Why do the democrats oppose drilling of oil here in North America?...

[Y]

so the Gov should decide HOW MUCH MONEY is good enough for a company?

In a perfect world, the market should decide.  But seeing how the oil industry has us by the short and curlies I'm all for classifying it as a regulated industry like utilities, cable providers, and insurance.

Energy is far too important and necessary to be left in the hands of a multi-national oligpoly which is why, for several years now, I've advocated nationalization of all the energy industry.

[C91]

Here you go, Henry.

The Department of Energy says drilling in ANWR won't do a damn thing about gas prices.  And even if we did drill there, we couldn't take delivery on the first barrel from it for at least 10 years. 

So, what's the better solution?  Drill up the refuge for no benefit to consumers or use that money to encourage development of renewable energy sources?

[Henry Hawk]

Here you go, Henry.

The Department of Energy says drilling in ANWR won't do a damn thing about gas prices.  And even if we did drill there, we couldn't take delivery on the first barrel from it for at least 10 years. 

So, what's the better solution?  Drill up the refuge for no benefit to consumers or use that money to encourage development of renewable energy sources?

well that is up for argument because there are those who believe differently about the oil that it there...

U.S. Department of Interior......After several years of surface geological investigations, aeromagnetic surveys, and two winter seismic surveys (in 1983-84 and 1984-85), the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), in its April, 1987 report on the oil and gas potential of the Coastal Plain, estimated that there are billions of barrels of oil to be discovered in the area. DOI estimates that "in-place resources" range from 4.8 billion to 29.4 billion barrels of oil. Recoverable oil estimates ranges from 600 million barrels at the low end to 9.2 billion barrels at the high end. They also reported identifying 26 separate oil and gas prospects in the Coastal Plain that could each contain "super giant" fields (500 million barrels or more).

U.S. Geological Survey..... The most recent petroleum assessment prepared by the USGS in 1998 (OFR 98-34), increased the estimate for technically recoverable mean crude oil resources.

[awol]

"estimates"...."could hold up to"

these are selling terms.  you've been sold.

here's another for ya -- "results may vary"

[C91]

Here you go, Henry.

The Department of Energy says drilling in ANWR won't do a damn thing about gas prices.  And even if we did drill there, we couldn't take delivery on the first barrel from it for at least 10 years. 

So, what's the better solution?  Drill up the refuge for no benefit to consumers or use that money to encourage development of renewable energy sources?

well that is up for argument because there are those who believe differently about the oil that it there...

U.S. Department of Interior......After several years of surface geological investigations, aeromagnetic surveys, and two winter seismic surveys (in 1983-84 and 1984-85), the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), in its April, 1987 report on the oil and gas potential of the Coastal Plain, estimated that there are billions of barrels of oil to be discovered in the area. DOI estimates that "in-place resources" range from 4.8 billion to 29.4 billion barrels of oil. Recoverable oil estimates ranges from 600 million barrels at the low end to 9.2 billion barrels at the high end. They also reported identifying 26 separate oil and gas prospects in the Coastal Plain that could each contain "super giant" fields (500 million barrels or more).

U.S. Geological Survey..... The most recent petroleum assessment prepared by the USGS in 1998 (OFR 98-34), increased the estimate for technically recoverable mean crude oil resources.

And I'm sure the Department of Energy took those surveys in account when they issued their report last week which tells us that drilling in those places will have no measurable impact on the price of crude oil and gasoline. 

Let me turn your question around.  How much of North America are the Republicans willing to destroy in an effort to put a Band-Aid on a gushing wound?

[Henry Hawk]

"destroy" is another term that has been used........to SCARE those against the idea....

[C91]

"destroy" is another term that has been used........to SCARE those against the idea....

Nice dodge.  Now answer the question.

[Henry Hawk]

"destroy" is another term that has been used........to SCARE those against the idea....

Nice dodge.  Now answer the question.

not dodging nothing..........destroy is a harsh word for what they actually do............and you know it...

how much price of gas are democrats willing to pay before we start using our own resources?

[C91]

not dodging nothing..........destroy is a harsh word for what they actually do............and you know it...

Your Honor, will you please instruct the witness to answer the question?  I'll rephrase.

"How much of North America are Republicans willing to destroy in order to put a Band-Aid on a gushing wound?  And is Henry willing to let us start the drilling in his backyard?"

[Henry Hawk]

not dodging nothing..........destroy is a harsh word for what they actually do............and you know it...

Your Honor, will you please instruct the witness to answer the question?  I'll rephrase.

