It won't matter with soaring prices it will be like using a band aid to deal with amputated arm. it could only make a slight "temporary" difference of a couple cents local or regionally. Not nationally, and certainly not global. Part of soaring prices is with the oil companies, their "much needed" profit margins. How strange this is cycling to "something" in the 70's.

Washington drivers would benefit from opening the drilling in Alaska. Cantwell needs to look out for all of the voters in Washington not just the special interest groups.

Drilling in that area will produce enough to... well... not really enough of anything other than jobs and money. Instead why not consider the area just another natural storage facility when we can no longer get oil from anywhere else.

I live in WA and the prices here are the same as in FL and TX.

Cantwell is actually representing alot of her constituents. It isn't needed and won't have enough of an impact to change anything. How about we look for other ways to reduce use. The animals will appreciate it.

Had Maria and her collegues permitted drilling in Anwar decades ago when it was first proposed, we would now have oil from Anwar that could mitigate the prices we are paying to OPEC and Cesar Chavez. Better to have the money and oil for fellow Americans, than have it go to people who want to kill us!

Anwar and other preserves must be protected at all costs from the oil barons. Bush, Cheney and their cohorts have had an eight-year rampage on the U.S. and it is time to pick them up by the "scruff of their necks" and put them where they can do no more damage!We absolutely need to learn some discipline of life in this country. There are many of us who remember life during WWII. We had rationing, not a big thing, but something that made a huge difference in winning and losing the war. It meant that we had to cut back on waste and greed, but it was good for all of us to join together in a conbined effort. Our population has generally filtered down into a self-serving society. Time for a huge change that would benefit all of us and turn things around for our children.

I think it would be a bad decision to start drilling in the ANWR area. What the people of this country need to look at is greed. Oil executives make hundreds of billions of dollars a quarter in profit alone. Our Government and an Oil happy leader President Bush, wont change and wont look at other alternatives. There is way too much money given to the Government by Oil Executives to try to change. Why do we have to wait till 2025 or later for the country to find alternative fuel with the new presidential selections?

Oil equals money. With leaders who makes hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, do you really think they care if gas hits $4.00 a gallon. The real losers are the people of the United States. We are all suffering and the near future holds no new positive change.

I certainly agree with P L Hardy. What a load of rubbish that Bush and his oil cronies are going to try and shove down our throats! Nothing seems to be worth conserving these days. Let's not get sidetracked by their ploy to destroy the widlerness - even part of it! How about instead we focus on getting away from petroleum products? Anyone for saving what's left of our once beautiful planet?

Gas stations have been accustomed to sustaining raised-floor on gas prices. An increase in supply may earn us only a slight decrease in gas price if any at all. The costs of drilling for oil in Alaska would far outweigh minuscule and temporary benefit of decrease in gas prices. At the expense of the ecosystem and environment, drilling is an excuse to delay investing money and effort in alternative sources of energy. We need to focus on fixing the long term problem by finding a viable long term solution, not dig a deeper hole for ourselves.

OK Folks, first of all, Maria Cantwell needs to focus on items and issues that have an impact on Washington citizens NOT Alaska. The citizen of Alaska have said they don't have a problem with the drilling for oil in their state, how dare we pass judgement on what they want in their state.

The decisions we have made in our state have created a situation where we have one of the highest set of taxes on gas in the country. Do you really think that another state would want our decisions pushed on them given our track record?

We need to reduce our reliance on oil from outside our own country. If it means that we drill in Anwar then so be it.

Until we have a viable substitute to fossle fuels that can be mass produced then we don't have much of a choice now do we.

We must reduce our dependence on OIL from our enemy's. We are finaincing the Terrorism by buying their oil at a premium price, because we do not have other choices. ALASKA does not object to our drilling, but Cantwell continue's to meddle in their economy. .instead of coming to solutions that help us. She could push GASAHOL with sustatinable farm products, beets, etc. . but we do not see her proposing that either. The danger to the envirment is a false charge for those that have not seen the ALASKA pipeline, with cariboo and all the native animals grazing around it. . For those that critize BUSH administration, we better check to see who has control of the congress, that is where the blame lies. .MAYBE we should do something about THAT instead. .

