flytyer57 Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 I hear there's a nice reserve under Crooked Creek. I say we go get it. And there in lies the problem. Even the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge needs protection from the messes the oil companies make while drilling for oil. Imagine a BP sized spill in the Arctic. Definately time to wake up and find alternative sources. How many more do we need to get our act together??????? There's a fine line between fishing and sitting there looking stupid.
gotmuddy Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 Huh? They're not free for us...let me know where they're giving them away, wouldja? Every county in the ozarks has free health clinics where they GIVE birth control away I hear there's a nice reserve under Crooked Creek. I say we go get it.We have plenty under the ground in places where there is no good fishing to last longer than my lifetime. I say we focus on that first everything in this post is purely opinion and is said to annoy you.
eric1978 Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 We have plenty under the ground in places where there is no good fishing to last longer than my lifetime. I say we focus on that first So anywhere there's no good fishing is a good place to drill huh? You know there are other types of ecosystems that are just as recreationally and ecologically valuable and just as loved by other people. You've got a typical case of NIMBY. If you were to say you'd sacrifice your favorite stream for a drilling operation, I'd take you seriously. But you don't want that, and anywhere else you decide would be a good place to destroy, someone else would feel how you feel about Crooked Creek. Drilling is not the answer to our long-term problems...that's another thing you should talk to a scientist about. We just don't have enough to make a real difference.
gotmuddy Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 So anywhere there's no good fishing is a good place to drill huh? You know there are other types of ecosystems that are just as recreationally and ecologically valuable and just as loved by other people. You've got a typical case of NIMBY. If you were to say you'd sacrifice your favorite stream for a drilling operation, I'd take you seriously. But you don't want that, and anywhere else you decide would be a good place to destroy, someone else would feel how you feel about Crooked Creek. Drilling is not the answer to our long-term problems...that's another thing you should talk to a scientist about. We just don't have enough to make a real difference. just because someone is drilling near a stream(which with directional drilling that isn't an issue), it does not mean that the stream is destroyed. everything in this post is purely opinion and is said to annoy you.
Chief Grey Bear Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 Has anyone rented your space yet??? You obviously don't use it. Chief Grey Bear Living is dangerous to your health Owner Ozark Fishing Expeditions Co-Owner, Chief Executive Product Development Team Jerm Werm Executive Pro Staff Team Agnew Executive Pro Staff Paul Dallas Productions Executive Pro Staff Team Heddon, River Division Chief Primary Consultant Missouri Smallmouth Alliance Executive Vice President Ronnie Moore Outdoors
eric1978 Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 Has anyone rented your space yet??? You obviously don't use it. He should rent it out to himself, since this quote is about as worthy of mockery as any I've seen. just because someone is drilling near a stream(which with directional drilling that isn't an issue), it does not mean that the stream is destroyed.
Al Agnew Posted January 30, 2011 Posted January 30, 2011 I will say (or repeat) one more thing about the supposedly available oil in the U.S. The reasons we aren't drilling more for domestic oil is because there is simply no easy to get at, cheap to drill, safe to drill oil left in the U.S. All the easy oil in the U.S. was gotten long ago. In fact, in 1970 we first started to use imported oil...because we were gettting out all the cheap oil we could at that point with existing technology and we needed more. Since then technology has improved, and so has exploration techniques. We've found more oil, but it ain't easy or cheap to get. The problems are many. On the North Slope of Alaska, you have severe weather, iced in ocean six months or more out of the year, an aging pipeline that's incredibly susceptible to terrorist attack and past its expected lifetime. The Prudhoe Bay field is about done, and it's left behind a legacy of lots and lots of minor spills and accidents that are not spectacular enough to get reported on but add up to some serious contamination. They are now doing most of their drilling out in the Arctic Ocean, not really easy or really safe due to the shifting ice. The Inuit living on the edge of the Arctic Ocean are actually for drilling in ANWR. Why? Because they make most of their living from the Arctic Ocean, not from the land, and they are hoping that if the oil companies are allowed to drill ANWR, it will make them drill less out in the ocean where the Inuit are scared to death they'll screw things up. It's the land tribes on the other side