What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Help save the arctic national wildlife  refuge!

This was an email forwarded to me. Please fill it out and forward it to more people.

Dear NRDC Member,

No one voted on Election Day to destroy the Arctic National Wildlife  Refuge.But President Bush is now claiming a mandate to do exactly that.

Congressional leaders are pushing for a quick vote that would turn  America's greatest sanctuary for Arctic wildlife into a vast, polluted oil field.

Even worse, they are planning to avoid public debate on this devastating measure by hiding it in a must-pass budget bill.

Please go to http://www.nrdcactionfund.org/arctic0501.asp
right now and send a message telling your U.S. senators and representative to reject this sneak attack on the Arctic Refuge.

And please forward my message to your friends, family and colleagues. We must mobilize millions of Americans in opposition as quickly as possible.

Don't believe for a second that the president is targeting the Arctic  Refuge for the sake of America's energy security or to lower gas prices at the pump.

President Bush knows full well that oil drilled in the Arctic Refuge would take ten years to get to market and would never equal more than a paltry one or two percent of our nation's daily consumption. Simply put, sacrificing the crown
jewel of our wildlife heritage would do nothing to reduce gas prices or break our addiction to Persian Gulf oil.

But if the raid on the Arctic Refuge isn't really about gas prices or energy security, then what is it about?

It's the symbolism.

The Arctic Refuge represents everything spectacular and everything  endangered about America's natural heritage. It embodies a million years of ecological serenity . . . a vast stretch of pristine wilderness . . . an irreplaceable birthing ground for polar bears, caribou and white wolves.

It is the greatest living reminder that conserving nature in its wild state is a core American value. It stands for every remnant of wilderness that we, as a people, have wisely chosen to protect from the relentless march of bulldozers, chain saws and oil rigs.

And that's why the Bush administration is dead set on destroying it.

By unlocking the Arctic Refuge, they hope to open the door for oil, gas  and coal giants to invade our last and best wild places: our western canyonlands, our ancient forests, our coastal waters, even our national monuments.

This is the real agenda behind the raid on the Arctic Refuge and the  entire Bush-Cheney energy plan: to transfer our public estate into corporate  hands so it can be liquidated for a quick buck.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) admitted as much when he said this battle over the Arctic Refuge is really a fight over whether energy  exploration will be allowed in similarly sensitive areas in the future. "It's about
precedent," Rep. DeLay said.

I take him at his word. If we let the president and Congress plunder the  Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for the sake of oil company profits, then no piece of our natural heritage will be safe from wholesale destruction. Please go to http://www.nrdcactionfund.org/arctic0501.asp
and tell your senators and representative they have no mandate to destroy the Arctic Refuge. Then please be sure to forward this message to as many  people as you can.

And thank you for speaking out at this critical time.

Sincerely,

Robert Redford
Board of Trustees
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
 
first off im all for stuff along these lines normally BUT being as i have a first hand account of current oil drilling in Alaska(my brother has worked rigs up there, right now he is working them in Wyo.) its not that big of a deal. its not anywhere close to being the big polluter that enviro's make it out to be. the companies are EXTREAMLY careful as fines are high. those working on the rigs are paid LARGE bonuses for not having a single spill or accident. if yah want to put a stop to this kind of thing push for more production of ethonal. its cleaner burning and much cheaper than oil and can be made anywhere anytype of grain is grown without the pollution of oil refineries.
 
right, like being payed extra for not having a accedent is going to prevent one
 
ok let me put this another way drilling for oil isnt going to last terribly much longer. why? our oil refineries aare going to be on there last legs soon and there will not be another one built because there is no way that one would pass and EPA rules. our "new" oil refinery is something along the lines of 35-50 years old. you are better off putting your energy into pushing for ethonal plants then preventing more drilling in the USA because of all the whiners who claim the whole Iraq war is about oil, solution: dont bother with foriegn oil anymore and open up our own reserves but i guess the enviro freaks are to wrapped up in saving the enviroment to allow any more drilling and its the same ppl claiming that we shouldnt be in the middle east at all and going by the small numbers of hybrid cars i see on the roads i guess they still think we need to get oil from somewhere. screw screaming about the Alaskan drilling, the chances of a spill are remote. put your screaming twords demanding more ethonal being mixed in with gasoline. any car on the road can run on 10/90 ethonal/gas. some of the newer vehicles can run on a 85/15 ethonal/gas mix. all ethonal is, is a grain alcohol. it can be made from corn, wheat, barley........any grain!!!! and the byprotuct "mush" can be fed as a high protien feed to livestock. sounds like a better way to direct your energy to me.
 
As a life-long Alaskan and someone who has seen ANWR personaly and also seen the oil fields at Prudhoe Bay it kills me to think of ANWR becoming that. Accidents do happen and they have an extreme effect on the wildlife when they do. Look at the Valdez oil spill.
I would hardly call working for the oil company a "first hand account". They only tell you what they want you to hear. Besides, making that kind of money, who's going to complain?
I do agree that focusing on decreasing our demand for oil is a much better soultion though. I don't think anything can be done about ANWR now.. between Bush and Alaska's gov. Murkowski there isn't a chance in heck.
 
oh please, what a load of crap!
and the lunatic fringe wonders why people dont take them seriously..

