Bill Tibbe Senior asked me to prepare a brief overview.

Location:

The refuge is located in Northern Alaska. It is bordered on the North by the Beaufort Sea, the East by Canada's Yukon. The Davidson Mountains extend across the refuge. Mt. Chamberlin's elevation is 9,020 feet. The Village of Kaktovik is on the coast. Camden Bay is on the shore in the North central. Prudhoe Bay lies 60 miles West of the boundary.

Prudhoe Bay is the site of oil drilling that began in the 1980's and became Americas biggest oil field. A 26 inch pipeline was constructed South across Alaska to Valdez, a shipping terminal. The pipeline was wrapped with insulation and the oil heated. In the "permafrost" segment the pipeline was elevated and supported on VSM vertical support members because the hot oil would melt the permafrost and cause the pipeline to sink and rupture.

Drilling in the Refuge:

Oil well exploration would be conducted in the winter months only. The production field is in the NorthWest area of the refuge in the coastal plains and actually comprises a small area of the total land mass of the reserve. The plains are bleak and forbidding in the winter, devoid of trees. Ice roads would be built and ice drilling platforms constructed. All equipment would be removed during the summer. Nothing would be left behind.

When production wells were drilled each location would be the central point of many directionally drilled wells which would radiate out, spoke like, from the central drill site. The wells would become horizontal and extend thousands of feet. Upon completion, after drilling equipment was removed, there would be only a relatively small "box" remaining permanently in the area covering the well head. However, it would be necessary to leave in place �gathering lines', pipelines to pump the oil to tankers. In the future, when the field is depleted everything could be removed and the area restored.

Environmental Impact:

In the winter there is little wildlife in the area. In the summer caribou migrate and calve. Bears, musk ok, water fowl, birds, foxes, wolves and other wildlife are found in the area.

Contrary to predictions, the Alyeska 26" elevated oil pipeline from Prudhoe Bay did not impede the caribou nor scare them away. They have adapted and cross under the pipeline naturally with ease. Since no summer activity is planned, no rutting, damage to ground cover, lichens and plants is expected.

Estimated Reserves:

The estimates of oil reserves remains controversial. The environmentalists, who oppose any drilling, attempt to advance the theory that only 3 to 5 billion barrels are recoverable, a quantity, they say, is too small to consider. The more knowledgeable advocates for drilling, however, estimate that there are up to 16 billion barrels making the refuge field the second largest in the USA.

Economic Impact.

The USA imports 53% of its oil. Presently the price of gasoline is rising "at the pump". Home heating oil, and electric bills are increasing. California is experiencing blackouts that could severely damage the states economy, cause devastating and catastrophic losses in business and health. California could drag down the rest of the economy.

Drilling in the refuge will bring jobs and revenue to Alaskans. It will provide energy to the "Lower 48 states".

Opinion Poll Questionnaire:

1. Do you favor drilling in the refuge? If so, why? If not, why not?
2. Do you have an opinion about the environmental impact on wildlife? If so, what is it.

Thank you for your attention;

Tyler R.T. , Staff Engineer

MAC

------------------
When hunting and fishing get in the way of your job, it is time to quit the job!

Also, I'd read the answer somewhere to the following question, but have forgotten:

How large IS the production field in proportion to the total land mass of the refuge? Pretty small as I remember.

As far as environmental imapcts go, I have read conflicting articles in the scientific rags about the impact of the pipeline itself. I think the jury is still out yet on the effects pipelines have on animal behavior and everyone is so polarized on the issue that there may never be any common ground. My concern would be that a major oil spill in this region could severely damage the ecosystem for several decades because many of the natural processes that would help "clean" the spill work very slowly in the arctic.

1. There is no shortage of oil at the current time. Yet the price of gasoline at the pumps is rising. The why is that there are many different blends of gasoline made for Northern and Southern States. Add to this Winter and Summer formulations and then add to this various City and Government initiatives for less pollutive fuels and you come up with hundreds of different blends, It is called boutique fuel in the industry. And this is where the oil companies really make their money. If a city dictates that only "this blend" of gasoline is to be sold in this local, then you can be sure that the oil companies will charge more for it.

2. The topic of oxygenators. These are added to gasoline to improve cumbustion and reduce emissions. Typically they are added at a 10% ratio. Some areas use Ethyl alcohol (primarily made from corn or other grains), while other areas (strong oil company areas) use MBTE (a product made from oil). The point is that with MBTE, it takes more oil to make it. Many of you may have noticed that MBTE is having problems because it has contaninated ground water in certain areas, so it may be on the way out. But you can be sure that the oil companies will try to come up with another oil based oxygenator.

