Back to Eden: Restoring the Marshes of Iraq

[NightTrain]

I've been saving, still going to get a Hummer with a turbo diesel! If it gets over 10 MPG, I'm going to put a super turbo kit on it. It goes without saying, 40" Super Swampers to tear the pristine wilderness into mud are priority #1.

I'll post the pictures so Spilly gnashes his teeth with Greenie fired fury.

Regarding the ANWR drilling...

It's done with minimal footprint, these days. The Caribou here in Alaska couldn't care less about the pipeline that already runs from the North Slope to Valdez. It was designed to not interfere with the migration of the Caribou by rising above the ground and below earth in certain areas. Up on the North Slope, thousands of Caribou have taken refuge by ducking behind the pipeline to get out of the wind when it's particulary nasty out. After an oil field winds down, the terrain is almost completely restored to how it was prior to construction of the facilities - the oil companies pay out big bucks for all of their structures to be temporary and yet safe.

Transportation is done chiefly in the winter months, and it's done by building ice roads so that the tundra isn't harmed in any way - when spring rolls around, the road melts without any trace.

We've already got the means to transport the oil from the North Slope to Valdez, it's completely assinine not to tap into the reserves there.

The political game is played with words - how many times have you people down in the Lower 48 heard the term 'Pristine Alaskan Wilderness' used to describe ANWR? Countless times, I'm sure. The fact is, it's a barren, featureless landscape for as far as the eye can see. The problem is the Democrats give in to the greenie's demands to stop progress with drilling in ANWR. They couldn't care less about where we get oil from, this is evident from their efforts worldwide against any oil company. It's their Holy Grail of crusades.

With any luck, the Republicans will pick up just a few more seats in the next election & ANWR will be opened up. It won't solve all of our energy needs, but it will be a large step in the right direction.

 

[MtnBiker]

A Hummer, that would be awsome, hope to see some pictures someday.

 

[spillmind]

wow, and people accuse *me* of being condensending and pretentious! funny how those problems you see so clearly in others is so prominent of yourself. so maybe i have an attitude problem myself! so sue me

this line:

'We've already got the means to transport the oil from the North Slope to Valdez, it's completely assinine not to tap into the reserves there.'

is so beyond i anything i hear every day, and i am glad it only comes in isolated incidents. god forbid you've got the whole neighborhood rallying behind you and your twisted fetish with an H2.

no pics for now, but enjoy this link: http://sierraclubmedia.net/

if it makes you feel any better NT, i can afford one, and i have the good common sense to not support that shit!

'The political game is played with words - how many times have you people down in the Lower 48 heard the term 'Pristine Alaskan Wilderness' used to describe ANWR? Countless times, I'm sure. The fact is, it's a barren, featureless landscape for as far as the eye can see. ' ... oh really!? got a pic of it handy?


lefty hater:

change my mind about what?

your compelling arguement on an alternate energy source?

'only problem with that is that even with "alternate energy" you STILL have to drill for natural gas that is for hydrogen which gives you pollution from the carbon that is released and on down the line but all of that is for another time and place this is a thread about the restoration of the marshes in iraq.....'

since when is hydrogen the only new possible form of energy? have you no imagination? this is old news. picture a hydrogen car in an accident. didn't y'all ever take chemistry?

and at least come CLOSE to maximizing the resources we do have. and yes, big companies put out PR articles like the one posted, however, how many hybrids or otherwise do you see on the road regardless? say and do are different things. i honestly don't see a push from large automakers in the right direction, and there is a reason why.

the plastic issue is one easily remedied. (watch the neocon meter go off the scale right here) HEMP. it is a potential large multi billion dollar industry. no i know you guys KNOW i'm not talking about blazing up your keyboard. hate it all you want, it's the truth.

i found this to be an interesting oil substitute, not sure about this company, however:

http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html

and props on a quick out to: 'and i would be curious to see these 'projected environmental impacts' that you are proposing, on a side by side analysis. '... and i didn't see these in your earlier post. sorry.

and even still, i am not convinced you are the evironmentalist you so claim to be here.


finally, let's talk about the projected AMOUNT of oil that is in the reserve: no one can say for sure, however:

the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management estimates that the recoverable oil in ANWR is 3.57 billion barrels, with the possibility of finding up to 9 billion barrels more (Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives). According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. consumes 19.6 million barrels of oil per day. The estimated ANWR oil reserves (3.57 billion barrels of oil) are enough to supply the U.S. consumers' appetite for oil for only 182 days, or half of a year. Another nine billion barrels of oil would be enough to supply U.S. consumers for an additional 459 days.

some solution.