"How much of North America are Republicans willing to destroy in order to put a Band-Aid on a gushing wound?  And is Henry willing to let us start the drilling in his backyard?"

we don't need "much" to be effective.............they NOW have capabilities to drill in one spot........then go directionaly.............and maybe you need to define....."destroy"...............and IF my backyard HAD oil................YES, I would be willing to $tart drilling......

[C91]

how much price of gas are democrats willing to pay before we start using our own resources?

Sit back Henry.  Since you're obviously unable to answer my question, I'll show you how it's done.

Personally, my limit is $2.50 a gallon.  But "using our own resources" doesn't mean drilling for more fossil fuels.  Because what happens when those fossil fuels run out?

"Our resources" extend far beyond the short-sighted solutions the Republicans present on behalf of their masters at Big Oil, Inc.  Our resources include using excess crops to produce ethanol.  Our resources include using our innovation to produce and distribute hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.  Our resources include harnessing the energy from the sun and wind to provide electricity to power plug-in hybrid vehicles.  I believe those resources also include development and construction of new nuclear power plants to replace coal burning facilities currently online.

But the GOP seems to be repelled to using any resources beyond drilling for fossil fuels.  Remember when Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House in an effort to provide more efficient energy consumption?  Why did Ronald Reagan have them removed?  Today, we know that solar energy is one of the gateways to weening ourselves off of fossil fuels.  Think about the example that was set by having those panels removed.  I'm sure Reagan impressed his backers at Big Oil and Big Electricity, but he didn't help the cause of energy independence.

Drilling for oil in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico is a short sighted fix.  Where do we go when ANWR is empty and the Gulf Beaches decimated and we still are running cars on 19th Century technology?

[Henry Hawk]

how much price of gas are democrats willing to pay before we start using our own resources?

Sit back Henry.  Since you're obviously unable to answer my question, I'll show you how it's done.

Personally, my limit is $2.50 a gallon.  But "using our own resources" doesn't mean drilling for more fossil fuels.  Because what happens when those fossil fuels run out?

"Our resources" extend far beyond the short-sighted solutions the Republicans present on behalf of their masters at Big Oil, Inc.  Our resources include using excess crops to produce ethanol.  Our resources include using our innovation to produce and distribute hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.  Our resources include harnessing the energy from the sun and wind to provide electricity to power plug-in hybrid vehicles.  I believe those resources also include development and construction of new nuclear power plants to replace coal burning facilities currently online.

But the GOP seems to be repelled to using any resources beyond drilling for fossil fuels.  Remember when Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House in an effort to provide more efficient energy consumption?  Why did Ronald Reagan have them removed?  Today, we know that solar energy is one of the gateways to weening ourselves off of fossil fuels.  Think about the example that was set by having those panels removed.  I'm sure Reagan impressed his backers at Big Oil and Big Electricity, but he didn't help the cause of energy independence.

Drilling for oil in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico is a short sighted fix.  Where do we go when ANWR is empty and the Gulf Beaches decimated and we still are running cars on 19th Century technology?

Not quite ready to sit back yet C... .......and what part of my ANSWER did you NOT understand?... ..................I never said, nor are any repbulicans saying, that this would be a long term fix............but it could/would help us become less dependent on middle eastern resources..................and why not allow the explorations of oil in our "backyards" and IF it is found..............why not utilize it .... UNTIL..........we find a better resource of NON-fossil fuel?

I HAVE answered your question for the third time now..............it is NOT really difficult to grasp this concept....I think Liberals have been trained to not think of anything that might be related to 'Big Business' as a possible solution..............but reality IS..........Big Business IS the solution, like it or not.........THAT is the way the game is played these days....................and the bottom line IS...........profits..............(unfortunatly).....and if we cannot make oil profitable for "big busines".........then we WILL continue to pay through the nose for a gallon of gas.........and the same goes for alternative fuels...........if it is NOT profitable.............it will NEVER, EVER, EVER happen.............period.

your honor.......

[Gryphon]

"destroy" is another term that has been used........to SCARE those against the idea....

are you talking about the war on "terror" here?

[Henry Hawk]

"destroy" is another term that has been used........to SCARE those against the idea....

are you talking about the war on "terror" here?

not even a remotely funny comparison................have you forgotten the twin tower being destroyed and the thousands of people killed........in the name of terror?.............that was NOT a scare tactic NOR was bombing SH..........

telling people that caribou is going to die and big business man will destroy the enivroment IS and nothing more than a scare tactic...

[C91]

telling people that caribou is going to die and big business man will destroy the enivroment IS and nothing more than a scare tactic...

Actually, it's a fact.  "Big Business Man" has been destroying the environment for years. 

I'm no tree hugger, but you can't dispute that, Henry.