3. When the media states that there is a shortage of gasoline, to a degree that may be true. What is happening is that if the oil companies can make more money by processing the oil into products other than gasoline, they do which can lead to a perceived shortage of gasoline, which will start a price increase. By the same token, when gasoline prices are high, they will devote more production to gasoline. The oil companies devote more production to higher profit products and restrict production of lower profit items. Over time, the the lower profit items will become scarce (supposedly) and then the prices rise to a point where the oil companies focus on that and restrict the others, sort of a see-saw effect going from one to the other. Irregardless of this, has anyone seen any gas stations closed due to a lack of product? I have not. By the way, this same scenario is what happened with natural gas last year and winter, what timing!
Also, if more money can be made by exporting products, that is what they will do. Although right now the high value of the US dollar makes this difficult to sell.

4. More oil is not going to help a damn thing, except raise their profits. Tapping in to more US reserves is the wrong thing to do as there is no need to do it. It should be saved for when there is an actual shortage due to war or some other catastrophie. Isn't that what the Alaska pipeline was built for, emergencies? But now it is in full swing and has been that way for some time.

Anyway, that is my $.02. We are all at the mercy of the oil companies because we all depend on fossil fuels for everything. It is a very political thing as well because there is alot of money in it, both in profits and taxes. Taxes in Iowa are $.228/gallon while Federal taxes are $.185/gallon. With as much fuel as Americans use, that adds up to a whole bunch of money.

------------------
Good huntin' and shootin',
RAB

With todays EPA restrictions, an oil platform has to be one of the safest places to be.
Wasnt there an article in the paper up here a while ago about how the caribou population was booming along the pipeline?
The exxon valdez was a fluke, even then it wasnt the oil companies fault.

On the subject of logging. 95% of all first growth timber in the lower 48 has been logged. Considering that the maturation time for equivalent timber/forest is about 500 years, I am no fan of continued logging of first growth forests.

I remember thirty years ago driving around Washington state while stationed at Whidby Island. Several of us were driving through what we thought was a magnificent forrest, a two lane through a tunnel of huge trees. We thought it was funny that all the side roads were posted no trespassing on a National Forest area. So we headed on back anyhow. About 200 yards in, the trees ended for the next however many miles we could see, clearcut to the mountains in the distance. I was shocked, I haven't looked a logging the same since. And some of my family was in timber and limber as far back as 1850. Now it's tree farms for pulp and ply. Renewable in 20-40 years.

5 percent left. That isn't conservation (and I refer to Teddy Roosevelts brand of conservation, not the new wave garbage) of resources to me. Taking over half of a covey is wrong, taking over half the deer herd is wrong, taking over half the timber is wrong.

Aside from which, all the top grade wood goes overseas anyhow. Anyone seen a good 2 X 4 in twenty years or more? Go to Home Depot and see if they have and Western Shipbuilding number one grade Douglas Fir.

Well, guilty of having an opinion I suppose.

Tyler, R.T., Staff Engineer

I used to work in the oil fields of Texas, so I know a little on the subject. Drilling is not a bunny-hugger's wet dream, but it can be done with very little significant impact on the environment.

Gas and oil prices are high due to profit management moves by OPEC and the price gouging by all the middlemen that the fear of shortage allows.

I say we drill the wells, prove the reserves then manage the reserve as the national asset it is. We should buy from OPEC as long as the prices are reasonable and use the threat of this reserve production to somewhat limit OPEC's capability to inflate the price of oil.

Oil is a limited asset. As long as we can afford OPEC's oil we should buy it and conserve our reserves.

Don

More important than drilling in ANWAR is the need to build more nuclear power plants. In my opinion every watt of electricity that's not generated by hydro should be nuclear derived. We could eliminate a huge part of the pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions in this country by getting rid of all coal and natural gas fired power plants but we let a few radicals essentially shut down the nuclear industry in america. It's almost impossible to build a nuclear plant in america because it's too expensive after fending off the lawsuits for ten years before breaking ground on a new plant. We've got a completely clean, safe power source and we won't use it. That's stupid.

------------------
'Trapper'

I also worked a short time (little over a year) in the patch in western Wy. This part of the state, despite it's extractive industries, has the highest populations of mule deer, antelope and elk.

