muzikool said:
How about drilling in Alaska? Freaking environmentalists!
people, Americans, live in Alaska...we would have to displace them, that would cost you more then you would save with their oil, we would also have an envirnmental price to pay when we upset the ecosystem, and I'm not talking about some threatened species, I'm talking about global repercusions that would be hard to recover from
envinmentalists are trying to save the world for our children and our grand children, that's a good idea not a bad idea...I agree some envirnmental laws are excessive and need to be revisited, but surely not all of them
supposedly, but I don't know, over a ten-year period of time, if we draw from ANWR, the oil that the US Geological Survey says is there, it would only give a six month supply of oil for the United States in a ten year period....reducing our need for oil only by 2%
so, while I don't argue it's a fair option, it won't do anything to help our problem...when a person thinks an envirnmental law is too severe, usually, (because this is the way republican media works), people haven't seen the data that tells us what we'd gain versus what we'd loose