Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (583318)	6/15/2004 9:49:46 PM
From: sandintoes	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

It really is a frozen tundra...most is accessible only to polar bears. We need oil, they have it, and if we don't have to depend on the Middle East it is a win win for the US. This is a no brainer, if you ask me... Let the libs flush their toilets once a day, our country needs oil, we have it, go get it!

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (583318)	6/16/2004 2:44:25 PM
From: Krowbar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

< Yes, I've been persuaded that drilling could be accomplished without real harm to that pristine area. > According to the latest estimates by the U.S. Geological Survey, the coastal plain would yield only about six months worth of oil for the United States under the most likely scenario. And even that would take 10 years to bring to market. Recovering that oil would require hundreds of miles of roads and feeder pipelines, refineries, living quarters for hundreds of workers, landfills, water reservoirs, docks and gravel causeways, production plants, gas processing facilities, seawater treatment plants, power plants and gravel mines. Conservatives want to give the impression that only a small percentage of the land would be drilled. That's true, but only because they only count the acreage that is the footprint under the equipment and roads and pipelines. ANWR would look like a polka dot shirt. Why do they call themselves CONSERVATIVES anyway, when they are hell bent on draining every drop that we have as though they have that right to self-indulge, and owe nothing to our grandchildren? < Of course, there are other avenues to pursue like alternative energy research to diminish the country's dependence on Saudi oil. The government could have requested yrs ago that Americans sell their humungous SUVs. If everyone was not trying to protect themselves from other tank-like vehicles on the highways, we would consume far less fuel. > Now you're talking about progress, but watch out, you're starting to sound like a liberal. Cyberken will accuse you of being a sewer rat, like me. Just a one-mile-per-gallon improvement in the efficiency of our automobiles would save half-a-million barrels of oil a day, forever. That’s more than we can ever hope to extract from the Arctic refuge. Now, why do you suppose that Bush ridiculed Gore's plan to promote the use of hybrids? They save about 10 MPG per car, with no decrease in performance, and would eliminate the need for Mid-East oil. We could have been well on our way by now if the Bush administration was really interested in getting us of of our oil addiction. Del