Concerning the environmental issues; the use of modern technology has changed the extraction industry by leaps and bounds, making the use of natural resources much more environmentally friendly.

While we're at it. Let's look at the other locations where oil can be drilled as well.
The environmentalists also want to stop all drilling activities around the Great Lakes Region. The same fields I worked in WY are besieged by environmental roadblocks that have put much of this area under a great strain to produce. Texas and NM have already been mentioned. The point is, we have reserves ALL OVER THE COUNTRY that are currently locked up and unavailable.

They clamor for alternative energy options, like hydro, while at the same time insisting that dams be brought down.

Anybody remember the huge debate about wind turbine fields? Enviro's complained because they consider them a threat to birds of prey.

Solar power generation requires the use of huge storage capacity (batteries)... do you ever hear them talk about the "environmental hazard" associated with THIS alternative? Not yet.

I remember quite well when the talk in the West was the need to change from the extraction industries to "eco-friendly tourism"... notice how, now that logging, mining and drilling have been crippled they have started on the tourism industry with elimination of snowmobiles, atv's, etc.

The agenda of environmentalists is pretty clear... remove humans from the equation.

It's time to put the bs aside and make use of our resources in a responsible manner.

That's the view from here.

------------------
One half of knowing what you want...
is knowing what you have to give up to get it.
Dan

Despite many who say its just a flat area, there is nothing special about it, I find the arctic coast fascinating, whether in its harsh beauty in the winter, or the stunning beauty of summer with many wildflowers and grasses, and teaming with wildlife. The caribou have totally adapted to the the oilfields, I been on a well pad, where a rig was actively drilling, and there were ~100 caribou resting under the drill string and bits on the other end of the pad. The roads and pads have allowed the population of caribou to increase as it gets them out of the tundra and bugs.

The environmentalists have done a good job of keeping the oil compainies toes to the fire, I have no doubt that the oil fields would be in much worse shape if they hadn't. But the point is, the oil companies and conrtactors run a tight ship, trucks wear "diapers" to prevent oil from being spilled from the engines onto the roads. Any spill, and I mean any as in a few drops is reported and cleaned up. Feeding or hastling wildlife is a guranteed one way ticket home, and a search for a new job. If caribou are blocking the road, you just stop, and weight for them to move on, no matter how long it takes.

The technology in both drilling and processing allows for much smaller facilities. The pipeline will be in operation for many more years, and is operating at slightly less then 1/2 the capacity it operated at during its peak. Doesn't it make sense to run some more oil through an existing and proven transport system?

As far as the oil being sent to Asian countries, yes it is, because the majority of refineries on the west coast can't process the heavier crude that is produced up here. Unless more refineries are made, and ones capable of handling North Slope Crude, then the prices of fuel on the west coast will stay high.

Production of oil is good for the economy of Alaska and the US. To those that travel to Alaska and enjoy the modern amenities, it is the oil $ that built that infrastructure, and continues to.

Oil is what our country runs on, and is also the feeder stock for the majority of chemicals and synthetics used in manufacturing many many products. Alternatives would be great, but their aren't any that are practicle at this point. If you like high prices on energy, then don't drill, if you'd like the prices to drop, drill.

Has anyone considered just how little a reserve of between 5 and 16 million bbls is in comparison to our domestic consumption? It's only a few months supply even if you sucked it all out.

Is this oil worth the cost and risk? In 2001, no. In 2030? Well, let's keep it where it is so we can answer than question when my grandchildren would like to have the gasoline to go hunting and the caribou and bears to hunt.

| |

ANWR facts and figures

(Published April 16, 2001)
THE ISSUE

Development interests argue:

* The amount of oil potentially present could be valuable addition to U.S. oil supply.

* Oil industry has proven in oil fields to the west that ANWR can be developed with minimal impact on wildlife and the land.

* The state argues opening ANWR will bring jobs and revenue to Alaska.

Conservation interests argue:

* The coastal plain's land, plant, caribou, polar bears, birds and other wildlife are more valuable to the nation than the oil that might be produced.

* Oil development would irreparably damage a fragile but thriving arctic ecosystem.

* This huge and unique piece of U.S. wilderness should remain virtually pristine.

"The only way to become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil is to explore at home. And you bet I want to open up a small part of Alaska (ANWR)."

