Scooby Doo wrote:
DSK wrote in
:
Scooby Doo wrote:
A "fool" is someone who won't accept a compromise where he gets more
than 92% of what he wants. ANWR is 19 million acres. The area
identified as the largest untapped petroleum supply in North America
is 1.5 million acres, or 7.9% of the 19 million.
Uh huh. And if "opening" that 7.9% negates the value of the rest, then
it's not enough, is it?
What "value" is being negated? Before you answer, ponder the fact that
the caribou population has TRIPLED since the opening of the Alaska
Pipeline. No doubt you were one of the Chicken Littles warning about
'negating value" before that project, n'est-ce pas?
That simply is *not* true. In fact the Porcupine Caribou Herd
has been in decline for several years now, and is at a minimum
(120,000 animals).
Note that every other herd, including the huge Western Arctic
Caribou Herd at something like half a million animals, is indeed
increasing in size in all areas where there is no oil
development.
And the *very small* (5000 to 30,000 animal) Central Arctic Herd
has in fact increased in size *in* *areas* *with* *no* *oil*
*development*. On the other hand, this very small herd is the
only one that inhabits the areas where Prudhoe Bay oil
infrastructure exists. While, as you claim, that herd has
multiplied... the fact is that is a very small herd in a very
large area and has simply moved away from the oil
infrastructure, and no longer calves anywhere near Prudhoe Bay,
Kuparuk, or Milne Point infrastructure.
It is the study of the Central Arctic Herd's reaction to oil
infrastructure that has caused virtually *every* credible
caribou biologist that has done field work on the North Slope to
state that developing ANWR would have a negative impact on the
Porcupine Herd. (Dozens of them have signed letters to Clinton
and then Bush asking that it not be done.)
.. The proposal to open that 1.5 million
acres would create about 700,000 jobs, decrease our dependence on
Middle Eastern and other unstable foreign sources of energy, and
allow 92.1% of the wildlife refuge to remain untouched.
No, it will provide approx six months worth of oil at current
consumption, probably less by the time all is said and done, and cut
across the entire wildlife refuge disrupting migration & seasonal
habitat.
15 billion barrels is "six months worth"? Arthur Andersen teach you math?
15 billion barrels is a pipe dream. The actual prediction is
just under half that. It isn't enough to have any significant
effect on a national scale. For Alaskans, and in particular
those who live on the North Slope, it would be worth millions in
tax dollars. But it won't reduce dependence of foreign oil (and
will export dollars, because all of the oil companies that will
benefit are either foreign based or multi-national) and won't
reduce the price of gasoline more than about 4 cents a gallon.
Speaking of Andersen math...
--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)