resource of nature). We can put on the list with the Spotted Owl. Oil works best for many items in the private sector and gasoline is not one of them. But first we got to get those viggie fuels marketed before we can start to conserve oil for those other purposes. We cannot expect people to walk, bike, or to ride those electric trains when they want to take the family for a Sunday vacation trip.

Check my exchange with Osborn. There a lot of ways to economize NOW rather than when it's too late.

Meanwhile we should put science busy inventing other ways to make those things you mentioned, other then out of oil, so we can move in the direction of oil conservation. The scientists seem to have time to waste creating modern myths such as the Big Bang so why not do something useful.

Right. We NEED more astronomers working in the electronic and pharmaceutical fields. You betchum!

Science is now, and has been working on those very things. Newer plastic bags, such as supermarket bags are made of plastic about one molecule thick, and other plastics are being made of vegetable matter.

And that list I quoted. Remember it was only a PARTIAL list, and I even edited THAT.

[Osborn F Enready]

Scribbler said: Unfortunately I figure they will start demanding changes a week after it is too late. It kind of has a precedent.

I fully and completely agree.


Friggin sheeple!

Do you think instead of a ray-gun, we could create a sheeple-gun?