-- President George W. Bush

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OIL

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates a 95 percent probability of 5.7 billion barrels of oil would be recoverable, and a 5 percent probability of 16 billion barrels, with a 50 percent chance of 10.1 billion barrels.

The USGS estimated most of the oil is on federal land, but some is on state and Native land.

The oil would not be found in one big reservoir, but rather several smaller ones. On federal land, the USGS identified 10 oil "plays."

"There is no oil technology that could make the coastal plain safe for calving caribou."

-- Sarah James, Arctic Village, board member of Gwich'in Steering Committee

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANWR WILDLIFE

* 180 bird species from four continents

* 36 species of land mammals

* All three species of North American bears (black, brown and polar)

* 36 species of freshwater fish

* Nine marine mammal species

* Has no introduced species

* Two caribou herds

* Home to North America's northernmost Dall sheep population

"(The refuge) is our home. This is our land.... There will be change. But this change is for our people."

-- Isaac Akootchook, Kaktovik elder

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

POLITICS

* An act of Congress is needed to open ANWR to oil development.

* While President Clinton opposed development, new President George W. Bush has urged the refuge be opened.

* Alaska's congressional delegation is at the peak of its power, and all three members support opening the refuge.

* High oil, natural gas and gasoline prices in the Lower 48 are lending an urgency to boosting supplies.

* The conservation community has made protecting ANWR one of its leading causes, lobbying Congress and the public, and stirring up grass-roots opposition to development.

* Pro-development forces have been equally zealous lobbying Congress and the public.

"The Refuge represents one of those remarkable remnant areas that we haven't touched yet. If we lose it, we lose something very precious."

-- Allen E. Smith, Alaska director of The Wilderness Society

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PEOPLE

* About 7,000 Gwich'in Indians are said to live near the migratory route of the Porcupine caribou herd, partly in 15 small villages in northeast Alaska and northwest Canada.

A main Gwich'in community in Alaska is Arctic Village, with about 140 Natives, on the southern border of ANWR. For generations the Gwich'in have hunted the caribou for food, clothing, tools, weapons, ornaments and ritual objects. The Gwich'in strongly oppose ANWR coastal plain development.

* The 8,000 Inupiat Eskimo shareholders of Native corporations generally support opening ANWR, in part because of the jobs, services and lifestyle improvements oil wealth could bring.

About 250 Inupiat Eskimos live in Kaktovik, which lies in ANWR along the Arctic coast. Most residents also traditionally subsist on game hunted in the refuge, as well as whales hunted offshore.

The Inupiat own about 92,000 acres adjacent to the federal coastal plain.

"Responsible development could allow for the recovery of valuable U.S. energy resources without damaging the environment."

-- John Browne, CEO of BP
Statement is corporate response to shareholder resolution on ANWR

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TIMELINE

1950s - Conservationists led by George Collins, Lowell Sumner and Olaus and Mardy Murie launch campaign to safeguard the area. They are joined by Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce, Fairbanks area sportsmen's group, Fairbanks newspaper.

1960 - Eisenhower administration establishes 8.9 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Range.

1980 - The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act establishes the 19 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Section 1002 defers a decision on managing the coastal plain section, recognizing the area's potential oil resources and its important wildlife habitat.

1986 - BP and Chevron drill KIC #1 well on Native land. Only well drilled in refuge area; results are secret.

1989 - 11 million gallon Exxon Valdez spill stalls drive to open ANWR to oil development.

1993-2000 - President Clinton opposes ANWR development and keeps development bills in check.

2001 - New president, George W. Bush, supports opening ANWR to oil development.
"Can you protect the beauty of God's work and still take care of the daily needs of people ... yes."

-- Jimmy Carter, former president who signed ANILCA into law

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ON THE WEB

http://arctic.fws.gov

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages ANWR.

http://energy.usgs.gov/factsheets/ANWR/ANWR.html

U.S. Geological Survey's "Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 1002 Area, Petroleum Assessment, 1998."

www.alaska.net/~gwichin

Gwich'in Steering Committee's site opposing ANWR development.

www.anwr.org

Site of Arctic Power, key group lobbying to open ANWR to development.

www.pcmb.yk.ca/pcmb.html

Porcupine Caribou Management Board, a Canadian government/Native group.

www.kaktovik.com

City of Kaktovik site

I went to school with a guy, Lenny Kruger, his wife's father was the head of exploration for the African Continent for Esso, her name is Rusty. This was in 1980. We were talking about the "shortage" of oil. They thought that was funny. Apparently the world is almost literally floating on oil. No problems for many centuries to come.

