Hey there,
Well I think you and I both know the reason why there isnt a commercial hemp crop, and that is due to the ties to marijuana and the US policy being totally ineffective and archaic.

Thanks for welcoming me, its nice to come around when I can.

My username is a long used nickname I have had since I was a kid. Its a spin on my name...long story. As for Davy Crocket, well there arent any racoons in Alaska

BTW, whats the story on your username?

Norrin Radd was the name of the comic book charecter who gave his life to save his planet from Galactus. He told Galactus he would do anything to save his world and the love of his life, Shalla Bell. Galactus, an ominpotent being, needed to devour entire worlds in order to sustain energy to live. Weary from traveling and looking for suitable worlds to devour, he decides to take Norrin Radd up on his offer and gives to him a small amount of the power cosmic, thus enabling to travel through space to scout worlds for Galactus to devour. He also gave him a surfboard and altered his soul somewhat in order to be able to pick worlds where billions of lives would be lost to help sustain the power of Galactus.

Thus the Silver Surfer was born.

BTW, if you have never read the story of Davey Crockett and Horatio Bunce, it is a must read....in my opinion.

Davy Crockett vs. Welfare

The enviros are so duplicitous. They dislike big business and will find any reason to stop them from doing what they do. They would rather sit in the dark and complain than let investors make a good profit. ANWR could be on the moon and Norrin would say the moonscape is "pristine". Oh well, . . . . stupid people.

RJ

What reason is there for a footprint within the nature preserve?

Since there isn't adequate 'price information' regarding environmental concerns, some type of 'oil spill' insurance could be required to cover the cost of cleanup, as a prerequisite to any drilling.

Nature preserves should require an additional premium simply because they are meant to be kept as preserves and less subject to fleeting political fads.

The point is, that with sufficient public policy inducement (in the form of a positive use of public sector interference), the private sector could find it more cost effective to utilize modern drilling techniques to save money by advancing drilling technology while reducing any negative impact to the environment.

Yeah, I guess I am stupid for wanting to protect one of the last places on earth which hasn't been polluted by man.

I don't dislike big business and am not trying to stop them from doing what they do. I do, however, opine that they should be less specious in their argumentation concerning their private profit motive.

There is no reason they cannot drill from outside the boundaries of the preserve.

It does come back to ME oil, but that influence is going to be there whether we buy their oil or not. It continues to be our problem if it’s used as a form of economic warfare. Sure, there are alternatives available for many of oil’s applications, but they’re just not as economical. The leaders of OPEC nations can hand an advantage to any industrialized nation they choose; as long as we’re active in the Middle East, we have some sway over where that influence goes. OBL also had a huge problem with the leadership of most Middle Eastern nations. Perhaps his real problem with the US military presence in Saudi Arabia is that al Qaeda can’t seize power so long as they’re there. We could pull out and let OBL move in and pick up a whole lot more political power over international affairs, but I really don’t think that would be a good thing.

RJ,
In all fairness to Norrin, he did say he was willing to compromise and allow ANWR drilling.

Ill try to address your post in its entirety.
There is more or less oil spill insurance, but instead of going through state farm or something, it is a bond that is placed within the government to ensure cleanup and reclamation funds in case something like this happens.

As for drilling tecniques and it being necessary to have a footprint inside the refuge itself, I am not an engineer so I wont claim expertise, but I would imagine a few factors come into play.
A. Economics
In order for directional drilling to be practical and economical they would need that footprint. It is simply to far from existing pads, which leads into
B. Infastructure capacity
The amount of material that needs to be transported is immense. So it simply isnt practical to drill 70+ miles underground with directional drilling then expect that additional oil to be handled with the current pipe available in that area. 5-10 miles is cumbersome to drill, 70 miles is impossible. Those transportation infastructure would need to be above ground.

I disagree with your assessment on ME oil. If the there had been a more consistent policy to restrict oil to the US, we would probably be much further along in synthetic or cleaner fuels and technologies by now.

Ok...

No doubt, but as I've said, I don't believe that would solve the problem of ME oil and/or influence.

How well did that work in the Exxon Valdez case? Why is there still oil residue in the area of the spill if there were sufficient funds available to ensure a clean environment?

In any event, why not rely on better private sector market forces to determine that 'price information' for better allocation of resources? Doesn't it involve a private sector corporation? Isn't the private sector better suited to efficiency due to market forces?

The public sector could retrieve that oil from outside the boundaries of the preserve regardless of cost (as in the case of a drug war we don't need).

Part of the reason for better 'price information' is to better determine the practicality of drilling such a marginal energy reserve, especially if it is within a nature preserve.

I am not convinced by your argument on oil transport given the current length of the Alaska Pipeline.

From one perspective, with better public policy, modern drilling technologies could be explored and utilized to achieve what you now consider only science fiction.

I think tax credits could make that type of business venture science fact, without the need to drill within a nature preserve.

Not only would that technology make future drilling less expensive, it could also be used to develop more efficient technologies in drilling and material transport that could be applied in other disciplines.

How much influence would the Middle East have on us without the influence of oil?

We already know the cotton gin was developed as late as it was, simply due to cheap labor.

I believe it would be a considerable amount of influence. We could come up with an alternative, but it wouldn’t be as economical or as efficient as oil. So while we’d be saddling our industry and/or society with an alternative energy source, the OPEC nations would be fueling the engines of other nations’ industries, most likely our trade rivals, with oil at a fraction of its current price. Our industry, which is already hurting, would be slammed yet again.

I would agree with you if our development had been static when compared to the rest of the global economy. However, even the Germans of a previous generation found methods to create fuels by alternative methods. In that same manner, the US would have found alternative fuels that could have been cleaner and renewable by now.

I consider it analogous to the Space Race. There is no private market in that sector as only a public sector can currently afford that market and only by creating it.