Drilling in Alaska will not deal with the soaring prices that we see today or year. This subject is a delicate matter, because of the all the groups and feelings involved. Strict,regulated drilling in these new areas, alternative energy sources, local and national government intervention through practical policies, social and environmental change will promote lower gas prices. There is no single solution to these problems, but we must act accordingly, responsibly, and quickly to deal with these problems.

Drilling in Alaska will not deal with the soaring prices that we see today or next year. This subject is a delicate matter, because of the all the groups and controversies within those groups involved. Strict,regulated drilling in these new areas, alternative energy sources, local and national government intervention through practical policies, and social and environmental change will promote lower gas prices. We can only hope! There is no single solution to these problems, but we must act accordingly, responsibly, and quickly to deal with these problems.

I just saw Senator "Can't well" on the evening news saying that she will fight new drilling in Anwar to the end. Come on good people of the state of Washington, we deserve better than this. Let's voter her out and put someone in the Senate that represents the views of the rest of us.

The Bush/Cheney administration is ALL about oil. Just how much would their friends and cohorts prosper from drilling in ANWR? When do we start to realize that this planet is more dependent on us for survival than we are on it. We are slowly tapping out all resources for future generations. Across the globe, not just here in America. We need to protect the environment and stop destroying what was here before we evolved.
Evolution should not be synonymous with Destruction.

Cantwell and Murray do speak for this voter and many more! Drilling in Alaska was a bad idea ten years ago and it is still a very bad idea!! Penny smart-pound foolish to say the least!

There are still some things more prescious than oil!!!

Don't touch ANWR! All the government can do is to provide legislation to protect regions from the big businesses that will devour whatever they seek to get their hands on to make huge profits for themselves. Maybe we get part of our oil now from overseas, but you bet it is the big oil companies we buy gasoline from that are making the money! They want ANWR so they can make more profit. If you think America is going to get $2.00 a gallon gasoline again in 10-15 years after ANWR oil starts to flow, your head is in the sand! Americans are selfish. We want what we want and we don't want to pay for it. We refuse to acknowledge long-term impact. We need to look at our own wasteful demand on resources and be seeking to choose better alternatives. We also need to insist that big business stops doing "business as usual" and starts becoming good stewards of the limited resources this earth has. They are limited. Dependence on oil is yesterday. Spend our dollars on looking for tomorrow's solutions. Keep ANWR as a beautiful reminder of what we as Americans have the privilege to preserve for the next millennium.

Tom Hawksworth said:
Had Maria and her collegues permitted drilling in Anwar decades ago when it was first proposed, we would now have oil from Anwar that could mitigate the prices we are paying to OPEC and Cesar Chavez.

Wow, Maria Cantwell and "her colleagues" were in the Senate "decades ago"? Hmmm, check your facts my friend.

Published: February 21, 2005
NEW YORK TIMES

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 - George W. Bush first proposed drilling for oil in a small part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska in 2000, after oil industry experts helped his presidential campaign develop an energy plan. Five years later, he is pushing the proposal again, saying the nation urgently needs to increase domestic production.

Senate Records and Transcripts
Nov. 2, 2005
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: And as you looked to the west you could see the state lands that had been drilled for oil and gas, and then to the east the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that had not been drilled. It was easy to tell the two apart because the scars that were left on that state land that had been drilled were still there years and years later. They didn't gingerly step in and drill and leave. They cut scars across that land that will be there forever.

he was speaking about the destruction left behind and the wastelands created by the industry.

I believe the phrase most often used is "Raping the Earth"

And by the way, Bush on his "visit" to the OPEC coalition in the Middle East was VERY, uh shall we say "lacking in strength and fortitude" when he was discussing increasing oil production.

First of all, not every Alaskan is for oil drilling in ANWR. I'm against it because it will do nothing for anyone's economy. The US needs to invest money in alternative energy and cleaner fuels. Oil from Alaska may also be really expensive because it will take time to build the pipeline, drill the hole, protect the wildlife, find transportation to the lower 48, and even then, there is no guarantee that prices of fuel will decrease.

So you want oil prices to decrease now? Well, if you started drilling now, the amount of time you wait will probably be the same amount of time it will take for the US to find better ways to solve the "oil crisis". Plus it'll probably be cheaper to look for other options instead of drilling. Why not look in Texas for oil? It's part of the contiguous US, therefore making the costs of transportation for the oil cheaper. Plus it's there, much closer, and most definitely prepped for oil production.

