Science – Old Alaskan oil wells could be swallowed by the ocean as rising temperatures speed up erosion of the state's Arctic coastline.
Just one more reason to step up solar and wind power.
America's reliance on oil (imported or domestic) may be our downfall!
As for BP & Shell, Mobil-Exxon,I personally DO NOT buy their products(or Volero, Venesala) because the are all greedy, over-paid, and anti-American!
Let's get back to AMERICAN OIL, and use less, not more! Trade in your SUV for economy's sake. BIG GAS GUZZLERS SUCK!
Hayden explains the limited capability of every solar-related energy source by relating how the laws of physics impose certain inescapable shortcomings. Along the way he precisely quotes the many well-known energy charlatans making statements that defy the laws of nature.
When it comes to wind, Hayden shows wind farms can generate electrical power at the rate of about 1.2 watts (W) per square meter (m2) for most sites, and up to 4 W/m2 in rare sites where the wind always comes from one direction. The goal is to generate enough energy to replicate a 1,000 megawatts power plant operating around the clock. To do that in California, for example, would require a wind farm one mile wide stretching all the way from Los Angeles to San Francisco.
To produce as much energy as a conventional 1,000 megawatt power plant using solar would require a 127 square mile field of solar mirrors collecting enough heat to turn a turbine. Now that would have quite an environmental impact!
Not a member? Sign-up today!
chiefee351
haley.julianna
stwor
usefulvoter
getreal1
psilosjordan
GlamourGirl
Dogan98
kdeloach
engineer
spkguy
mipmap
Punchkin
jordan11
Rigel
saltyveruca
dstargel
justgotmarried
4Jason4
nowsourcing
starshinediva
dandur6
texangelwings
justmydating
Freewill
Sinds.Net
koval1922
tynxy
dexlovex2
violanavoenko
simonsez
TimALoftis
Malaika111
wickli
mohatu
alakazam
Dobes_Rule
ClickHere
gsmaster
adimoga
prevgofreka
bharati2
tehranchik
raeliegh
Hullios
ETproductions
logaut
Monte G
LucyCompton
Debbie
About Propeller | Frequently Asked Questions | Help
© 2003-2008 Propeller. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
14)
Vote
"Coastal erosion has more than doubled along a segment of the Arctic Alaska coast during the past half century," it said, adding the land loss was being magnified by the conversion of freshwater "thermokarst" lakes into saltwater bays as they become inundated with waters from the Arctic Ocean.
I wonder. how is it that oil wells can be drilled and pumped in deep north Atlantic, sometime 1000's of feet below the ocean, and yet some people are claiming that these wells in Alaska will somehow succumb to natural erosion of land around them and ultimately the sea? Is this article alarmist? I think so.
A must read environmentalist argument against drilling in Alaska. These egocentric capitalists come equipped with a few arguments in favor of drilling and all of them are terrible. I'd like to start with my favorite: establishing oil drilling facilities is beneficial to the wildlife. My God, what a good joke. You'll typically find a proponent declaring that since drilling in the Alaskan Prudhoe Bay, the caribou population has risen from a few thousand to tens of thousands. Well, this is true and I won't deny it. My guess is that the initial rise in population was because all the smaller, weaker animals they used to prey on were now dead and littered about the landscape; the caribou took full advantage of all the free meals.
These "environmentalist" should know that caribou subsist only on a diet of arboreal lichens. (not a small animal)
Interestingly, the Caribou Herd which migrates through Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3000 animals to its current level of 32000 animals.
I would be wise of environmentalists to take courses in physics before they start harping about alternative energy sources, carbon footprints ect. They seem to have illusions that just because it's another energy source it can replace what we now use.