Alaskan deja-vu

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Tue May 02, 2006 7:59 pm

Well, here we are again. When the oil companies wanted to drill Prudoe Bay and the enviormentalists blocked it,,,they just held an oil crunch.

Now they want to drill ANWAR and the enviromentalists aren't going for it.
This time they conveniently have Iran and a few hurricanes to blame it on.

There's plenty of petroleum around, we just can't get it because we pissed off too many people. We pissed off the mullahs in Iran and the rebels in Nigeria,,,2 of our main suppliers. Iraqui production is below the Saddam days because we thoroughly pissed off the insurgents. Bush pissed off Chavez in Venezuela to get back at him for sending free heating oil to the poor here. I don't see us getting a lot of Venezuelan oil.
The poor are really going to be shafted this winter with the price increases in heating oil.

The projected cost for the Alaskan pipeline was 1 billion. ALYESCA was allowed to pass on any increased costs. The final cost was 10 billion.

Will anyone be surprised if they receive permission to drill ANWAR? Will the enviornment and the consumer get hosed again? Who else is Bush going to piss off next to insure that Haliburton and Exxon don't have any weak quarters? ...Central Asia, Indonesia?

Last but not least; will the American consumer have to work an extra 10 hours a week to pay his energy bills?
Dan

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Tue May 02, 2006 9:50 pm

..they drill Anwar at their own peril

Lassen Forge · Post by **Lassen Forge** » Wed May 03, 2006 9:10 am

Posting a reply to this in the Politics thread.

Anwar is part of a bigger game. MUCH bigger. One you're supposed to be diverted from so you don't see it, but are captivated by more important things, like...

Lacy Peterson and her Fetus, Conner.
New Orleans and Katrina
9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11
"Shuffle the Government" card game
Minor Media Distractions.

gottago...

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Wed May 03, 2006 7:18 pm

true Sue, the grab bag is pretty darn big

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Wed May 03, 2006 10:22 pm

Hi Sue
I hate to sound like the devils advocate BUT with the current enviornmental laws,it would be difficult to mar Alaska to any great extent. I've driven up there 7 times. I've been from Prudoe bay to Valdez and Tok to Barrow.
I've been to the drill rigs and driven almost the whole length of the pipeline. Alaska is friggen HUGE.
Opening up ANWR is not going to bring development. It's too remote for the average traveler. Yes, it's pristine,,,no it shouldn't be opened.

They'll make gravel pads and roads. In a couple hundred years, it will revert to what it was before. If they do more resource extraction, it will take a couple thousand years to revert. The next ice age should put the final touch on it. Mother nature doesn't care.
Alaska is just too damn big for man to show a signifigant change.
Obviously that's a matter of opinion.
Dan

Post by **mdmf007** » Sat May 06, 2006 4:03 pm

if drinlling anwr is approved - there is little that will stop it. being in one of th emost isloated spots on earth will prevent any sizeable disruption from protestors. just toget there will cost 2-3k alone. not to mention support.

dont kid yourselves, if its legal, and at 70+ a barrell ther is no way to stop exxonmobile, BP from tapping that reserve -

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Sat May 06, 2006 4:21 pm

If I remember correctly, north slope oil has too much sulphur. We export it to take buying pressure off of low-sulphur oil from other sources. We don't actually use Alaskan oil. I don't know if ANWR oil is low sulphur or not. I know that we ship Alaskan coal to other countries too.

When oil is driven up high enough, it will be economically feasible to convert coal to oil products. I wonder which government official owns the best coal beds??
Dan

Post by **mdmf007** » Sat May 06, 2006 6:25 pm

Cant sit still - Alaskan crude comes in at the rate of 2 and a half super tankers a day. It is offloaded at cherry point WA (anacortes) and is refined at the cherry point refinery. Almost all of the fuel burned in WA, OR, ID, MT, Norcal, is from Alaskan crude. There are two super pipelines (one of which ruptured 5-6 years ago and killed three kids) it pumps JetA diretcly to Seatac, PDX, and every other sort of fuel type. from heavy bunker to kerosene it all is made from alaska black gold.
i worked for FOSS maritime in college, and know the refinery inside and out.

later all -

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Sat May 06, 2006 9:37 pm

Well, slap me silly and call me a fool. I guess my info is wrong or just too dated.

