Who would like to see ANWR opened up to oil and natural gas drilling?
ANWR- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in Alaska.
Also: What about building a natural gas pipeline from Alaska thru Canada, to the Lower 48??
ANWR- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in Alaska.
Also: What about building a natural gas pipeline from Alaska thru Canada, to the Lower 48??
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
What part of NATURAL WILDLIFE REFUGE do people not understand?
The whole idea of these preserves, refuges, etc, is to protect for posterity these treasures. They are not made to be exploited when any special interest group feels they can turn a profit.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
I for one would love to see ANWR opened up.
For one thing the effects of petroleum products will not effect the worlds ecosystems for many many years to come. the idea that a pipeline is going to somehow hurt carribo or some other land animal is preposterous. crude oil is a very thick liquid that will not spread on the ground like it does in the ocean. besides when did animals become more important that people? NEVER!
Secondly the gas pipeline..
hard to defend
it would have to belong to canada, and that in itself would cause issues…
i dont know alot about natural gas, but it would seem a hell of a lot more dangerous than crudeoil.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Absolutely, but we also need to look at curbing our usage in order to lessen our dependence on foreign oil.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Drill today and we might see oil in ten years if everything goes right.Just think if we spend the time and money on solar and wind energy where we would be in ten years.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
No, that will run out too…duh, temporary solutions are not the answer.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
It’s not worth it. It won’t do anything other than lower the price of oil for a brief few years and endanger a wilderness. There’s no reason to do that.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
The long term environmental costs don’t seem to outweight the "benefit" that would occur for our petrol dependent society. I think it’s an awful idea that is not forward looking at all, pure instant gratification. big concern
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Yes
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Yes. The drilling can only be done in the winter when an ice road can be built to the sight. The pumping station will handle five well heads all localized. and the caribou only use the area in the spring summer and fall. It is safe and economical and the oil lake is the secant or third largest in the world.
It will reduce the need for foreign oil by a factor of ten.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
I would.
we shouldn’t just lett all that oil sit there. Besides, drilling there and getting more oil would naturally drive down the price of gas.
very good idea
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
no don’t want to see that. can’t we have one unmessed with beautiful place left in the states?
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Terrible idea, we should look to alternative fuel sources before spoiling one of our countries last great places. I backpacked in the brooks range near ANWR for 45 days and would hate to see it ruined.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Not me.
There isn’t enough gas and oil in ANWR to make any real difference to America’s supply.
And the refuge is a fragile environment. A spill there would be devastating.
Why risk it when it won’t actually solve any problem?
July 4th, 2009 at 6:52 am
I wouldn’t like to see it drilled. We need to just suck up and pay for the upgrade of our society to more renewable sources of fuel. The alternative sources won’t mess up the ecosystem as much and it will create jobs. After all, that area is supposed to be untouchable natural land. Let it stay that way, especially if the only reason to ruin it would be to save money.