"Congressional leaders are pushing for a quick vote that would turn  America's greatest sanctuary for Arctic wildlife into a vast, polluted oil field."

"It is the greatest living reminder that conserving nature in its wild state is a core American value. It stands for every remnant of wilderness that we, as a people, have wisely chosen to protect from the relentless march of bulldozers, chain saws and oil rigs.
And that's why the Bush administration is dead set on destroying it."

umm yeah..ok. that sounds perfectly logical!
smile_l_32.gif


but oh yeah, I keep forgetting..we dont need to bother with facts or logic, lets just make up sensational horror stories that have no basis in reality, just because we hate Bush and have our own agenda to push.
making up outright lies is fine as long as people are stupid enough to believe it..(which, sadly, many are..)
Scot
 
The North Slope has as much oil as the entire Middle East. And you know why they don't want people to drill any more up there? They want to wait until the rest of the world dries up, and then we can open up shop and collect the wealth of other countries.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Bonnie @ Jan. 26 2005,5:32)]I would hardly call working for the oil company a "first hand account". They only tell you what they want you to hear. Besides, making that kind of money, who's going to complain?
LMAO!!!!!! my brothers alot of things but he is nobodys parrot. the ONLY two things that are any concern of his are the well being of his family and getting funds to pay for his next round of fun. no offence taken Bonnie but he is one guy that will speak his mind reguardless of consiquences.

Alaskas going to be opened up for oil. there is nothing we are going to be able to do about that. the world craves oil and money talks. your efforts are better spent demanding the production and use of more ethonal. its an easy solution that can be implimented now nation wide unlike hydrogen fuel. in Miles City, Montana of all places(about 2.5 hours from me) last week they were selling 85% ethonal "gas" for $0.95 a gallon. if i remember right GM has seveal popular models now with engines that can run on the 85% ethonal as well as "pure" gasoline. and like i said EVERY car out there with a gasoline engine can run on a 10-15% ethonal mix gasoline
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The North Slope has as much oil as the entire Middle East. And you know why they don't want people to drill any more up there? They want to wait until the rest of the world dries up, and then we can open up shop and collect the wealth of other countries.


no way, thats a gross overstatement
 
  • #10
rattler, instead of just arguing with everybody, either be supportive in this thread and forward it to other people, or go away and dont post and argue in this thread again.
 
  • #11
starman i brought up an excellent point. i see major flaws in the original post:

"President Bush knows full well that oil drilled in the Arctic Refuge would take ten years to get to market"

i would put $100 on it taking less than 1 year from the time the first hole is punched, give modern technology some credit.

"an irreplaceable birthing ground for polar bears, caribou and white wolves."

the major breeding grounds for all these species are in Canada. granted all do in Alaska also but the Artic wild life refuge is FAR from the only place in Alaska.

"By unlocking the Arctic Refuge, they hope to open the door for oil, gas and coal giants to invade our last and best wild places: our western canyonlands, our ancient forests, our coastal waters, even our national monuments"

the LARGEST complaint by far on this i can think of is two issues here in Montana, Looging and coal bed methane. the coal bed methane is by and large on private property and no one is allowed to drill for it and i think they should. on logging. it needs to be done selectivly. forrest fires to day are not the same as 100 years ago. why? cause we dont allow fires to burn anymore. so fuel keeps building up so when one starts it burns so hot that it kills the trees when it didnt used to.

i generally hate organizations like this. they are only giving you half truths and the public by and large are taking them as full truths. we jsut went through a whole thread on President Bush lieing to the general public. well this organization giving half truths is the same in my book. sign the petion if yah want to. it makes more difference to me but i am being honest when i say your efforts are better spent demanding less dependance on foriegn oil by demanding more ethonal being mixed with the gasoline. its enviromentally friendly. it creates more jobs for US citizens, it creates a better market for "junk grain"(i can go more into this if yah wish but it will mean better money for small time farmers, not just big corporations) ethonal is the best bet twords energy independance not hydrogen fuels that eco-minded individuals are screaming about because it uses existing technology that is widly and currently availible. and this whole argument of mine relates DIRECTLY to the opening of the Artic wildlife refuge Starman.
 
  • #12
Oh for god sake, calm down already......
confused.gif


You obviously support Bush, but lots of people dont, get over it.
if all you are going to do is argue with everybody, then I think you should simply stop posting in this thread.
 