Any idea on the sulphur content of the ANWR oil?

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:48 am

[quote="can't sit still"]Hi Sue
I hate to sound like the devils advocate BUT with the current enviornmental laws,it would be difficult to mar Alaska to any great extent. I've driven up there 7 times. I've been from Prudoe bay to Valdez and Tok to Barrow.
I've been to the drill rigs and driven almost the whole length of the pipeline. Alaska is friggen HUGE.
Opening up ANWR is not going to bring development. It's too remote for the average traveler. Yes, it's pristine,,,no it shouldn't be opened.

They'll make gravel pads and roads. In a couple hundred years, it will revert to what it was before. If they do more resource extraction, it will take a couple thousand years to revert. The next ice age should put the final touch on it. Mother nature doesn't care.
Alaska is just too damn big for man to show a signifigant change.
Obviously that's a matter of opinion.
Dan[/quote]

yes, the Great White North is a HUGE place but to assume that opening ANWR (and also a gas pipeline) won't bring development.... BS !!
I have been here since 1/73, the population of Anchorage back then was around 125,000 and now the Anchorage/Mat-Su Valley must be around 330,000+..... SOOOOO.. just what development isn't happening here..??
and as far as environmental impact/protections.. our POS governor (Murkowski) has done everything in his power to make it easy for resource extraction companies to take what they want and have minimal environmental oversite let alone consequences... even his fellow Republicans are aghast at the deal he wanted to make/give to the oil companies to build a gas pipeline (he tried to give them the state for free..)
BTW, if you have been here that often you should know that there is a short summer season for plants to recover once disturbed and scars on the land last for decades, when was the last time you saw an old clear cut that looked even close to the same as a virgin forest (and thats where there are LONGER growing seasons to recover)..??

on a positive note.. I am looking forward to experiencing BM, will be my first time and am still deciding if I want to camp "solo" or try to find a theme camp that feels "comfy" I will be driving a 29' motorhome and will have room for supplies, etc...... any recommendations/advice/tips ?

ps, we abbreviate Arctic Ntl Wildlife Refuge here as ANWR... where did the "A" come from all of you are using..?? (anwAr)

Mister Jellyfish Mister · Post by **Mister Jellyfish Mister** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:34 am

When I bought my home it backed to National Wildlife Preserve land managed by the BLM. Shortly thereafter they "traded" it to a residential developer. This particular game is played by developers crafty enought to purchase other land the BLM wants, then offer and lobby for the trade.

A similar strategy could work for the oil companies too. Let's all purchase the land in front of the white house and drill for oil there. Even if we don't find any it will look cool and poetic.

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:01 pm

AKMOJO, I lost that second "A" pretty fast. A lot faster than the people who still put 2 "U"s in nukular.
You know very well that Anchorage is growing because of the clime. Matanuska is great too. Fairbanks is too cold.
I'm sure you know what it costs to build a town where there is permafrost. Check the price of water in Barrow or even Dawson creek.
You can't have pipes under ground or above ground without circulating the water constantly and heating it. The ground is -30 year round.Sewage disposal gets to be a problem at -60 f. The energy cost of having a settlement on the north slope would be prohibitively expensive.
Even in anchorage there are buildings with refridgeration coils burried underneath to keep patches of permafrost from melting.
You could build a settlement, but with the short season, exhorbitant building costs and equal energy costs,,it couldn't grow to any size.
he mountains are great but anywhere that there is permafrost, the forests are crappy. Stunted little spruces etc that can't grow more than a few inches of root.
There's not much to see in the far north. I don't see much possibilty of development. I flew into Deadhorse because the road wasn't open.
It was flat with a gazillion mosquito pools. Nothing there.

