Your Bush

[MaryJane]

I had to do this case study in an environmental class and I wanted to hear your opinions.

In 1923, President Harding set aside the region known as 'The National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska' as a petroleum reserve, under the stipulation that the oil fields be drilled only in time of pressing national need. These fields have never been needed or touched. Today, it is recognized for its extraordinary wildlife values. "For example, the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area provides important nesting, staging, and molting habitat for many loons, ducks, geese, and swans (this area is a critical molting and staging area for over 20% of the world's Pacific brant population) and encompasses the major calving area and seasonal travel routes for the 25,000 Teshekpuk Caribou Herd. To the south, the Colville River corridor contains high density nesting habitat for songbirds and birds of prey, including Arctic peregrine falcons."



The Colville River also occupies the Reserve and it supports over twenty different species of fish including arctic char, pink and chum salmon, burbot, long-nosed suckers, sculpin and sticklebacks. Along the Chukchi Sea coast and partially within the existing boundary of the Reserve lies a series of sheltered barrier islands which forms one of the largest coastal lagoon systems in the world. Comprising over four million acres in the southwest corner of the Reserve, the Utukok Highlands is a favorite calving area for the Western Arctic caribou herd which congregates in the rolling hills by the tens of thousands in the spring.



According to this article, http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/Release/20040122.cfm, on January 22, 2004 President Bush announced that the entire 8.8-million-acre northwest planning area of the reserve available for oil leasing.

[Wezas]

Damn, just when I thought we finally had a decent dirty thread on this board, it's about the president.

[Kitsun]

I don't know about ripping up the entire place for oil but I think its time we finally started getting *some* of our own oil from our resources. Sick of being dependant on the whims of those arab countries for good gas prices. We can probably get it done better, faster and more efficiently with our tech so it wouldn't shred the whole area.

[Parkbandit]

I :heart: Bush.

:smug:

[longshot]

President Harding should have picked a better spot for the reserve then...

I really can't feel bad for a couple dirty Alaskan hippies worried about foraging for berries.

Sorry.

I say drill.

[MaryJane]

The oil that could be mined from the site would not even satify 1% of our need. I just think it's unfair that he wouldn't even consider alternative plans to SHARE.

[pennywise]

Beg your pardon, but that is a massive reserve, and drilling it would satisfy more than 1% of our need. And just as a side note, what bothers you about drilling the area? The drilling isnt that big a deal, its the transportation that should be a worry. So why not drill the site and run another pipeline from a main collection area around there to some port or other?

Pennywise, Just trying to figure out whats wrong with making use of what we got.

[MaryJane]

"Information gathered from the biological, seismic and geological studies was used to complete a Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) that described the potential impacts of oil and gas development. The report concluded that oil development and production in the area would have major effects on the Porcupine Caribou herd and muskoxen. Major effects were defined as "widespread, long-term change in habitat availability or quality, which would likely modify natural abundance or distribution of species." Moderate effects were expected for wolves, wolverine, polar bears, snow geese, seabirds and shorebirds, arctic grayling and coastal fish. Major restrictions on subsistence activities by residents would also be expected. The U.S. Geological Survey recently determined that the refuge may contain roughly 3.2 billion barrels of oil that could be economically recovered and brought to market, assuming a price of $20 per barrel. But it would take 50 years to extract it all, and during that time, the oil would satisfy only 1 percent of projected U.S. demand. "

It's a quote from somewhere, I don't know where.

[Parkbandit]

I think it's a good bandaid to take care of our consumption today.. but the real win for us will be alternative fuel sources. Find those and we can tell OPEC to go fuck themselves.

[Betheny]

:( I was all set to expound lyrically upon the goodness that is my bush, too.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Maimara
:( I was all set to expound lyrically upon the goodness that is my bush, too. Too tempting. :smug:

Basically everything PB said. I don't see a problem with it.

[vigilante]

Most Alaskans agree with Bush on this, including our Governor (former U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski), and our Washington delegation (Don Young - Congressman; Lisa Murkowski - Senator; Ted Stevens - Senator). A majority of us, the constituents, support Bush on this issue. It isn't a bunch of Alaskan hippies getting in the way on this one...

It's outside environmentalist hippies sticking their nose where it doesn't belong. It's not a matter of IF on this one, it's WHEN...

