Home > Oh, Really? > Archives > 2008 > July > 07 > Entry
North, to Alaska?
Perhaps it’s not global, yet, but some folks are warming to the idea of punching some holes into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil. So, is this the mindset that sets back oil shale development, because a less expensive alternative has been found? Or does this kind of thinking spur greater interest in shale as part of a multi-pronged approach to solving energy problems?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment | Categories: Energy
Comments
By wayne
July 8, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this
I have lived in Alaska for 4 years now and have heard all about the fight over ANWR. The people who are against it have never been there and the people who are for it see just another enviromental fight. The area where they want to drill is not going to effect the eco system as much as has been proclaimed. The only way to get out to the area is by ice road or by air. The caribou migrate through the area, but there are very few resident caribou. The temps get down to -60° F with some nasty cold winds. With the engineering that is required, the pipeline would be safe to run for as long as the oil is being pumped. Too many people make decisions based in emotions rather than facts. Reasearch the subject before you decide. Oil shale will not be effected by ANWR. Oil shale is still needed and will be a great source for the future.
By Leonard Patrick
July 16, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this
Idiot! Is the world still flat or has mankind just stupid? Why can’t we start thinking outside of the box???
Here a possible solution for the short term. Check it out and you decide if it makes sense.
www.pickensplan.com