[at-l] > RELIGIOUS, SENATE LEADERS OPPOSE ANWR DRILLING

[kahley7@ptd.net (kahley)]

At 12:28 PM 2/9/02 -0700, Ron Martino wrote:
>kahley wrote: I don't oppose oil extraction everywhere -
>just in those areas where the impact is unacceptable, after /all/ costs
>are factored in.

I guess I would need to go and see this place to understand what
makes it soooo special.  I'll admit a prejudice...there are no trees
there and I understand, no mountains and little water, so since flat
land gives me the heebiegeebs and I require the company of trees,
this place sounds less than attractive (*aren't we all glad that I
don't make these decisions<g>).
Seriously..specifically.....what makes this place so special as to
make it untouchable?

> > I'm up in the air about ANWR.  It SHOULD be explored and evaluated.
>
>         I don't follow - why?

Because oil is maybe second to water as a most valuable natural
resource and we are foolish not to know how much of it we have.

>         If it were discovered that there's oil all along the Appalachian
>mountains, but it turns out that the drilling sites are going to happen
>to have to be sited in close proximity to the AT, throughout its length,
>would you consider an effort to stop the drilling 'nutty'? Or does our
>thirst for oil outweigh all other needs?

First, I didn't refer to efforts to stop the drilling as nutty.
I said not to evaluate was nutty.  And putting my previously
mentioned prejudice aside, the AT has a greater value because
it is accessible to a greater number of people.  It is more useful
in it's current state, at least for now.   I do not subscribe to the
"wilderness for wilderness sake" theory.  I wish I could, I really
really wish I could but it's a small small world and the idea that
we can't touch any part of a 2 million acre hunk of public property
that maybe .0001 percent of the public will ever see is a problem
for me.  We are all gonna have to face the fact that until we get off
of the oil teat,  something's gotta go.  If I have the choice of windmills
on the AT or another choked, dammed river or drilling in the ANWR,
the choice is easy for me.  And, we hold this nightmare image of oil
wells as the huge metal structures used to drill the well.  After the
well is on line, that thing goes away and you have a well head
about the size of a shelter which hardy represents as great a lasting
scar as would windmills on the ridge tops.
I hope we are all doing more than gripe about this.  Mike and I have
made significant changes in our lifestyle to minimize our impact
on this world.  we recycle everything we can.  Half of our clothes
are purchased used, in fact half of everything we purchase is used.
including gear.  I curb cruise and dumpster dive.
We do not have central heating because we figured out we could
save half the amount of heating oil by doing without,  I don't own
a dish washer or clothes dryer and never have.  I defrost my freezer
rather than burning energy to automatically melt off frost.  We own
12 acres of land and have kept 11.75 acres untouched (still more of
an impact than the proposed ANWR drilling on the whole parcel).
We live in about a thousand square feet of space, unlike my parents
who feel they need 2500.
OK, so I'm boasting.  We are proud of the steps we have taken to
be kind to the earth.  I guess I'm almost unwilling to listen to people
who have done little to conserve and yet seek to limit the nations
options re our natural resources  I guess I'm even bordering on being
snooty about this but I can't help it.  If everyone adopted even a part
of our lifestyle, the situation would already be eased.   This isn't
aimed at your Ron, unless you are like most of the people who fill
the landfills with yesterday's "must haves".  Forgive me if I ask though,
how do you dry your clothes?