Unless we somehow become dependent on some alternative energy source within the next year, consider this a done deal.

[SpunGirl]

Plz keep it neatly trimmed, no need for painful brazilians. Kthx.

-K

P.S. Also, Dubya is a-okay with me most of the time.

[MaryJane]

Hey, that's neat to have an Alaskan's?point of view.

What happens when they're done, or start their work and it kills all your tourism? Who's going to want to do the 'Alaskan Cruise Through Oil Drilling' and once they're done they leave you with their drilling mess and you still have no tourism!

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by MaryJane
kills all your tourism?I'm sure Mint can have just as much fun in the Yukon.

[vigilante]

What happens when they are done is the same thing that is happening now, wherever oil-drilling/leasing has occurred...they pack up and go home.

Everyone will still visit Alaska...the oil fields are nowhere near the Inside Passage and Southcentral (hardly anyone visits the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge). And even if the sites were in heavily populated tourist areas...the oil companies have proven they can do their deeds with minimal impact on the environment (in most cases).

They do not 'leave you with their drilling mess' because it is all regulated. Trust me, the oil companies enjoy a solid reputation up here for being responsible. And the one oft-used counter to that is Exxon Valdez ... which did not occur at or near an oil-drilling site at all....

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by MaryJane
Hey, that's neat to have an Alaskan's?point of view.

What happens when they're done, or start their work and it kills all your tourism? Who's going to want to do the 'Alaskan Cruise Through Oil Drilling' and once they're done they leave you with their drilling mess and you still have no tourism!


LOL... come on MJ.. you do realize they are talking about a very small piece of northern Alaska right? Any idea how much of that area's economy can be attributed to tourism?

That's like saying that Florida would lose all of it's tourists by putting up 3 oil derricks in the everglades.

[MaryJane]

Honest, I'm just bringin up situations from my Environmental Class. Course, it is an ENVIRONMENTAL class so they're biased. I wanted to hear both sides.

I mean, I work for the DIESEL operated railroad.

[MaryJane]

We're looking for a good nuclear waste disposal site. You think Alaska would mind?! I'm going to put that in my report. "No real Alaskans go there, lets haul the waste there!"

[Hulkein]

Just put it in some poor African country and tell them that it is edible.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by MaryJane
We're looking for a good nuclear waste disposal site. You think Alaska would mind?! I'm going to put that in my report. "No real Alaskans go there, lets haul the waste there!"

Name one state that WANTS us to use their land for a nuclear waste disposal site and you may actually have a point.

[Drew]

Originally posted by MaryJane
We're looking for a good nuclear waste disposal site. You think Alaska would mind?! I'm going to put that in my report. "No real Alaskans go there, lets haul the waste there!"

What's wrong with Yucca Mountain?

[vigilante]

I heard South Shore, MA wouldn't mind :D

[Betheny]

I thought all the toxic waste and stuff went to Jersey.

[Sean]

Have you ever actually been to New Jersey?

[Betheny]

Do you have to be?

[Blazing247]

<Have you ever actually been to New Jersey?>

A lot of Jersey is actually very beautiful. Most people judge Jersey from what they see on the Turnpike from exits 15-13 (Newark to Elizabeth), which granted, are shitholes.

Of course, my family is from CT, probably one of the most beautiful states on the Eastern shore.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Blazing247
<Have you ever actually been to New Jersey?>

A lot of Jersey is actually very beautiful. Most people judge Jersey from what they see on the Turnpike from exits 15-13 (Newark to Elizabeth), which granted, are shitholes.

Of course, my family is from CT, probably one of the most beautiful states on the Eastern shore.

You don't have to tell me, I know that I've lived here the last 20 or so years.

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by Maimara
Do you have to be?

Now don't make me go and mostly agree with Blazing darnit!

:wow:

[Back]

Is he just opening it up for oil companies to make profit from, or is he tapping the reserve finally to lower our gas prices?

Reading the article, I couldn't tell. Also, its interesting that the Bush Regime didn't even consider the counter proposal to compromise.

[Weedmage Princess]

Tijay, the Jersey end of the Goethal's bridge is really nice...and clean. So is the area east of the Bayonne Bridge, affectionately dubbed "Factory Island."

--some random former Staten Islander :bleh: