Read this topic

[=JAWS=tom{ASN}]

When i was 8 i was much smarter then you was and i know about politics but not worldwide politic. Then you think how do he know that he was smarter then me, its because you are a Trolltard.

[Duel of Fates]

Anyone who thinks drilling in Alaska for oil will solve any problems clearly does not understand economics. First off, to set up the infrastructure for the retrieval and transfer of the raw product is in itself a huge use of petroleum products. I do not know what the net gain would be (if any) in that endeavor so I will not pretend to say "lululululu omg we luze oilz here guyz!!11." I'm not sure what concessions the Canadians would want for having our pipe go through quite a bit of their territory. If they did not allow a pipe to transfer the petroleum, we would be stuck shipping it which would contribute to the cost, time, and general inefficiency of the entire deal.
Secondly, as Corpse said, because this jagaloon race of ours still hasn't figured out "renewable energy" (And no, I'm not talking about that Ethanol bull [poo]) our consumption of oil has increased and will continue to increase for the for see able future even though we've probably hit peak oil and thus the US is strategically keeping its non-renewable sources of energy under strict control.

First off, it won't solve all the problems, but would be a good start.

The short term gain would be more jobs, more industrial orders, and opening up vast resources for future use.

The long term gains would be less dependence on foreign oil which gets us into trouble politically, in case you haven't noticed the ongoing turmoil in the middle east.

To say that it is too much trouble to start drilling is bull sheet. Classic case of "why try?" syndrome that politicians have been spoon feeding the public for over a generation now. We have the resources, the technology, and people willing to work it. Why not take the reigns off. Sitting around and complaining about the situation and then telling everyone that "it's just too hard" to fix the situation, does no good whatsoever.

As for Canada not giving us a pipeline, fine, we can ship it. Costs less to ship it from Alaska, than it is to ship it from Saudi Arabia methinks.

It is true that renewable energy would be the way to go, and is preferable. Unfortunately, we do not have the technology to mass produce energy that would benefit all, at a low cost. I would love to live off of wind turbines and 100 year batteries, but unfortunately, we aren't there yet. BTW, production of ethanol requires use of petroleum, so we are using gas to produce ethanol. Tell me where that makes sense, burning our food (corn), still using gas, and causing the prices of both gas and corn to climb. In uncertain times, it seems foolish for a country to burn its food supply.

So until you come up with a viable solution, that will not bankrupt the economy, we will have to rely on Nuclear, Natural Gas, Coal, and Petroleum. It is simple math.

As for Corpse's observation, I too thought of that years ago. I really hoped we had a "master" plan that some brilliant scientists and government thinkers came up with for the future use of our resources. But watching politicians over the past few decades, I have come to the conclusion that we are being led by a bunch of [m'kay] morons who would sell out their country for a few dollars in their pocket. To say we have a grand plan for the future, is hopeful, but highly unlikely.

[Corpse]

When i was 8 i was much smarter then you was and i know about politics but not worldwide politic. Then you think how do he know that he was smarter then me, its because you are a Trolltard.

The fact that I am quoted in your signature renders your point invalid.

[[m'kay]]

When i was 8 i was much smarter then you was and i know about politics but not worldwide politic. Then you think how do he know that he was smarter then me, its because you are a Trolltard.

You know, normally even I would feel mildly ashamed for trolling some eight year old, but this was so painful to read i'm fairly sure i'm well within my rights to reciprocate.

Again, your tenses are way the [m'kay] off, you know nothing about the most basic parts of politics and that's probably some [poo] you pull of Wikipedia, and you actually took Corpse seriously when he said you are good. All of these things combine to make you look like either a really retarded eight year old, or a ridiculously retarded ten year old.

[toad]

Sorry to throw a wrench in alternative eng peeps. A gallon of gas has more potential energy per gallon than any other solution. Plus it is safer to carry around and people have been using it for years. The best solution I have seen is the peeps twisting e-coli DNA to poop gas. In a nutshell they make e-coli into very efficient chemical plants. Something along the lines of sunlight, C02 + sugar = gas. The downside is they haven't figured out how to ramp it up.

[=JAWS=tom{ASN}]

When i was 8 i was much smarter then you was and i know about politics but not worldwide politic. Then you think how do he know that he was smarter then me, its because you are a Trolltard.

The fact that I am quoted in your signature renders your point invalid.

I didnt take you searious but i wanted to use everything you say against you.

[Corpse]

Sorry to throw a wrench in alternative eng peeps. A gallon of gas has more potential energy per gallon than any other solution. Plus it is safer to carry around and people have been using it for years. The best solution I have seen is the peeps twisting e-coli DNA to poop gas. In a nutshell they make e-coli into very efficient chemical plants. Something along the lines of sunlight, C02 + sugar = gas. The downside is they haven't figured out how to ramp it up.

Although the amount of energy present in a set mass of natural gas is really high in comparison to the equivalent mass of coal or oil, if you look at it in terms of volume, its energy density is lower.

As for using bacteria to produce renewable gas, you said yourself that they need sugar. You need land to grow crops to get sugar, which increases food insecurity. Plus there's the issue of finding a fertiliser that isn't a derivative of fossil fuels. Otherwise, this won't be viable in the future either.

Tom, if that's what you're trying to do, try harder or not at all.

[=JAWS=tom{ASN}]

Okay i will have to think if i give up or try harder.

[[m'kay]]

Okay i will have to think if i give up or try harder.

Jesus christ, is this your definition of banter? My god, it's like another Rancor...

[(SWGO)Minas_Thirith]

I don't have the time to read all this.
But anyhow here goes what i know about the energy.
Currently the earth is relying on a fossil energy that is running out.
Going onto another fossil energy is retarded it will give the same problem in years to come.

If you guys think there is no other way then you are wrong.
It's all for bussness and profit.
It has been calculated that if we made a solar panel in the midle of the sahara desert, with the dimension of 200x200Km it would give enough energy to supply the whole world in a cheaper way.

But no let's just dig up oil in any place we can get anything off.
Sice the persons in charge will be dead before the real thing starts.
Old people [m'kay]ing up the world and young people who will have to clean up the mess.