[at-l] A.N.W.R. VOTE - conservation issue - not trail

[yumitori@montana.com (Ron Martino)]

> Try looking at the energy involved in making ethanol, it takes MORE
> energy to make it than you get from burning it. Wind and solar do not
> have the energy density to work unless in the case of solar you went to
> orbital production. Also you may notice a distinct drop off in energy
> production at night with solar and in calm wind periods with wind. We
> have a 24X7 world in case you haven't noticed.

	That's what batteries are for.

	Certainly none of these sources alone will supply all of our energy
needs. But they help. Heck, even in Missoula, a town hardly know for its
sunny days, solar power is often used to supplement energy needs. One of
the town's fire stations is set up as a solar test site - the panels
collect enough energy during peak hours to exceed the needs of the
station. Even when that isn't the case, they reduce the power needed
from the electric company, saving both electricity and money.

	Just because these methods aren't perfect doesn't mean we should not
use them.
 
> The only problem with nuclear power is political. 

	That, and waste by-products no one wants in their backyard. Certainly
the storage of nuclear waste itself has political aspects, but that's
because of its potential harmfulness.

> And as to the leave no
> trace in Alaska, we are talking about 1000 acres out of 19,000,000. I
> doubt your grandchildren will ever set eyes on any of it. Its not the
> easiest to access nor the most desirable hiking country in any rational
> sense. Flat frozen tundra with clouds of mosquitos is not my idea of
> hiking heaven. And if it was there will be 18,999,000 acreas left to
> hike.
> 
> Bryan

	That's a thousand acres for the actual drilling sites. The roads and
related infrastructure will take more. And it doesn't include the
potential loss in the case of an accident.

	I am surprised that you define the worth of the ANWR in terms of what
value it might have for you personally. I've found most of the folks on
this list to be more aware of the wider ramifications of development,
whatever form it takes. They may still feel it necessary, but they don't
dismiss them simply because it's going to take place away from their
personal 'hiking heaven'.

	There is a concise analysis of the potential effects of oil drilling on
the Refuge's 1002 Area by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service at 

	http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/arctic/issues1.html

	Included are maps of the entire North Slope, all of which, except for
the Refuge, is currently available for drilling. Compare the size of the
1002 Area to the rest of the North Slope, and explain why we need to
open it up to drilling now, mosquitos not withstanding.

	Ron
-- 

yumitori(AT)montana(DOT)com