Originally Posted by Don Shillady
Dave I only cite the ANWR oil as a date when the Democratic Clinton administration started to oppose drilling, not to mention Al Gore's motivation to stop essentially all fossil fuel consumption to reduce CO2 emissions. But on top of that the use of nuclear power is also suppressed. I agree that there is probably more oil in the shale fields of Colorado and North Dakota than in ANWR, but there is also off-shore oil available. I am teaching a class right now with students from Yemen, Ethiopia, Iraq, India, Vietnam and some from the good old USA and they report all kinds of stuff about how the Chinese are scooping up oil in other countries while we watch Cuba and Venezuela drill nearby. The environmentalists seem to me to want to just stop using coal, shale oil, off-shore oil and ANWR oil, any oil or coal just to reduce CO2 while all the time there is no indication that China and India will reduce their CO2 emissions. Sure wind power is great when the wind blows, sure photovoltaic cells are great when the sun is shining and sure we should find clean ways to convert coal to liquid alcohols using the Sasol process. I am for all of those energy sources along with Picken's natural gas. It just seems to me that the environmentalists are intent to choke the U.S. enconomy in order to force conversion to non-fossil fuels as well as no new nuclear power stations. Since the intervening delay you cite may be at least five years, maybe ten to convert to electric cars if indeed that is where we are headed, how are we supposed to commute to work in the meantime? OK pass laws and/or tax breaks to force conversion to electric cars BUT we can't just sit at home for five or ten years until the electrics come along with the enhanced electric grid to handle the load. It just seems to me to be a destructive tactic to cut off available oil sources while other countries continue to get the oil out of the ground and continue to evolve CO2. Just a question, but I wonder how many windmills does Al Gore have on his land? How much of Al Gore's roof is covered with photocells? For the folks on this Forum I would think most of us are hooked to a gas pump at our navel so I am surprised that there is any doubt about the need to drill for more oil. Of course it will run out eventually and we now have about the third serious warning to get ready for alternate energy forms but I would like to see Al Gore put up a windmill and figure out how to get me a tax break to put photocells on my roof. I have heard it costs about $20k for a reasonable rooftop installation and that it will take more than ten years to pay for itself, so if Al Gore wants me to use them I need a tax break for that expense. In conclusion, Dave, I am for all forms of energy not just from ANWR oil. How is it that France can get about 75% of it's electrical power from nuclear plants and yet we are hoping for intermitant current from windmills? By short term priority I would favor North Dakota shale oil most and then a few more nuclear plants, but that is just my opinion.
Best Wishes,
Don Shillady
Retiured Scientist/teen rodder