As far as preparation for the trip, buy all the gas you can carry in Anchorage. About a mile north of the center of Tok, there was a cheapy station. Try to get across the Yukon territory without buying gas.
Search your vehicle really good to make sure there aren't any guns. I'm sure that you've heard the stories. You've got about 3100 miles.

If you bring down smoked Alaskan salmon, you're welcome in my camp.

Dan

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Sun May 14, 2006 9:36 pm

hi Dan..
I appreciate the camp offer and yes, I will be bringing down smoked salmon and halibut... also some moose, always have enough to share...
I am not quite sure what you have seen here.. as I said.. I have been here 33 years.. 33 years... have seen Anchorage triple in size... to me.. thats growth and development.. they pour concrete under poly tents and build year round now, 4 lane highways coming and going.... there have been 8-9 hotels go up in the last few years as well as the air cargo industry going crazy with growth at the airport.. Denali Ntl Park is the 2nd most visited in the nation, incredible amounts of tour ships and tourists... the local pop is 330,000+ and growing
permafrost isn't everywhere as you seem to make it appear... nor are all the trees stunted (ever hear of the Tongass and Chugach Ntl Forests and the logging there...) too much of a blanket statement for a state over half the size of the US....
I spent 10 years as a fly fishing guide in Bristol Bay at fly in lodges as well as taught skiing here winters in Anch.. I know my environment quite well here as well as the flora and fauna... I was also a USFS Fire Tech for the Toiyabe Ntl Forest based in Austin Nv many yrs ago, also at the Shasta-Trinity Ntl Frst and BLM in Ak.... 1st came up here flying U-21's (Beech King Airs) in the Army..
I am not driving a motorhome from here, have rented one in the Bay Area....
here are 300+ action outdoors and wildlife/scenic pics of mine... http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/aksotar/my_photos
see you on the Playa !!

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Fri May 26, 2006 4:12 pm

Here's news. I'm not saying it's truth but it's news.