Fossil fuels may not be renewable but until those viable alternatives are available and economically feasible for production, we must obtain the necessary oil from where it is available.

We should dismiss the Eco terrorists totally. It is certainly possible for very
non-impact drilling in todays world which
uses only a few acres to drill multiple wells
in multiple directions at multiple distances, providing a means of access to
necessary oil reserves with the least amount of impact upon the environment.

As Hunters, we appreciate the wild, the wildlife, and certainly the freedoms that
go along with this way of life. We must remember that those freedoms occur in a free market economy in a Constitutional Republic.

Our dependence upon foreign oil has exascerbated the current energy problem. This dependence was engendered by 8 years
of an executive branch which had intent in
raising the cost of fossil fuels, taxes related to it, restrictions upon locating new reserves, drilling for found reserves
and processing the oil into petroleum products.

This problem is seen partially in Californias
dilemma right now. They have restricted the
use of any fossil fuel(Coal as well) in the production of electricity. Ditto hydroelectric and nuclear production of energy.

They now claim they are "entitled" to have
assistance from the federal government, financed by the rest of the nation, for their
own policies, their own economic decisions,
their whacko environmental activism.

Gerald Did not say to New York go fish. He
should do so though, with California. And
start drilling for oil.

Heck: Build a pipeline especial for them
out there on the left coast. Down heah in
Texas we can send them oil. Crank up some
tower construction from El Paso to San Diego
and we can provide some electricity to
help alleviate the problem--ALL AT MARKET PRICES!.

dai

quote:

---

Originally posted by William E. Tibbe:
Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, oil drilling

Bill Tibbe Senior asked me to prepare a brief overview.

Location:

The refuge is located in Northern Alaska. It is bordered on the North by the Beaufort Sea, the East by Canada's Yukon. The Davidson Mountains extend across the refuge. Mt. Chamberlin's elevation is 9,020 feet. The Village of Kaktovik is on the coast. Camden Bay is on the shore in the North central. Prudhoe Bay lies 60 miles West of the boundary.

Prudhoe Bay is the site of oil drilling that began in the 1980's and became Americas biggest oil field. A 26 inch pipeline was constructed South across Alaska to Valdez, a shipping terminal. The pipeline was wrapped with insulation and the oil heated. In the "permafrost" segment the pipeline was elevated and supported on VSM vertical support members because the hot oil would melt the permafrost and cause the pipeline to sink and rupture.

Drilling in the Refuge:

Oil well exploration would be conducted in the winter months only. The production field is in the NorthWest area of the refuge in the coastal plains and actually comprises a small area of the total land mass of the reserve. The plains are bleak and forbidding in the winter, devoid of trees. Ice roads would be built and ice drilling platforms constructed. All equipment would be removed during the summer. Nothing would be left behind.

When production wells were drilled each location would be the central point of many directionally drilled wells which would radiate out, spoke like, from the central drill site. The wells would become horizontal and extend thousands of feet. Upon completion, after drilling equipment was removed, there would be only a relatively small "box" remaining permanently in the area covering the well head. However, it would be necessary to leave in place �gathering lines', pipelines to pump the oil to tankers. In the future, when the field is depleted everything could be removed and the area restored.

Environmental Impact:

In the winter there is little wildlife in the area. In the summer caribou migrate and calve. Bears, musk ok, water fowl, birds, foxes, wolves and other wildlife are found in the area.

Contrary to predictions, the Alyeska 26" elevated oil pipeline from Prudhoe Bay did not impede the caribou nor scare them away. They have adapted and cross under the pipeline naturally with ease. Since no summer activity is planned, no rutting, damage to ground cover, lichens and plants is expected.

Estimated Reserves:

The estimates of oil reserves remains controversial. The environmentalists, who oppose any drilling, attempt to advance the theory that only 3 to 5 billion barrels are recoverable, a quantity, they say, is too small to consider. The more knowledgeable advocates for drilling, however, estimate that there are up to 16 billion barrels making the refuge field the second largest in the USA.

Economic Impact.

The USA imports 53% of its oil. Presently the price of gasoline is rising "at the pump". Home heating oil, and electric bills are increasing. California is experiencing blackouts that could severely damage the states economy, cause devastating and catastrophic losses in business and health. California could drag down the rest of the economy.

