X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST, HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.0.2 Sender: -0.7 (spamval) -- NONE Return-Path: Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (IDENT:U2FsdGVkX1/7U0x8iSTAbImV+9yPHGmLHMjzpZfwvHs Æ newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j2I2kAlj004494 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:46:10 -0500 Received: from fate.mr.itd.umich.edu (fate.mr.itd.umich.edu [141.211.14.130]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.2/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2I2g8v3019288 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:42:08 -0500 Received: FROM web52506.mail.yahoo.com (web52506.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.39.127]) BY fate.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 423A40D3.BD9FE.19904 ; 17 Mar 2005 21:45:39 -0500 Received: (qmail 3451 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Mar 2005 02:46:05 -0000 Message-ID: <20050318024605.3449.qmail Æ web52506.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [67.127.185.90] by web52506.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:46:05 PST In-Reply-To: 6667 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1343874149-1111113965=:2950" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:46:05 -0800 (PST) To: Daniel Reeves , Lisa Hsu Cc: improvetheworld Æ umich.edu From: cameron wicklow Subject: Re: drilling in alaska Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 118 --0-1343874149-1111113965=:2950 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I have no opinion on the subject, though you probably are looking for this side of the argument: I've heard that the part of ANWR expected to have oil is only a small fraction of the entire area...and with modern horizontal drilling techniques, the fraction of that area that that needs to be developed is tiny. As far as the wildlife is concerned, the number of caribu fluxuates regularly, and very significantly. Supposedly, since we've been drilling west of ANWR, the regional caribu population has increased 4x. Though this isn't proof that it doesn't harm wildlife, it suggests that it isn't an issue. Also, friends in Alaska tell me their companies are so sensitive to oil spills that they go to the extreme measures of putting pans under their cars to keep any chance of engine oil from dripping in their parking lots. I do think that it's rediculous not to even allow the appropriate seismic surveys to see how much oil their is. They could be done in the winter when the ground is frozen with zero impact. Daniel Reeves wrote: my understanding from previous articles people have sent to improvetheworld about this is that there is (contrary to CNN's claims) between 0 and 5.6 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil which I take to mean that drilling buys us 0 - 280 days of dinosaur goo. ANWR wasn't necessarily on my list, but as someone to whom the backcountry is especially important, I'm mad. danny ps, cam, you're officially on the spot for comment! pps, from theonion in 2002: (i love the one about the next generation of fossil fuels) Seeking to decrease U.S. dependence on Iraqi oil, Senate Republicans want to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling. What do you think? "It'd be nice if we lived in some magical fantasy world where we could get energy from the sun and the wind, but we need to deal with reality." Daniel Mendoza Systems Analyst "America needs to reduce its overall oil consumption, but I can't bring myself to ride the bus with a bunch of puds. So Arctic drilling it is." Tim Wills Machinist "How much oil is in one of those seals, anyway?" Vincent Putnam Delivery Driver "If I didn't know better, I'd say some oil man stands to make billions on this. Say, the president used to be in the oil business! Maybe he could help us sniff out the culprit!" Christine Sample Nurse "If drilling kills off the refuge's indigenous wildlife, that'll give us a nice head start on the next generation of fossil fuels." Gene Oliver Real-Estate Agent "We might as well use that oil. If we don't, our children will." Diane Bell Architect --- \/ FROM Lisa Hsu AT 05.03.17 00:10 (Today) \/ --- > what do you guys think about this? > > http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/16/arctic.drilling.ap/index.html > > lisa > -- http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - google://"Daniel Reeves" "In answer to the question of why it happened, I offer the modest proposal that our Universe is simply one of those things which happen from time to time." -- Edward P. Tryon --0-1343874149-1111113965=:2950 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I have no opinion on the subject, though you probably are looking for this side of the argument:  I've heard that the part of ANWR expected to have oil is only a small fraction of the entire area...and with modern horizontal drilling techniques, the fraction of that area that that needs to be developed is tiny.  As far as the wildlife is concerned, the number of caribu fluxuates regularly, and very significantly.  Supposedly, since we've been drilling west of ANWR, the regional caribu population has increased 4x.  Though this isn't proof that it doesn't harm wildlife, it suggests that it isn't an issue.  Also, friends in Alaska tell me their companies are so sensitive to oil spills that they go to the extreme measures of putting pans under their cars to keep any chance of engine oil from dripping in their parking lots.
 
I do think that it's rediculous not to even allow the appropriate seismic surveys to see how much oil their is.  They could be done in the winter when the ground is frozen with zero impact.

Daniel Reeves <dreeves Æ umich.edu> wrote:
my understanding from previous articles people have sent to
improvetheworld about this is that there is (contrary to CNN's claims)
between 0 and 5.6 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil which I
take to mean that drilling buys us 0 - 280 days of dinosaur goo.

ANWR wasn't necessarily on my list, but as someone to whom the backcountry
is especially important, I'm mad.

danny

ps, cam, you're officially on the spot for comment!

pps, from theonion in 2002: (i love the one about the next generation of
fossil fuels)

Seeking to decrease U.S. dependence on Iraqi oil, Senate Republicans want
to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling. What do you
think?

"It'd be nice if we lived in some magical fantasy world where we could
get energy from the sun and the wind, but we need to deal with reality."
Daniel Mendoza
Systems Analyst

"America needs to reduce its overall oil consumption, but I can't
bring myself to ride the bus with a bunch of puds. So Arctic drilling it
is."
Tim Wills
Machinist

"How much oil is in one of those seals, anyway?"
Vincent Putnam
Delivery Driver

"If I didn't know better, I'd say some oil man stands to make billions
on this. Say, the president used to be in the oil business! Maybe he could
help us sniff out the culprit!"
Christine Sample
Nurse

"If drilling kills off the refuge's indigenous wildlife, that'll give us
a nice head start on the next generation of fossil fuels."
Gene Oliver
Real-Estate Agent

"We might as well use that oil. If we don't, our children will."
Diane Bell
Architect


--- \/ FROM Lisa Hsu AT 05.03.17 00:10 (Today) \/ ---

> what do you guys think about this?
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/16/arctic.drilling.ap/index.html
>
> lisa
>

--
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - google://"Daniel Reeves"

"In answer to the question of why it happened, I offer the modest
proposal that our Universe is simply one of those things which
happen from time to time." -- Edward P. Tryon

--0-1343874149-1111113965=:2950--