 

[jimnyc]

'The political game is played with words - how many times have you people down in the Lower 48 heard the term 'Pristine Alaskan Wilderness' used to describe ANWR? Countless times, I'm sure. The fact is, it's a barren, featureless landscape for as far as the eye can see. ' ... oh really!? got a pic of it handy?

"During the debate on whether or not to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the U.S. Department of the Interior has posted Website pictures of the actual area where oil would be drilled--and those pictures conclusively demonstrate that the pictures of mountains and abundant wildlife shown on television news broadcasts are misleading at best and dishonest at worst."

"Of course, environmentalists and their congressional supporters have cried foul, for they would have us believe that scenic fields, mountains, and wildlife would be ground into oblivion from oil drilling. But the Website pictures tell us a different story."

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=941


By the way, have you seen the area first hand, Spillmind? Forgive me if I side with the 'real' news reports (not environmental wackos) and someone who can see it with his own eyes (NT).

 

[NightTrain]

WHAT IS ANWR AND WHERE IS THE COASTAL PLAIN?

•The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) encompasses 19.5 million acres located in the northeast corner of Alaska, 65 miles east of Prudhoe Bay, the largest oil field in North America.

•More than 40 percent of the refuge, 8 million acres, was designated Wilderness, a federal land classification which prohibits commercial development of any kind. It was recently named the Mollie Beattie Wilderness.

•The Coastal Plain (the 1002 area) is 1.5 million acres, 8 percent of the 19.5 million acre refuge. In 1980, Congress specifically excluded the 1002 area from the designated Wilderness zone and required a study of its oil and gas potential. However, Congressional authorization is required before oil exploration and drilling may proceed in this area.

•The 1002 area is considered to be this nation's most promising onshore prospect for a world-class oil discovery. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the 1002 area may contain between 5.6 and 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil reserves.

•The 1002 area could potentially produce an average of one million barrels of oil every day for 30 years. That level of production would account for more than 25 percent of America's domestic production and rank ANWR among the top ten oil producing areas in the world.

•The State of Alaska has concluded that with the combination of environmental controls and the evolution of Arctic technology, ANWR's 1002 area can be explored and developed with no significant impact on wildlife and habitat values.

•Every aspect of development would be regulated strictly and monitored closely through a complex structure of laws, permits, and environmental programs.

•Research has provided no evidence that oil field activities have produced any negative changes in population of fish or wildlife species using the North Slope.

•The Central Caribou Herd, which migrates into existing North Slope fields, has expanded from about 3,000 animals in 1970 to over 27,000 at present. There is scientific evidence to support the conclusion that the Porcupine Caribou Herd, which travels across the Coastal Plain of ANWR, would be just as adaptable to development activities as the Central Caribou Herd has been.

•The Coastal Plain has the potential to reduce the need for imported oil and cut the trade deficit. Furthermore, development of Coastal Plain oil reserves could increase employment nationwide by as many as 735,000 jobs by the year 2005 and could increase the U.S. Gross Domestic Product by $50 billion.






At its widest points, the Coastal Plain is about 100 miles across and about 30 miles deep and covers an area slightly larger than the state of Delaware. Along the coastal area, the plain is an almost featureless expanse, barren and dotted with thousands of unconnected small ponds; the area to the south becomes gently rolling, treeless hills which merge into foothills and then into the northern edges of the Brooks Range.

There is a Native population of about 260 residents at Kaktovik, a village on Native owned lands at Barter Island, adjacent to the Coastal Plain and within the boundaries of ANWR.

If ANWR were a state, it would be larger than 10 other states.

Size of ANWR relative to U.S. states:

1. ANWR
19.0 million acres

Portion of ANWR permanently closed to development (Wilderness & Refuge)
17.5 million

2. West Virginia
15.5

3. Maryland
6.6

4. Vermont
6.1

5. New Hampshire
5.9

6. Massachusetts
5.3

7. New Jersey
4.9

8. Hawaii
4.1

9. Connecticut
3.2

Area proposed for exploration
1.5 million

10. Delaware
1.3

11. Rhode Island
.7


Climate


The Coastal Plain area demonstrates a striking contrast between summer and winter. During the summer months temperatures are relatively warm (40 degrees) and daylight is continuous. During the winter months temperatures drop well below O degrees and blowing snow fills in valleys and swales, resulting in the appearance of a vast, white wasteland.

ANWR WEATHER

Average Summer Temperature (July)
41 degrees F (5 degrees C)

Maximum Summer Temperature 86 degrees F (30 degrees C)

Average Winter Temperature (Feb.) -4 degrees F (-20 degrees C)

Total Cloud Cover 54% of year

Expected Days of Fog 115 days

Average Annual Rainfall 10 in. (25 cm)

Prevailing Winds at Barter Island 13 knots easterly

 

[NightTrain]

Big Oil, Caribou, and Greed
The debate over ANWR.