of the Brooks Range, who make their living off caribou, who are scared to death of drilling ANWR. Classic case of NIMBY...but the stakes are a lot higher than just scenery. Best scientific consensus is that the Porcupine caribou herd WILL be in serious danger under any kind of drilling scenario in ANWR. I researched this a few years ago after I went up there and saw the place and visited the Inuit, and I won't go into it here but if drilling is allowed in ANWR, it WILL mess the place up. And best estimates are that ANWR could furnish 2-4% of U.S. oil under current consumption for a period of a couple of decades. Worth messing up some of the last "pristine" country on earth? Offshore oil...we all know what can happen there after last summer. There IS still oil available in shallow water offshore, but the reason it isn't being drilled is because it's close to very valuable real estate, either in environmentally sensitive areas or in areas that are as expensive and well-developed as any in the U.S. Oil spill disasters happen. People are not infallible. Worth gambling? We have lots of oil shale and oil sands out West. In some of the most scenic and important wildlife country on earth. The technology has advanced to the point where we can get it out ALMOST economically enough to make it worthwhile for the oil companies to pursue, and as the price of oil continues to rise it WILL be economical...except that it requires taking lots of environmental chances and at best messes up a lot of that land. At worst it could do damage that is totally unfixable. So, none of that oil is cheap. In fact, a lot of it is still not being exploited not because those dastardly environmentalists don't want us to, but because it still isn't worth the hassle for the oil companies. At some point, it will all be economically viable...when oil reaches such a high price that it becomes as cheap as anywhere else. And none of it is easy, which is what makes it expensive. And even the "expensive" doesn't take into account the true costs, which include the "normal" environmental degradation inherent in operating an oil rig as well as the very real danger that a major accident in a very sensitive area will happen. We'll all be paying extra for the Gulf spill for decades. So what do we do? Take all those gambles for a short term "benefit" of reducing our dependence on foreign oil for a couple decades, starting a decade from whenever we decide to do so (because it takes that long to fully develop any of the oil sources available now)? And note I didn't say "end" our dependence on foreign oil...since we get close to 80% of our oil from foreign countries now, that ain't gonna happen because we just don't have enough oil easily enough available to do so. Or do we get off our duffs and start reducing our oil consumption? Not by each individual being forced to buy electric vehicles or put solar panels on their houses, but by a partnership of government and industry coming up with viable long term replacements. I'm pretty sure I know what the oil companies want. They want to keep selling oil for as long as the oil holds out, and THEN be ready to shift over to something else, and never mind the steadily increasing risk to the environment from this course.
gotmuddy Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 We have lots of oil shale and oil sands out West. In some of the most scenic and important wildlife country on earth. The technology has advanced to the point where we can get it out ALMOST economically enough to make it worthwhile for the oil companies to pursue, and as the price of oil continues to rise it WILL be economical...except that it requires taking lots of environmental chances and at best messes up a lot of that land. At worst it could do damage that is totally unfixable. oil shale bothers me as much as strip mining for coal. I hate how places look after they do that. There is a huge strip mine near henderson texas that looks horrific. everything in this post is purely opinion and is said to annoy you.
Justin Spencer Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 There should be panels on every house to heat water and run the boobtube. I think the govt. could take this good idea and expand on it. If they took a portion of each individuals welfare check and put solars panels on their roofs, or on the roofs of low income housing this would offset energy costs year after year and would save money both for the welfare recipients and the govt. as they could lower payments. I'm sure the panels would be considered a scarlet letter by many so I'm sure that's how that idea would be shot down. "The problem with a politician’s quote on Facebook is you don’t know whether or not they really said it." –Abraham Lincoln Tales of an Ozark Campground Proprietor Dead Drift Fly Shop
Members Steve_IA Posted January 31, 2011 Members Posted January 31, 2011 The recipients of such gracious government subsidies will most likely open the windows when their temps rise to uncomfortable levels. As for the hot water... it may not be long before there isn't enough fresh water in the urban areas to drink let alone bath. Yes I'm an alarmist, but I'm actually of the age that I probably won't be around when the sky does fall. steve
Recommended Posts