Originally Posted by Cyclone85  Oh -- Tight--Tight---Tight....you got it all wrong, man!! It would only be an extra million barrels a day of supply to the U.S. Seriously, what would a million barrels a day do to the fussy supply growth curve vs. the demand growth curve? It's only a 5% margin for error. What do we have now? 0% So what's an extra 5%? Remember, according to Harry Reid (who is always on the right side of every economic and social issue known to man), says we cannot 'drill drill drill' our way out of this energy crisis. Tight -- listen to Harry.
Bill Clinton was absolutely dead on for vetoing ANWR and the pristine area where they wanted to drill. Just wondering, does anybody have an actual photograph of where the actual drill site was to be? How big of an area did it entail? |
Well, maybe we should take 5% OUT of the supply and see what happens? The fact is we need ANWR, and all offshore areas. And now as oil keeps rising, and rising and rising what to environmentalists want to do? Thats right, they want to close off more and more areas from domestic production.
The area of ANWR is roughly the size of NJ, DL, RI, and CONN. The area to be used for drilling is SMALLER than Dulles Airport and is on the NORTH SLOPE which is barren of trees and is nothing more than frozen tundra.
My question to them is.... is one part of the earth better than another? I mean we hear all this about interdependence and hurting just one part hurts all the rest, so why are they willing to sacrifice the living desert at the benefit of frozen tundra? Why allow drilling in Texas, but not in Wyoming? Why in the gulf of Mexico and not off the coast of California?