>Here are some facts about ANWR:
>
>-----ANWR totals 19.5 million acres — eight million are already
designated Wilderness. Only a small portion of the coastal plain,
approximately 2000 acres, would be used for oil development (one-hundredth of a
percent of the entire 19.5 million acre area.)
>
>-----The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that between 5.7 and 16
billion barrels of oil are under the coastal plain of ANWR. Opening just
2000 acres of ANWR to exploration is estimated to yield enough oil to
replace 30 years of Saudi imports.
>
>-----New jobs would be created by opening ANWR—estimates by the unions
are from 222,000 to 700,000.
>
>-----Since exploration began on the neighboring North Slope and the
Alaska pipeline was built in the 1970s, the porcupine caribou herd has
increased from 3000 to 30,000. Polar bears like to walk on the pipeline
to keep their feet warm.
>
>-----A study by the Energy Information Agency (EIA) found that
domestic oil production in ANWR could begin in 2013. It also found that
expenditures on foreign oil would decline by an average of $8 billion per
year after production begins.
>
>-----According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which
manages federal wildlife refuges, eleven refuges have active oil and gas
production on them. Those refuges which currently have oil or gas
production on them are: Hewitt Lake (MT), Lake Thibadeau (MT), Kirtland's
Warbler (MI), Hagerman (TX), Atchafalaya (LA), Anahuac (TX), Lacassine
(LA), San Bernard (TX), Delta (LA), Crosby Wetland Management District
(ND), Sabine (LA). To find out more about them go to www.fws.gov/refuges
<http://www.fws.gov/refuges>
>
>-----Audubon Society has drilled for oil on its refuges. Audubon says
"Birds and Oil Don’t Mix" in Arctic but it seems ok on their own land.
Its website touts that " pro-drillers" in Congress want to open the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil "exploration and extraction"
without telling their own donors that on three of their own bird
sanctuaries wells have been producing oil and gas for years.
>
>-----The National Audubon Society's Paul J. Rainey Wildlife Sanctuary
in Louisiana has been producing natural gas for 50 years and providing
Audubon with the revenue.
>
>-----The Michigan Audubon Society owns the Bernard N. Baker Sanctuary
and, when oil was found, contracted to have wells drilled with a form
of slant drilling that was much less environmentally friendly than what
would be used today in ANWR. In addition, their Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary near Naples, Florida also has wells on it.
>
>
>
>According to the Government Accountability Office in 2003 (GAO),
"About one quarter (155 of 575) of all [national wildlife] refuges has past
or present oil and gas activities, some dating to at least the 1920s."
(GAO-03-517) www.gao.gov/highlights/d04192thigh.pdf
<http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d04192thigh.pdf>
>
>For instance, the Sabine National Wildlife Refuge in LA lists income
from its oil wells as a benefit to the local economy. See:
http://www.fws.gov/sabine/
>However, the report does point out that many of the older wells have
had spills and have not been well maintained. Today, with new
technology, the danger of spills has lessened considerably.
>
>Read the Clinton administration study, "Environmental Benefits of
Advanced Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Technologies" at:
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/iss ... ctives.htm
>
>In 2002 and 2003 the National Audubon Society received over $5 million
in government grants — funds that can be used to lobby the government
to not open ANWR to exploration.
>
>It seems hypocritical of Audubon Society and other activist groups to
deny the Inupiat Eskimos of Alaska the same economic benefits from oil
exploration that they are receiving off their lands. If it's OK to
drill for oil and gas on Audubon's land, then why not in ANWR?
>
>
>Background and links: Read more about the three Audubon refuges and
their oil exploration at: "Audubon Wildcatters"
http://solohq.com/Articles/Davison/Audu ... city.shtml
>
>For info on Audubon's "Birds and Oil Don't Mix" info:
http://www.protectthearctic.com <http://www.protectthearctic.com/>
>
>Compiled from several articles by
>Gretchen Randall
>Winningreen LLC
>e-mail: [email protected]
>

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Mon May 29, 2006 1:05 am

you are welcome to live in Bend and read all the links, stories and "facts" from people that don't live here or are paid by special intrests or the government itself....

WHILE I LIVE HERE AND HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 33 YEARS, 365 DAYS A YEAR....

lets make a deal.. I won't set foot in Bend and you stay out of Alaska.. and we will just pass each other on the Playa....

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Mon May 29, 2006 9:27 am

Mojo, yes I'm in the 48 now. Ultimately it will be the people in the lower 48 who will decide the question about resource extraction in Alaska.
I've been to the north slope and Barrow. How many Alaskans have been there?
Alaskans resent having their future decided by outsiders but , for the present, it's uncontrollable.

Because of gold, both black and yellow, Alaska has always attracted people who were greedy carpetbaggers. Robert Service wrote plenty about the kind of people who weren't welcome in Alaska.

Getting all prickly and defensive won't accomplish anything positive.
Alaskans can't stop growth any more than the French can stop globalization . It's only through reasoned dialog that there is hope of preserving what's important. I don't believe that anyone can preserve it all.
If they find oil, I'd prefer that it were in the far north rather than Kenai or Tongass. Greed is the most reliable human trait and one has to be realistic about the resources in Alaska.
Your best bet is to encourage people to come and see Seward's folly so that they can put some value on it's natural beauty and not just on it's natural resources.
Dan