Besides, I think WA residents should support their local communities by considering biodiesel. Biodiesel burns cleaner and is made from crops grown in WA. Yes, I said WA. So as you fill your tank with biodiesel, rest assure that your hard earned money is actually staying within the WA economy.

I had this dog once that would lay on his back to get his belly rubbed, and when you rubbed his belly he got this goofy expression on his face and pee'd straight up in the air. We'll see those same expressions and reactions in the Whitehouse and at the US Naval Observatory if Bush and Cheney get to greenlight drilling in the ANWR. For those guys that's knocking back the big one - a one night stand with the best looking girl at the prom; but which is ultimately nothing but an ego trip that doesn't prove or solve anything, and which may lead to all kinds of trouble. The problem isn't supply, the problem is it's still too long to January 20th, 2009 when no matter who gets elected unanswerable official questions will be asked about the extraordinary gluttony exhibited by the oil MNC's right now; conglomerates that have loyalty only to profits and no apparent sense of stewardship of the resource or the social consequences of their runaway greed. Reminds me of an episode of the old Tom Baker Dr. Who. The energy amnesty ends when a bunch of secret service agents take up permanent residence in Texas and Wyoming and that can't happen soon enough.

A million barrels a day may not sound like much now but it may be significant 10 yrs from now when it might come on line if the decision was made to start development now. Also think of all the trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that could come on line. Also for all the idiots out there, the oil companies do not set the price of oil. All they can do to affect the price is by adjusting production. Oil is traded as a commodity on an exchange that is open to the world. Since the United States doesn't produce enough oil to satisfy it's own needs we have to pay world prices for it. With demand for oil increasing worldwide if production doesn't increase the price has nowhere to go but up. Also remember that the profits the oil companies are making are being directly reinvested in exploration and infrastructure creating billions of dollars in jobs and businesses that serve the oil industry. That money gets redistributed throughout our economy.

ANWR and many other natural areas must be protected, forever. We have always known that many of the earth's natural resources are finite, but we continue to try and fool ourselves into believing we can continue to consume products and resources at an ever increasing rate - it is unsustainable.

We all must face the fact that there are simply too many people on this planet and we must enact measures to end the population growth - NOW.

One of the single biggest acts to reduce our global footprint and to end poverty is to stop having children!!! We don't need more food, more jobs, or more things as much as we need to take responsibility for our actions and consciously have few if any children! No one living in poverty - regardless of age, class, ethnicity, religion - should have children. A family must be planned so that parents are ready, willing, and able to raise the child / children to adulthood. Families must be small - zero to two children.

The president of Shell Oil Company is visibly pressing hard for development in ANWR. His solution to the oil price crunch is to increase US production - same line as the Bush/Cheney team. I'll bet none of those folks will commit to retail price caps if ANWR is opened to production. They'll say that they can't control enough of the factors that drive the price of oil to be able to make any promises in that regard. Fine, so that's how we'll get additionally screwed if we buy into their line of junk and get complacent on ANWR. Okay, so the oil companies do not directly set the price of oil, thus there is no controlled correlation between their profits and the price of a gallon of gas? Says Big Oil "We're so sorry, all these speculators keep making us make all these unconscionable profits." Hooey. But say it's so. Say this destructive greed is free market driven and not the result of market manipulation - I like that thought - power to the people and all that. Fine - as of today, I'm getting healthy. The car stays parked. Enough people do that and the price comes down, right? No oil saturated tundra or dead Caribou necessary. Fine with me.

The Greenies were predicting gloom and doom to all the wildlife when Prudhoe Bay was opened. Did it happen? Not at all. The caribou and other wildlife gather around the very large industrial complex of Prudhoe Bay and thrive there mostly because the wolves tend to stay away. They also gather to hide from the swarms of mosquitoes. The local caribou herd has greatly increased with oil developement.

Enviromental worries at ANWR is really not a real issue. It is made so by Friends of the Earth and other Greenies to raise money from ill informed people in New York and yes, Seattle. If you love sending money to our enemies, keeping Americans out of work, keeping our balance of payments out of balance, and like five dollar gas keep supporting not drilling in ANWR and other places that can produce large amounts of domestic oil.