  • #13
actually this post of mine has nothing to do with Bush, i dont support Bush. i support his possition on some things. i dont really support or not support the Arctic drilling cause im pretty dang sure its going to happen reguardless of how loud ppl scream. on wiether i support Bush i will state that he flat out decieved the country on the No Child Left Behind Act and it is absolutly worthless and dentrimental to this nation. i also say and have ALWAYS said that the Patriot Act is one of the most un-Constitutional piece of legislation EVER proposed and should be repealed immediatly.

and since i think the Arctic is going to be opened up reguardless i offered a more valuable way for ppl to direct their energy IF they dont want us to keep depending on foriegn oil AND they dont want more places like the Arctic refuge opened up. i am not argueing with Bonnie on what she said about my brother. i think she got the impression that he is higher up in the company than he actually is and IF he was one of the "big wigs" i would actually conceed that she may be right but since he is fairly low on the totem pole AND i know him as well as i do i can say with absolute certainty that he is no parrot for the oil company. i have seen no arguments posted against my ethonal propsals.
 
  • #14
Starman I have to say there was NO arguing going on at all just statements and conversations. If any the thread had any problems they did not start until you posted. You had absolutly nothing revelant to say regarding the thread. You threw gas on the fir.... wait no you started the fire. Think, then post.
 
  • #15
I don't think Rattler has said anything that can be construed as argumentative, he is posting his opinion, offering sound alternatives and alternative viewpoints. Telling him to stop posting in this thread is simply unwarranted.

Middle Eastern Countries control somewhere in the range of 80% of the worlds KNOWN oil reserves, so saying that the new alaskan field will be as large as the middle east's fields is probably not so.

And as was said, monetary incentives to not have an accident don't prevent accidents, but they DO provide incentives NOT to have one, incentives that cause oil companies to heavily invest in technologies that can help prevent horrible situations from occuring.

As far as I am concerned, I think people need to be realistic in their views, just because they want to drill for oil doesn't mean they are evil polluters that are going to make a black lake on the alaskan landscape, nor do I think all the safety precautions in the world are going to keep that snow pretty as it can be.

Oil companies exist to turn a profit, just like every other company in the world, but they are also highly concious of their environmental impact these days, someone mentioned valdez, that was a big eye opener for the world. Oil companies spend millions of dollars in environmental research each year, and employ environmentalists, I am not saying they put the environment before their profit, that would be naieve, but they do have a public image to maintain, and the land they are hoping to drill on is leased, if they break the rules then that lease can easiliy be awarded to a more responsible organization, in otherwords, while their motives may be questionable, it is in their best interest to do the cleanest job they can, oil spilled all over the snow can not be sold to you or me.

Extremism will almost always take you down an innacurate path, and is almost never entirely correct, and I am not saying the middle of the road is right either, each person neads to find a path that is correct for them.

To sum up in an 'on topic way' what exaclyt I mean, how about this.

opening up a new oil reserve is a (IMHO) a responsible economic decision, doing so will most likely cause some environmental damage, and that saddens me, but In reality, all parties involved will work to reduce environmental impact and the overall effect of the project will probably benefit the nation. It's a pretty middle of the road opinion I admit.

The chinese economy grew 8% last year, they are rapidly becoming a 'mega-consumer' society, if China were to ever reach the prosperity level of the US, there would not be enough resources in the world to build that many cars, but that's ok, we would run out fuel sources for them long before then, alternative energy research is surging ahead, and imo, were going to get there in the nick of time.
 
  • #16
There are 19 million acres in the ANWAR preserve.  The actual footprint of the oil rigs and related logistical support area will be less than 1000 acres.  That sounds like a rather small area will be impacted.
It is true that the oil will have to be shipped out by either tanker or pipeline but the current Prudhoe Bay pipeline doesn't seem to be causing a problem and with the new double hulled tankers being proposed, that should end any possible repeat of the Exon Valdese incident...as long as we keep the Captains away from the Scotch bottle.
 
  • #17
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]the major breeding grounds for all these species are in Canada. granted all do in Alaska also but the Artic wild life refuge is FAR from the only place in Alaska.


my prime concern is for the rare birds that breed there like Spectecled eider, white-headed geese, and the many shoebirds that breed there, some wich are of conservation consern. several of these birds have very restricted breeding reinges, promarily the rare eiders. luckally, their whole range isnt in the proposed drilling site, but its still does not make it ok
 
  • #18
cause, coatal real-estate is important for sea dwelling birds
 
  • #19
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]luckally, their whole range isnt in the proposed drilling site, but its still does not make it ok
Did you not read my post?
What percent of 19 million acres is 1000 acres?  Surely that is not going to much damage.
 
  • #20
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Lauderdale @ Jan. 29 2005,3:49)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]luckally, their whole range isnt in the proposed drilling site, but its still does not make it ok
Did you not read my post?
What percent of 19 million acres is 1000 acres?  Surely that is not going to much damage.
if my math is correct, it is 0.000053%

lets see..
if the 19million acres was a football field,
then the 1000 acres would be 3 square feet.

or..if the 19million acres were a 4X8 foot sheet of plywood.
then the 1000 acres would be a square 1/4 inch.
(thats a square quarter of one inch.)

Scot
 
Back
Top