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Mon May 29, 2006 9:32 am

<<They'll make gravel pads and roads. In a couple hundred years, it will revert to what it was before. If they do more resource extraction, it will take a couple thousand years to revert. The next ice age should put the final touch on it. Mother nature doesn't care.
Alaska is just too damn big for man to show a signifigant change.
Obviously that's a matter of opinion.
Dan>> quote can'tsitstill

and not scientific opinion. The republican wing nuts in the house keep bringing this up. the senate and the american people don't want it...time after time after time. Who'se not getting the message here?. I too have seen alot of Alaska and even worked hard to try to save parts of it (GreenPeace )
I've climbed McKinley twice and appreciate the place from its heights as well.
In 73 the Nixon admin wanted to explode nuclear bombs off its coast. There was even a plan to use nukes to blow artificial harbors up on the north coast. Can you really trust these folks and their evil cabal in oil?
There are just some things that are too important to risk destroying and Alaska is one of these. There is an army of zealous activists out there that I guarantee you , will come unglued if ANWAR is ever drilled. But this will never happen. Too many people grasp its significance. Too bad you don't.

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Mon May 29, 2006 3:22 pm

Dan...keep your opinions to yourself.. they were NEVER asked for nor wanted.. I hear from far too many people that live out of state and want to tell me what it's like here and/or what we should do..
what part of I have lived here for over 33 yrs don't you seem to understand.. I have flown ALL over this state and MANY times.. have friends that work in various industries and all over the state....
why in the hell would I want to listen to someone that lives in Bend telling me all about my state..??
I have repeated myself yet you still spin the same story and don't seem to recount that I have worked as a forestry tech for the USFS as well as BLM and spent WHOLE seasons living in the woods here.... I have guided river rafting trips in the Brooks and deal with villagers in western and NW Ak due to my current position with the state..
it's all about politicians being paid off by big oil and the idiot in DC as to why this horse won't be left alone... hell, lets burn everyone else's oil and save ours for when we need it (besides, shouldn't we have a Ntl energy policy in place before continued drilling..??).. the numbers don't add up for ANWR as compared to the cost of changing it forever...
oh, the tundra is EASILY scarred and takes LIFETIMES to repair due to the short growing season, let alone the more than likely thaw that will occur and thus cause a lake/creek to form from tread marks of track vehicles crossing the frozen tundra during exploration...
you are not welcome in my camp, I don't want to associate with you or even an exchange of hellos...

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Mon May 29, 2006 7:53 pm

My opinions aren't welcome and I should keep them to myself and you didn't ask for them.
Fair enough.
I started this thread to point out to burners that the gov is trying to manufacture enough excuses to trash Alaska again.
I think it's worthwhile letting people know when Gov is trying to trash an exceptional place.
You don't like that. So, don't read my thread.

You're pissed about the govenor that your fellow Alaskans elected. You're pissed about Bush and the petros.
But, you're still making a 6,000 mile petro-powered trip to BM. You want to burn petro but not from your back yard.
You didn't like some of the info that I posted. Rather than correcting any inaccuracies, you rant.
You may or may not be a bush pilot just as I may or may not have been to alaska. Your objectivity and critical thinking are what I'm questioning.

You've lived in Alaska for 33 years. OK, Have you received your permanent-resident-dividend check every year,,,courtesy of the oil companies? Have you sent it back?

I started a thread here to make Burners more aware of alternate energy. Free Energy for BM 2006
I'm trying to make some kind of contribution towards utilization of non-petro power. I built one of the FE devices to see if it would be practical to get Burners to copy it.
I live in a self-built log house from dead wood. I heat with dead wood.
It's all beetle-killed lodgepole.
I'm converting my little diesel van to run on veg oil.

What's your contribution towards lessening oil consumption?

Cowboy Angel, It's not that I don't grasp the signifigance of ANWR. Do you grasp the value of the petro? They've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq for oil. I could only speculate what they might do in ANWR.

I was there when the greens tried to stop Prudoe. They weren't successful.
I don't doubt their commitment.
What will the greens do when the govenor re-privatises the only road north? The only strips will be controlled by petro. The only alternatives are ship through the Bering Straight or helicopter from Fairbanks

I'm not saying that drilling is inevitable, I just don't see anything on the horizon with the power to stop it. I would be quite happy to be proved wrong.
Dan

Sensei · Post by **Sensei** » Mon May 29, 2006 7:58 pm

Nice post, Dan.