Drilling in the refuge will bring jobs and revenue to Alaskans. It will provide energy to the "Lower 48 states".

Opinion Poll Questionnaire:

1. Do you favor drilling in the refuge? If so, why? If not, why not?
2. Do you have an opinion about the environmental impact on wildlife? If so, what is it.

Thank you for your attention;

Tyler R.T. , Staff Engineer

---

-- Mats

quote:

---

Originally posted by dai:
There is no viable alternative for
fossil fuels at this time.

---

Surely you are joking???

-- Mats

* ANWR comprises 19 million acres. The area of petroleum exploration, known as area 1002, is 1.5 million acres. It is adjacent to the coast and North of the limits of the Brooks Mountain Range.

* Within area 1002 there are two geological provinces #1. The unformed area and #2. the deformed area. This refers to the stratigraphy ( rock formations ) some are laying in a relatively flat position and some have been uplifted, folded or otherwise deformed due to tectonic forces.

* Eighty percent of the anticipated reserves are relatively near the border with Prudhoe Bay.

* One post above referred to "millions of barrels". Please note that the reserves are BILLIONS and not millions.

* The risk assessment assumes 95% - 5% probability. The 95 percent probability level refers to 19 in 20 chances; the 5 percent probability refers to 1 chance in 20.

* The total quantity of technically recoverable oil is estimated at between 5.7 and 16 billion barrels of oil and 45 TCFG to 35 TCFG ( trillion cubic feet of gas ).

* The price to recover oil and gas determines its economic feasibility. Included are the costs to find, develop, produce, and transport the oil to the lower 48 states and West coast markets based on 12% return on investment. At a price less that $13 per barrel, no commercial oil is estimated, but at a price of $30 per barrel between 3 and 10.4 billion barrels are estimated.

* The amounts of in-place oil in the ANWR 1002 reserve are larger than previously estimated. The increase results in part from improved resolution of reprocessed seismic data and geologic analogs provided by recent nearby oil discoveries.

Tyler R.T.

[This message has been edited by Tyler R. T. (edited 06-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by William E. Tibbe (edited 06-06-2001).]

I would also like to see the coast of California drilled for the same reasons despite of all the Nimby's here in CA.

Furthermore, this country needs to get off its collective ass and build clean nuclear power generating plants. Of course (and Heaven forbid) a decision would have to be made on proper & safe storage of the waste.

DRILL! DRILL! DRILL!
SO I CAN SAY FILL! FILL! FILL!

Herb

[This message has been edited by Herb D (edited 06-06-2001).]

Don't carry no papers neither.

dai

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mats:
Buy a bike.

-- Mats

---

Why are we 62% or more dependent upon foreign oil sources?

Why doesn't California build Nuclear energy
production facilities? Why don't they Build more
hydroelectric plants to provide more electricity? Why don't they use Coal burning plants to produce the necessary electricity?

Surely you are joking if you think there is any viable means to provide electricity and fuel for vehicles, homes, and industry.

If you believe that there are alternatives, use them. If you think solar energy can provide a solution, then you go invest in a company developing such technology. My points are:

1. California's problems are Californias, not the rest of the Tax payers.

2. California's policies and laws and restrictions have put production of necessary energy well beyond it's resources to produce and they have developed a semi-unregulated, highly intrusive state institution which has governed how the produce energy and whom and how and how much they purchase energy from.

Much of their dependence is upon shell companies that do not produce any form of
energy themselves.

Last: Gray Davis has claimed a new entitlement from the federal government. What a bunch of baloney.

David

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mats:
Surely you are joking???

-- Mats

---

It seems that everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.

Originally posted by Mats:
Buy a bike.
-- Mats

Mats, Surely you must be jerking our bobber.

If you wish to disconnect your electricity, park your vehicle, discontinue using lead, zinc, and copper, be my guest, as I will use what you don't want. All this stuff comes from the earth, plain and simple.

EARTH FIRST, WE'LL LOG THE OTHER PLANETS LATER------------CHAINSAW

As to alternative energy sources, there is a least one bright spot of the horizon and that
is wave or tidal engery. A British engirneer
has come up with a design for a sea bed installation which offers great promise.
The big improvement with this new design is an im turbine which turns in the same direction regardless of the direction of the tidal flow. This obviously
offers a huge increase in efficiency. Being
located on the seabed these will have mimimum
impact to the environment.

Pete

[This message has been edited by Pete E (edited 06-08-2001).]