Quote from Tom Hawksworth:

------Had Maria and her collegues permitted drilling in Anwar decades ago when it was first proposed, we would now have oil from Anwar that could mitigate the prices we are paying to OPEC and Cesar Chavez-------

Two points:

1) Had we been extracting oil from ANWAR for decades, it would be long gone by now! This is only a band-aid, not a solution for us. Let's look beyond oil...

2) Cesar Chavez has been dead for 15 years! Are you sure you don't mean Juan Valdez?

2 - I think Tom meant Hugo Chavez - and wasn't Juan the fictional icon of a coffee brand?

Drilling for oil in Alaska doesn't help to lower the gas prices nation wide or globally.
I don't know much about politics, but being one of the Americans, our population occupied 7% of the whole world, but we are using over 30% of natural resources from the world.
Are we using too much or too less???
If we drill out the oil in Alaska, (if there's any), the damage to the environment will be severe. The animals will have no place to live or survive. they are forced into a dead end.
If the Congress or Bush insists to drill oil in Alaska, why don't they shoot all the animals down first? why don't they blow all the ice out first?
Instead of killing them slowly and cruelly like this.
Americans, do we want 10 or 20 years later, explain to our children, why Alaska is a dead place, why Alaska has no animals like bear, seal or salmon, why we suck out everything there...etc.
Bush, maybe you have answers for your grand-children, but i don't know how to explain to them, if you can give a speech, that will be great!

Hey Booty Malone, you're dead wrong.

http://www.motherjones.com/blue_marble_blog/archives/2008/05/8134_global_warming_10.html

"Fewer caribou calves are being born and more are dying as a result of a warming climate. The problem is timing. Peak food availability in West Greenland no longer corresponds to the peak time of caribou births, according to a study by Eric Post of Penn State. Throughout the Arctic winter, when there is no plant growth, caribou dig through snow to find lichens. In spring they switch to grazing on newly growing willows, sedges, and flowering herbs. As the birth season approaches, cued by increasing day length, they migrate to areas where newly-emergent food is plentiful.

But the routine that's worked for millennia is faltering because caribou are unable to keep up with accelerated plant cycles tied to global warming. Now when pregnant females arrive at the calving grounds they find plants that have already reached peak productivity and are declining in nutritional value. The plants initiate growth in response to temperature, not day length (unlike the caribou), and are peaking dramatically earlier in response to rising temperatures. "Spring temperatures at our study site in West Greenland have risen by more than 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees F) over the past few years," said Post. "As a result, the timing of plant growth has advanced, but calving has not."

The phenomenon is called trophic mismatch and is a predicted consequence of climate change. Trophic mismatches have been documented in birds. The most famous example being the study on Dutch birds and their caterpillar prey highlighted in Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth. "Our work is the first documentation of a developing trophic mismatch in a terrestrial mammal as a result of climatic warming," said Post. "And the rapidity with which this mismatch has developed is eye-opening, to say the least.""

"When do we start to realize that this planet is more dependent on us for survival than we are on it."

Never, because it is not true. We are a plague on the earth, and it is in the process of shrugging its shoulders to brush us off. How long do you think you'll survive as global warming starts to get worse? It's May, and the temperatures here are far below those of decades past. The climate is changing, and the earth will adapt. We, however, are far too fragile to do so. You want to pit your survival skills against this rock? Go ahead, but you will lose. The "saving" of the earth isn't requested for the earth's sake, don't fool yourself. Our egotistical attitude towards everything around us would prefer to save the earth for generations of HUMANS, not the other beings that inhabit this planet. Animals and plants will go on with or without our presence; I bet they'd be happier without it.

As for drilling in Alaska, who do you all think will reap the financial consequences of that, and who do you think will control it? Opening up the area for drilling will only serve to further line the pockets of a group of people who already make enough money to buy and sell the lot of us several times over. The fact is, the right wing conservatives of this country DO NOT CARE about you, me, or anyone. They are self-serving, and short-sighted.
And just because caribou are walking around the Alaskan pipeline doesn't make it any safer than a brown bear wandering into your local neighborhood. You're encroaching on their territory, buddy, NOT the other way around.