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Mon May 29, 2006 8:14 pm

[quote="Sensei"]Nice post, Dan.[/quote]
Thanks, I have no axe to grind though. I gave up a long time ago on beating my head against reality. I'd love to see alaska remain pristine.

People have babies and drive cars. All we can do is hope to minimise the resulting damage.

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Mon May 29, 2006 8:57 pm

ok try James Kunstler's, The "Long Emergency" we're running out of oil and fast. There will be many acts of desperation to quell the storm, like trying to drill the coasts, ANWAR, strip mine for more coal (poor Wyoming) fight horrible international conflicts over oil access, more nuke plants, etc. I'm glad to hear that you're using bio-diesel. This and more alt-energies will have to move up in excellerated development if we are to make a difference. Will it happen? Probably not. That's why cooperative living experiments like BM are vital and I'm with you I think, on trying to get BM to go total alt energy..this is the admin's big challenge and they know it. not an easy one either.

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Mon May 29, 2006 9:35 pm

Dan... you say I am pissed at my fellow Alaskans because Murkowski was elected.. with that reasoning I guess I should be pissed at you because Bush was..??
your repeat opinons weren't wanted AFTER you seemed to ignore my statement regarding living here for over 3 decades and the changes as a resident I have seen occur..

YOU ARE NOT A RESIDENT OF ALASKA NOR NEVER HAVE BEEN from what I understand... how many nights have you spent in remote villages talking/living with the locals, have you EVER subsistence fished or hunted here..??

you say you have made a few trips north and have seen [b]ANWR[/b] and like to quote "facts" from the government as well as the oil companies..

1st off, I seem to remember you saying "anwar" instead of "[b]ANWR[/b]" "alyesca" instead of "[b]alyeska[/b]" and now you spell "[b]Prudhoe[/b]" as "prudoe"
hard for me to take anyone serious that can't even get the main names correct..

2nd, [b]ANWR[/b] will supply 2-5% of our oil needs for maybe 6-10 yrs and won't have any oil out of the ground for at least a decade.. so it will in no way help our CURRENT needs...not to mention the miles of roads, bridges, infrastructure, etc not included in the "footprint" estimates you seem to enjoy quoting...

3rd, this isn't Ecotopia and as much as you brag about your dead wood house and veg oil burning van, the best anyone could ask for is for people to check their tire pressure, drive at reasonable speeds, carpool, maintain their vehicles, more public transit, etc... we need a National energy policy MORE than we need to drill in [b]ANWR[/b]

4th, [b]ANWR[/b] is a caribou calving ground and Prudhoe Bay isn't.. now Kaktovik is against offshore drilling and also anti Shell Oil Co. Eskimo whalers have noted that the Bowheads now swim further out to sea, they believe the seismic tests are driving them further offshore.... Polar Bears walking on the pipeline because THEY LIKE WARM FEET..?? LMAO, with global warming they are concerned that they will become extinct..
warm feet, LOL ... wait till I tell my native friends that one..

yes, I will be using black gold to get to the Playa and I have collected EVERY PFD the state has issued to residents, oh, the state gives me my PFD, not the oil companies... but being enviornmentally aware doesn't mean I have to eat brown rice and sleep on the floor... thats YOUR personal lifestyle choice.... I prefer to live responsibly and do my best to conserve, I can't change the world but I can change myself...

oh, I flew U-21's (Beech King Airs) and U-1a's (Dehavilland Otters) in the Army here .... as well as Beavers, 206's, 185's, super cubs as a guide....
and you say you drove to Prudhoe Bay.. did you have a road permit to get past Deadhorse..?? the road has NEVER been private, just not open to the public due to remotness, lack of facilities....

thank you for your concern and desire to help, but please at least get the names right so you sound more credible...

