This thread discusses the Content article: Sen. Hatch touts need for oil shale

While drilling for oil shale has widespread support in conservative Utah, Democrats in Colorado and Wyoming are skeptical.

Maybe Colorado and Wyoming are wondering why Hatch and his cronies are talking about strip-mining the west, considering the fact Atlantic Richfield dicovered enough oil under the Arctic in 1977 to totally fuel this country for the next 200 years!

"President Bush, who has called for lifting restrictions on oil shale leasing in the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming"

I honor Senator Orrin Hatch as a person, a stalwart religious freedom advocate and an outstanding servant of his Utah constituents. However, I respectively disagree with him on his voiced opinion on the use of Utah's natural resources.

I also, understand his devout support of President Bush, should I be in his position I would be equally devoted. Since I am not, I must admit, at present, anything that President Bush is supporting I am against.

In my opinion when it comes to the use of Utah's natural resources for energy, we have no other legitimate alternative other than capitalizing on our abundant reusable energy source of the sun and the constant winds produced daily by the entrances to its many valleys.

I realize this thinking is not attractive to the massive amount of investments that company's 'like' Energy Solutions (Nuclear and other Toxic Waste storage and Nuclear Power industry's) have already invested and have yet received its desired return on their investment. I guess I say to that Oh Well! Life's experiences are fretted with poor investments.

In my opinion Tourism, Education (University's, Museums, the Arts and outdoor wilderness activities) and clean industry's utilizing our natural resources are our State future industries.

The Keeper wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: Sen. Hatch touts need for oil shale

While drilling for oil shale has widespread support in conservative Utah, Democrats in Colorado and Wyoming are skeptical.

Maybe Colorado and Wyoming are wondering why Hatch and his cronies are talking about strip-mining the west, considering the fact Atlantic Richfield dicovered enough oil under the Arctic in 1977 to totally fuel this country for the next 200 years!


You have proof of that? 200 years? Fact is, if that was true, they'd being drilling there, they already have the pipeline set up, or could extend it pretty easily from Alaska, I'm not buying your claim without a link

Dubbs wrote:
The Keeper wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: Sen. Hatch touts need for oil shale

While drilling for oil shale has widespread support in conservative Utah, Democrats in Colorado and Wyoming are skeptical.

Maybe Colorado and Wyoming are wondering why Hatch and his cronies are talking about strip-mining the west, considering the fact Atlantic Richfield dicovered enough oil under the Arctic in 1977 to totally fuel this country for the next 200 years!


You have proof of that? 200 years? Fact is, if that was true, they'd being drilling there, they already have the pipeline set up, or could extend it pretty easily from Alaska, I'm not buying your claim without a link

heres a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1002_area

Dubbs I think your new name should be "Doubting Thomas"

Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
The Keeper wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: Sen. Hatch touts need for oil shale

While drilling for oil shale has widespread support in conservative Utah, Democrats in Colorado and Wyoming are skeptical.

Maybe Colorado and Wyoming are wondering why Hatch and his cronies are talking about strip-mining the west, considering the fact Atlantic Richfield dicovered enough oil under the Arctic in 1977 to totally fuel this country for the next 200 years!


You have proof of that? 200 years? Fact is, if that was true, they'd being drilling there, they already have the pipeline set up, or could extend it pretty easily from Alaska, I'm not buying your claim without a link

heres a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1002_area

Dubbs I think your new name should be "Doubting Thomas"

Personally I think we should go with the Uber Troll.

Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
The Keeper wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: Sen. Hatch touts need for oil shale

While drilling for oil shale has widespread support in conservative Utah, Democrats in Colorado and Wyoming are skeptical.

Maybe Colorado and Wyoming are wondering why Hatch and his cronies are talking about strip-mining the west, considering the fact Atlantic Richfield dicovered enough oil under the Arctic in 1977 to totally fuel this country for the next 200 years!


You have proof of that? 200 years? Fact is, if that was true, they'd being drilling there, they already have the pipeline set up, or could extend it pretty easily from Alaska, I'm not buying your claim without a link

heres a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1002_area

Dubbs I think your new name should be "Doubting Thomas"


Once again you show your lack of research and comprehension skills. Did you read your link? Do you know what I even was questioning... you big tard?

I said I doubt it had 200 years worth of oil in the area, THAT'S what I doubted you idjit.

And guess what? I was right, here's a quote from YOUR link (friggin idiot)


"The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices"

There's only 4 to 6 billion barels they are projecting from the area, a small amount compared to other areas, even the United States has area's that project 10 times that.

So, who's the idiot? YOU are bigdummy, once again you show you have no comprehension skills, and a lack of basic reading skills.

Go back to threatening women and children, your better at that.