|
|
|
So, what's the current status of ANWR? I know the GOP sleazed through a few bills that would open up the reserve, but are there still mechanisms the Dems. can use to stop this atrocity? Are other votes coming up?
Tom Barta |
06.02.05 - 1:31 pm | #
|
|
>> but are there still mechanisms the Dems. can use to stop this atrocity?
Looks like all that's left is passing an amendment to strike Arctic Refuge drilling from the budget bill. The entire process is explained here, http://www.savearcticrefuge.org/...ions/
budget.pdf
If the Refuge is opened to drilling, there's still public pressure against oil companies to not drill (Sen. Boxer's petition, etc). Most people who support drilling, already a minority, have been deceived. They'll eventually learn the truth.
cosmos |
06.02.05 - 5:52 pm | #
|
|
Actually, as I understand it, even if ANWR drilling passes in the budget bill, there will have to be implementing legislation passed later on to put into action those things that are creating money in the budget bill. So there may be other important steps along the way.
ANWR News |
Homepage |
06.02.05 - 7:53 pm | #
|
|
There's plenty of steps for the drillers to stumble over. I'm betting they will.
Mark A. York |
Homepage |
06.02.05 - 8:16 pm | #
|
|
It goes without saying that the global economy depends on the availability of affordable energy. Many place their hopes for abundant energy supplies in yet-to-be-imagined technologies.
But while researchers tinker with far-off possibilities, there’s something we should do right now to keep the energy flowing: break the radical environmentalists’ chokehold on national energy policy.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/
0,2...,158456,00.html
thackney |
06.03.05 - 9:39 am | #
|
|
>> But while researchers tinker with far-off possibilities, there's something we should do right now to keep the energy flowing: break the radical environmentalists' chokehold on national energy policy.
Thackney, on energy issues, you should rely on scientists and physicists, not Faux News and a lobbyist paid with oil money.
The so-called "radical environmentalists" would produce much more energy using higher efficiency and currently available technology. Rocky Mountain Institute, 'General Energy Policy'
http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid306.php
'Steven J. Milloy'
http://www.sourcewatch.org/
index...e=Steven_Milloy
'Put a Tiger In Your Think Tank'
http://www.motherjones.com/news/
...xxon_chart.html
STEVEN MILLOY: ...Those two groups -- apparently run out of Milloy's home -- received $90,000 from ExxonMobil.
'FACTSHEET: Steven Milloy'
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html...heet.php?
id=881
cosmos |
06.03.05 - 11:14 am | #
|
|
Milloy is NOT a scientist. He's a propagandist shill with a political science degree. That's ain't science buddy. Appeal to inappropriate authority fallacy. Next!
Mark A. York |
Homepage |
06.04.05 - 11:24 am | #
|
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|