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:07 pm

Cowboy, here's a thought. BLM has historicly let people do things like leach gold out of tailings with cyanide. They'll even let you cut off a mountain of overburden and throw it in the stream below.
What are the chances that they would permit a temporary wind farm on the desert? I guess it would have to be stored at the ranch the rest of the time.
There are some good designs that utilise surplus half-barrels. They don't have to be elevated much and they don't kill birds.

BMORG would have to invest into HUP batteries and some inverters.

A friend of mine came up with the idea of storing the energy as compressed air instead of storing electricity. You need tanks instead of batteries.
In the end, everythings heavy and everythings expensive.
I could design something that would run center camp, but the initial cost would be steep.
If anyone's interested in a general design, i'll post all the components.

Actually, it might be easier to start with the JOTS. A bright LED in each jots. A 3 foot turbine, an alternator and 2 golf cart batteries would work fine. That might get the ball rolling.
BMOG spent $400,000 on art grants. It wouldn't cost much to light a few things up. I don't think it would compromise radical self-reliace to power up the JOTS and center camp from on-site power.

Dan

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Tue May 30, 2006 5:15 pm

put your info up here. Ideas start taking off with exposure and good luck

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Tue May 30, 2006 7:14 pm

cowboy angel, It all gets down to money and willingness.
Here's all the wind generators you could want.
http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/ju ... owind.html

Here's the batteries. http://www.thesolar.biz/hup_solar_one_batteries.htm

Here's the do it yourself stuff.
http://www.otherpower.com/17page1.html
http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wi ... ators.html

BMORG has invested into cranes and heavy equipment. They bought the ranch. They spend $ 400,000 for art grants. They spend months building infrastructure. They tank in diesel.

Hell, last year they built that big rotating thing with 3 rocks. Bring the bastard back out and put blades and a generator on it.
I can't twist their arms. If they want to lead the way , great.
Larry et al have to have the willingness to make it happen.

They could use it at the ranch year-round and then truck it out to the playa. Hell be twice as practical,,,build 2. Just move the batteries.
All the pieces are just sitting in some warehouse. Just put them together.

They could fabricate the tower and buy surplus generators to couple up.

There are a lot of viable possibilities. People with money and willingness can bring them to fruition.
Dan

Post by **mdmf007** » Tue May 30, 2006 9:17 pm

why not trash alaska - we have done a thorough job of fucking the other 49 states up. - Alaska had geological isolation to save its ass, and some pretty nasty weather most of the year.
Now that we have airlines, and parkas, we can screw it up in comfort and still be home before the weekend is up.

Suck alaska crude till its dry, then rip up the tundra and extract the coal seams.
when thats done and gone, we can burn the trees as firewood. I almost forget the fish and crab - we have done a good job at ovefishing the bering so thats a good start.

later all

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Tue May 30, 2006 11:52 pm

ya ha.
It occurred to me that as far as I know there are no industrial sites on AK rivers ( not sure about Juneau) those rivers are the cleanest I've ever seen.

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Wed May 31, 2006 6:43 pm

C.A., I believe that most of the Alaskans would like to preserve the cleanliness of their state.
If you climbed Mckinley, then you know the Denali area. Just outside the park is the Usibelli coal mine. I toured the mine. Every bit of run-off was chanelled to sediment ponds and allowed to clarify before it was returned to streams.
I won't claim that they beautified the landscape, but at least they tried to minimise the impact.

Alaska has more than 3 million lakes that are bigger than 20 acres.
It also has many streams and rivers that won't support fish because of "rock flour",,,ground up dust from glaciers.

I rafted on a cold river[35 deg.] They told us that if we fell over, we could expect to use our muscles for less than 1 minute,,,don't fall over.
It's a great place to visit.

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Wed May 31, 2006 6:55 pm

back when G Bush I was in office, he killed a transportation bill that would have included money to built bike lanes along established and new highways. It would have been paid back by saving an couple of ANWRs by now!

AIIZ

PS- Montana has its own oil wells and refineries so I'm not sure how much gas actually come from Alaska

Alaskan deja-vu

Alaskan deja-vu

7 times an expert..... ??