Text 7995, 162 rader
Skriven 2005-01-25 06:38:25 av John Hull (1:379/1.99)
   Kommentar till text 7961 av Darryl Perry (1:106/324)
Ärende: Re: fighting terrorism.
===============================
24 Jan 05 23:08, Darryl Perry wrote to John Hull:

 DP> On 01-24-05, John Hull said...

 JH>> 23 Jan 05 22:38, Darryl Perry wrote to JOHN MASSEY:
 JH>> 
 JH>>  DP> On 01-23-05, JOHN MASSEY said...
 JH>> 
 JH>>  JM>> DP>The problem with that is that the US can't decide for 
 JH>>  JM>> DP>other countries on how they will fight terrorism.  I've 
 JH>>  JM>> DP>always said that the best way for us to fight terrorism 
 JH>>  JM>> DP>is to stop using foreign oil, 
 JH>>  JM>> 
 JH>>  JM>> It's not this Administration that is stopping drilling on 
 JH>>  JM>> known reserves of American oil.
 JH>>  JM>> If you want us to stop using middle east oil, then you will 
 JH>>  JM>> need to change the minds of people like Kennedy, Boxer, 
 JH>>  JM>> Kerry, Clinton, and other environmental wack-jobs.
 JH>> 
 JH>>  DP> wack-jobs?  Keeping the oil companies from exploiting our 
 JH>>  DP> natural spaces does not equate to not using foreign oil.  
 JH>>  DP> It's two different issues.  The minusule reserves of oil 
 JH>>  DP> found under the ANR will not 
 JH>> ammount 
 JH>>  DP> to a hill of beans with regard to the amount of oil imported 
 JH>>  DP> to the U
 JH>> 
 JH>> You can't have it both ways.  Either we import oil from somewhere 
 JH>> else or use our own resources.  The oil fields under the North 
 JH>> Slope and in other 

 DP> The third option is that the US reduces the amount of oil that it 
 DP> needs by
 DP> using ethanol.  This was taken from www.ethanolrfa.org:
 DP> ---------------------------------------------------------------
 DP> The United States is increasingly dependent on imported energy to 
 DP> meet our
 DP> personal, transportation, and industrial needs. As a result, the 
 DP> U.S. is
 DP> held hostage to the whims of OPEC and very unstable regions of the 
 DP> world. As
 DP> a domestic, renewable source of energy, ethanol can reduce our 
 DP> dependence on
 DP> foreign oil and increase the United States' ability to control its 
 DP> own
 DP> security and economic future. Our energy policy should first and 
 DP> foremost
 DP> promote domestic, renewable fuels, not foreign oil imports.

 DP> The U.S. imports 62 percent of its petroleum needs today. By 2025, 
 DP> the
 DP> Energy Information Administration projects the U.S. will import 77 
 DP> percent
 DP> of its petroleum.
 DP> --------------------------------------------------------------- 
 JH>> places in the far north, while not as large as those under Saudi 
 JH>> Arabia, a certainly not "miniscule."  It has been estimated that 
 JH>> between oil and hig grade coal, the US has enough energy resources 
 JH>> to last for 300 years.  IF enviro-whackos would get out of the 
 JH>> way.  

 DP> Then where would we be 300 years from now?  We need to start now 
 DP> to find other fuels.

The point is that we have the time to find other fuels if the nuts get out of
the way so we can do the research.

 JH>> With regard to damaging the environment, it ain't gonna happen.  I 
 JH>> remembe when they started drilling on the North Slope, the whacks 
 JH>> sounded the trum doom.  Well, if anything, that pipeline has done 
 JH>> just the opposite.  The h given off by the crude traveling down the 
 JH>> pipe has enabled the plant life the tundra to flourish year round 
 JH>> in the vicinity of the pipeline.  That i term has provided food for 
 JH>> the caribou (there has been a big increase in t herds as a result), 
 JH>> and that in turn has provided more food for the predat like the 
 JH>> wolves and bears and foxes, etc.  The entire food chain has benef
 JH>> just from that.

 DP> If Pasadena Texas is any indication, it's

They aren't lobbying Congress to keep oilmen out of Texas though, are they?

 JH>>  DP> Why is it that industry-base and the technological-base of 
 JH>>  DP> this country cannot find suitable rewable sources of energy, 
 JH>>  DP> instead of 
 JH>> relying
 JH>>  DP> on an ever shrinking commodity like petroleum?  GWB's 
 JH>>  DP> adminstration i cutting funding on projects that do just 
 JH>>  DP> that.
 JH>> 
 JH>> Everybody screams about the US using more energy than anybody else 
 JH>> - that we're using more than our share - blah, blah, blah.  Well, 
 JH>> our technology what found the oil, what enabled all those OTHER 
 JH>> countries to get it out o the ground, has found most of the ways to 
 JH>> use it to get the most out of it and is doing 99% of the research 
 JH>> into finding ways to supply the world wit energy that is not fossil 
 JH>> fuel dependent.  The ways we've found to be more efficient more 
 JH>> than makes up for the amount we use that supposedly isn't o
 JH>> "share."

 DP> Interesting, but that's not at all the point I was trying to make. 
 DP>  I'm not
 DP> screaming about the US using more than anybody else.  I'm 
 DP> concerned about
 DP> the US staking a claim on foreign oil producing countries in 
 DP> turbulant
 DP> regions and causing security issues at home.

Somebody is lying to you, because we aren't doing that.  Protecting the world's
oil supply from being controlled by dictators like Saddam is NOT the same
thing.

 JH>> By the way, the majority of the pollution for fossil fuel is 
 JH>> coming from developing countries in the third world, and from 2nd 
 JH>> tier countries like China and Russia.  The US has largely cleaned 
 JH>> up the air and water to such extent that it is cleaner today than 
 JH>> it was before the boom in oil use, an we've done it at tremendous 
 JH>> cost.  If we followed along with the greenies 

 DP> I just want to point out that it was the 'greenies' that pushed to 
 DP> have the
 DP> US clean up the air and water from such pollution.  You can't 
 DP> claim the win
 DP> that was earned by somebody else.

By whackos, I mean tree spikers, and the type who use their influence in
Congress to keep us from even looking for new sources of energy, and very often
from doing the necessary research to find a replacement for the oil they won't
let us drill for.  There are huge deposits off the California coast, in the
Gulf of Mexico, and in Alaska that we can't go after because of them.  Oil that
*would* make us independent of imported oil and the subsequent political
problems you spoke of.

 JH>> the rest who want to cut our oil imports, a couple of things will 
 JH>> happen. won't have the energy needed to do the research into 
 JH>> alternate fuel source we will have to go back to burning wood and 
 JH>> other less efficient dirtier fuels; and all the progress we've 
 JH>> made toward a better world will go up in smoke.

 DP> We've already got biodiesel and ethanol products that we can use.  
 DP> All
 DP> reports say that that technology is robust and ready for market.  
 DP> It's just
 DP> a matter of switching the market to use it instead of existing 
 DP> petroleum
 DP> products.  I for one would be happy to use ethanol.... if I could 
 DP> find it in
 DP> my area.  I'm eagar for the day when fuel cells will become the 
 DP> norm, but I
 DP> realize that is far in the future.

It will take at least 20 years to transition to a new fuel source once it is
ready to use.  That means we still have to depend on the old source while that
transition is taking place.

John 

America:  First, Last, and Always!
Go to www.madgorilla.us for all your Domain Name Services at the lowest rates.

--- Msged/386 TE 05
 * Origin: We are the Watchmen of our own Liberty! (1:379/1.99)