July 20, 2001 4:00 p.m.

http://www.anwr.org/features/land/Website The Land-ORIGINAL.htm



had a long talk with Poppa Goldberg last night. Poppa G (no relation to Kenny) knows more about good column-writing than the Pope knows about midget basketball and fly-fishing, put together. But I guess that's not saying much. How about: My dad knows more about this stuff than Gandhi knew about rice cakes and non-binding clothes.

Anyway, Poppa G says my columns are getting a bit too formulaic: a joke in the beginning, some overly wordy serious stuff, then more jokes, and a smart-ass finish. Hey, when you think about it, that's a pretty apt description of the Clinton years.

So, starting Monday, we'll try to start mixing up the formula around here. But today, I have something very serious to talk to you about: Simple, Chronic Comsotosis — my word for bad doggy breath. No, that's not right.

Actually, what I want to talk to you about is my expense account. As very close readers of this column know, you get a severe headache when you sit too close to the computer screen. But they also know that I recently went to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. I hung out with folks who know how to fix their own cars and have totally legitimate reasons to carry knives on their belts. I also got to see what Joe Lieberman called "one of the most beautiful, pristine places that the good Lord has created on Earth" and "one of God's most awesome creations."

This is a form of divine slander, like saying Ghostbusters II was some of Bill Murray's best work; it's unfair both to God and to the cooler stuff in the Almighty's oeuvre. But such declarations are also a con. When you watch the evening-news programs on ANWR, most of the time you see mountains and beautiful rivers and lakes and all that. But that's not where they want to drill for oil. In fact, they can't drill for oil in those places for two very straightforward reasons. First, there's no oil there. Second, it's against the law.

In fact, the only spot where it's legal to drill for oil is on what's called the coastal plain of ANWR, the snippet on the northern coast of the Refuge. You rarely see pictures of the coastal plain, because it's not what TV producers call a "beauty shot" (I know this hyper-technical TV lingo from my years as a producer). So, they show mountains and Disney animals and crystal-clear running water and say, "This is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where the evil greasy snout-nosed Republicans want to gouge the planet for a thimbleful of oil."

But that's only true in the sense it's not an outright lie. Yes, the drilling would be in ANWR, but it wouldn't be where the beauty shots are. It's like doing an on-location report on New York City's urban blight and crime, but broadcasting from a café in Rockefeller Center. The coastal plain is, in fact, a vast tract of peat bog and mud puddles (sounds like a crime fighting duo: "Tune in this fall to see Pete Bog and his fast-talking streetwise sidekick Mudd Puddles, tackle evildoers. Tuesdays at 9.").

The coastal plain is a breeding ground for all sorts of awful flying critters. There are trillions of mosquitoes. There are these creatures called warble flies and nosebots, two bumblebee-like flies that cause the caribou unrelenting grief. I could swear I even saw Alan Dershowitz whiz past my ear.

Sure, it's possible to think this spot is beautiful. People find all sorts of things beautiful these days. In fact, a man sold a can of his own excrement at an auction for tens of thousands of dollars a few years back. If that's art, hell, then the coastal plain is Shangri-frickin'-La.

But the truth is that the beauty of the coastal plain isn't really in the eye of the beholder, it's in the imagination of the angst-ridden liberals who have never beheld the thing and never will. Pay attention to the debate over ANWR and a single word will come up more than any other (discounting definite articles like "a" and "the," which come up a lot in pretty much every debate). That word is "pristine."

I understand the appeal of pristineness; the idea that a place or a thing is precisely as God made it can be very compelling. But the key point is that it's an idea. There's nothing inherently beautiful about pristineness. But when I listen to opponents of oil exploration in ANWR I get the distinct impression that what they really mean isn't so much that ANWR is beautiful in itself, but that humans are ugly. In fact, I bet if you asked someone from Greenpeace if there were any place in the world that is devoid of humans and also ugly, they wouldn't be able to name one.

This is why there is no compromising on the anti side of this argument. The oil industry has made huge strides in oil exploration in the last few decades. The oil under the coastal plain could literally be extracted during the dead of winter — when it's night for 58 straight days and no caribou would be dumb enough to come within 500 miles of the Arctic Ocean — and all that would be left come spring would be a couple of Portosan-sized boxes (which the caribou would probably climb onto to catch a better wind and avoid the bugs that breed in their nostrils — I am not kidding).

But the environmentalists refuse to accept any concessions from the industry, because you can't be a little bit pregnant and you can't be a little bit pristine. It's like ANWR is a new car, and the second you drive it off the lot by poking a teeny-tiny hole in the ground, it's "used." The idea is ruined, even though the idea was false all along. The coastal plain isn't pristine — the Inupiat Eskimos, who support drilling in their homeland, have been offing the caribou up there for centuries.

What really drove home for me how much arbitrary abstraction is involved on the anti side of this debate were my efforts to get to ANWR in the first place. The tour I signed up for didn't bring me to ANWR. It brought me to the Alpine oil facility run by Phillips Petroleum in Prudhoe Bay, a couple of hundred miles from ANWR. At Alpine, by the way, the caribou are thriving despite twenty years of oil extraction with machinery far clunkier than the stuff that would be used in ANWR.

The problem for me was that I couldn't go all the way up to the top shelf of the planet to write an article about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge-without actually going there. The roughnecks and engineers thought I was a moron for insisting on seeing an area that looks exactly like the area around Prudhoe.

"Just look out the window. That's what ANWR looks like."

It didn't matter. I had to go because of a totally abstract journalistic convention that dictated that I go. So, I hired a small charter plane (which came with an emergency kit in the off chance that I got stuck out in the bush in bear country). We flew over to ANWR and guess what? Another endless ocean of puddles and tundra.

Now, here's the kicker. That plane was really expensive. And so was my hotel. In fact, the whole trip cost a lot more than we planned and the greedy oil companies aren't covering my freight. Which brings me back to the real issue: my expense account. We all know that copper wire was invented when someone tried to pry an extra penny out of the NR home office. Well, when the NR suits see my expenses it's gonna take the jaws of life to get full reimbursement.

That's where you come in. The full story of my trip to ANWR will not be posted on National Review Online — at all, ever. Cover stories of National Review OnDeadTree do not get posted on National Review Online. This is a matter of policy set by forces far more powerful than me; forces of bottomless, dark, unfathomable, nigh-upon-Stygian depth; forces which have been rumored to rhyme with Pitch Dowry.

Still, if you do not subscribe to NRODT, and you want to read the full, definitive story, you must purchase the magazine. Moreover, the rush to get a copy of this magazine must be so huge, so massive so as to create a jet stream that virtually snatches my reimbursement check out of the iron claws of the NR accounting office. Newsstands should be buried in confetti from the periodical-shredding dogfights over the last copy of the August 9 issue of National Review. Bookstore coffee houses should drown in a sea of spilt lattes.

For if there is not such a groundswell, if the ad revenues and newsstand sales do not surge like Alec Baldwin's skull after an overdose of Viagra, then there's no way the home office will ever approve my expense report and they will never send me anywhere else again. And if I cannot travel the globe as a peripatetic scribe in pursuit of truth and reimbursed alcohol consumption, then the hotel and airport bars which form the backbone of the American, nay, the global economy will shudder from my absence.
It's all riding on you.

Sorry, Dad.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

Originally posted by spillmind

lefty hater:

change my mind about what?

your compelling arguement on an alternate energy source?

'only problem with that is that even with "alternate energy" you STILL have to drill for natural gas that is for hydrogen which gives you pollution from the carbon that is released and on down the line but all of that is for another time and place this is a thread about the restoration of the marshes in iraq.....'

since when is hydrogen the only new possible form of energy? have you no imagination? this is old news. picture a hydrogen car in an accident. didn't y'all ever take chemistry?

hydrogen is only one of many things and right now it's the only one that can be done effectivly. and it wasn't an arguement for anything just stating a fact about drilling.

Originally posted by spillmind
and at least come CLOSE to maximizing the resources we do have. and yes, big companies put out PR articles like the one posted, however, how many hybrids or otherwise do you see on the road regardless? say and do are different things. i honestly don't see a push from large automakers in the right direction, and there is a reason why.

the plastic issue is one easily remedied. (watch the neocon meter go off the scale right here) HEMP. it is a potential large multi billion dollar industry. no i know you guys KNOW i'm not talking about blazing up your keyboard. hate it all you want, it's the truth.

1. to quote an ecology prof "those who think hemp is a solution are smoking too much of it"

2. i see your a good little sheep using the word "neocon" why do you look up the word neoconservative and see what it means.

Originally posted by spillmind
i found this to be an interesting oil substitute, not sure about this company, however:

http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html

and props on a quick out to: 'and i would be curious to see these 'projected environmental impacts' that you are proposing, on a side by side analysis. '... and i didn't see these in your earlier post. sorry.

and even still, i am not convinced you are the evironmentalist you so claim to be here.

i never claimed to be one . and i never said anything about 'projected environmental impacts' i was stating whats is actually happening nothing needs to be projected.

Originally posted by spillmind
finally, let's talk about the projected AMOUNT of oil that is in the reserve: no one can say for sure, however:

the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management estimates that the recoverable oil in ANWR is 3.57 billion barrels, with the possibility of finding up to 9 billion barrels more (Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives). According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. consumes 19.6 million barrels of oil per day. The estimated ANWR oil reserves (3.57 billion barrels of oil) are enough to supply the U.S. consumers' appetite for oil for only 182 days, or half of a year. Another nine billion barrels of oil would be enough to supply U.S. consumers for an additional 459 days.

some solution.

wrong. there has NEVER been an actual study of whats in anwar just guesses. and what you posted are just guesses. you have to test drill before you can make predictions somthing which hasen't been done.

 

[spillmind]

somebody called *me* a good little sheep?!

that was rich.

'hydrogen is only one of many things and right now it's the only one that can be done effectivly. and it wasn't an arguement for anything just stating a fact about drilling.'

good for you, great job avoiding the point about the large car companies buying up techonology and running it into the ground.

'1. to quote an ecology prof "those who think hemp is a solution are smoking too much of it"' just who are you quoting here? someone who taught at that college you thought about going to?

the hemp topic is for another thread altogether, but a quick link:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001e/

i honestly can't believe you are even TRYING to argue this is not a possible solution you're really swallowed it all, haven't you?
you're (not your) making monica jealous.

nice backpedal. i think you set a new record on that one! now who bleating?

'wrong. there has NEVER been an actual study of whats in anwar just guesses. and what you posted are just guesses. you have to test drill before you can make predictions somthing which hasen't been done.'

i agree. which is why the speculation can only be treated as such, not FACT, and why legislation will have a very hard time passing, if it EVER does.

the main point(s) NT and jim seem to be conveniently ignoring:

drilling here is only putting off the inevitable dependancy on oil. there must be an alternate energy solution SOON, there is just no way around it. do we want our children figuring this one out, or are we all about exploiting what we know is a limited 'dirty' supply of energy, or do we do something innovative about it?

the anwr reserve, no matter how optimisitic, will never eliminate our dependancy on oil from the middle east, and your perceived muslim enemies for their supply. with all the money that is funnelled into there every day, it's no wonder the resistance to the american global capitalism model is so well organized/funded.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by spillmind
the main point(s) NT and jim seem to be conveniently ignoring:

You're a bit confused, my worm eating friend!

I posted once in this thread, and it was just a link as per your request to having pictures handy.

I do agree with NT & Wilbury. I figured I wouldn't embarass you in this thread, but it appears thats happened anyway.

 

[spillmind]

embarassed? how so?

you came with the environmental whacko comment, and i can't help but feel that this reflects your stance on the the issue, like you just admitted. so, i don't see how my statement was unfounded.

 

[jimnyc]

My point is that you were accusing me "conveniently ignoring" things you have stated, when I wasn't even a participant, nor did you ask me a damn thing!! How can I ignore what I haven't been asked?

 

[spillmind]

fair enough.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

Originally posted by spillmind
somebody called *me* a good little sheep?!

your the one who's using words without knowing their meanings.

Originally posted by spillmind
that was rich.

good for you, great job avoiding the point about the large car companies buying up techonology and running it into the ground.

nobody's bought up anyting. in fact car companies have been at the front of the field in with these things with the exception of fuel cells with is nasa's doing.

Originally posted by spillmind
just who are you quoting here? someone who taught at that college you thought about going to?.

it was a prof at a lecture in school not collage. i forget his name i meant to add 'as a speaker' to the last part of my statment. it came up in my marine bio class.

Originally posted by spillmind
the hemp topic is for another thread altogether, but a quick link:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001e/

i honestly can't believe you are even TRYING to argue this is not a possible solution you're really swallowed it all, haven't you?
you're (not your) making monica jealous.

it isn't a soltition to anything and has been roundly dismissed by the scientific community due the the fact that it would take to vast of an amount of land to grow enough to sustain anything.

Originally posted by spillmind
nice backpedal. i think you set a new record on that one! now who bleating?

what they hell are you talking about here?

Originally posted by spillmind
i agree. which is why the speculation can only be treated as such, not FACT, and why legislation will have a very hard time passing, if it EVER does.

in all energy bills that have contain a drilling in anwar measure have all said test drilling andmore "on the ground research" needs to be done first. if a bill gets passed they can go in there do test then come back and apply to drill there if there is enough oil if not no premits will be issued.