This is silly. In no way will drilling in Alaska help this problem. The only reason this is an option is because our government doesn't give a hell about alternative forms of energy. They say they care, but as a researcher I can tell you that funding for these types of research hasn't gone up but it has actually gone down if you factor in inflation. Our government has been run by oil barons for too long. At best there is approximately 30-50 years of oil left on this planet. That is total oil, not accessible oil. One of the major problems is that a majority of it is inaccessible. Hypothetically, Why drill down several hundereds of feet to have maybe 100gallons of oil. It just isn't cost effective. We have passed the peak oil so therefore it will be more and more expensive. Remember how at the last election Bush said he was gonna keep the Average gallon of gas below 3.00 dollars. And sure enough, right before the election it suddenly dropped below 3 dollars.
That wasn't because of oil costs but due to a form of stimulus put out by the government. Now we are gonna see 4 dollars per gallon by the end of the year. Because of the movement pass "Peak Oil" we will witness a common trend where Availability dictates Price. This doesn't mean that we will see an increase in cost of 1 dollar per/3 years but we will begin to see a logarithmic growth in cost every year. Which means by the end of the decade we may be seeing above 10 dollars per gallon.
We need to not waste the oil reserves. If we are so inclined to drilling in Alaska we first need to change the mentality of the consumers so this precious commodity isn't wasted. We should also note our dependency on plastics. Our oil is needed to make these as well. Our entire medical establishment and our electrical infrastructure is very dependent on Sterilized plastics and insulators. I think these are far more important than the desire of an individual to have the freedom to get in the car to drive a block to a drive-thru restaurant for a cheeseburger and fries.
I personally think the government will sit on a majority of the oil in alaska for a while. The reason being, He who has oil has power. If Alaskan oil is the last oil on the planet then the US will be able to ensure its survival both in the form of finance and as a global "Superpower" in a Post-Oil society. Also, it would be a lot easier to take over a country if you could use machines and rockets.

I'd rather take the money being spent on this and spend it on renewable energy sources. But don't get me started...

The principles of Supply & Demand should be recognized in this debate. Regardless of how many years or how many barrels of Oil can be extracted from the ANWAR area, the fact that America is willing to drill in previously protected areas will assist in brining the price of Oil down, and reduce our dependencies on Countries outside of North America. I sometimes get the impression that this issue is driven by political perception and on whether or not you hate Republicans? There are good points being presented from both sides but the pros seem to outweigh the cons. And as far as "alternative forms of energy"...We already have enegry sources that are not nearly as implemented as they could be (Wind, Solar & Nuclear). This debate is as mind numbing as Global Warming. Nothing can be accomplished if we continue to bring so much negative emotion into the equation. I sometimes feel that if I support such plans as drilling in Anwar, that I will automatically be accused of not respecting the Earth.

Read your comments and came to conclusion that most of them are stupid. Someone thinking that we will get away from petrolium is stupid. Everything around you including your keyboard is made from oil. Don't want drilling, DON'T buy gas your anything made from petrolium! And please do not complain about the gas prices! AND BE WILLING TO PAY THE PRICE FOR BEING STUPID!

Had the liberals approved drilling for oil seven years ago when our stupid president first proposed it, it wouldn't be long now before we had cheaper oil provided we didn't export it to the Chinese. some of their arguements then were not valid and they're not valid now. Sure it would have been ten years before we saw the benifits...... it's almost been ten years now and soon we would have been reaping the benifits!! Poluting the Alaskan frontier ?? We're a mechanized society, machines require oil. Had we started drilling then we could be looking for alternatives to petroleum. Animals would have been displaced ?? TUFF, the oil is there and we're here. We need to get it. If you don't want to retrive the oil available to us, then don't complain about high oil costs.

Well, I think if we could set aside the enviromentalists and the 25,000 polar bears, we could agree to drilling in Alaska. I mean, yes, the world has different climates. Come on, you pick this year out of all the six million other ones. The world changes seasins, which means its going to change climate types. Do the polar bears even need to be protected by the U.S.? I dont think so, of course i think that we should keep them around because they are useful. But if we can be smart about drilling in Alaska, and not having oil spills, they can still be alive. Do you really want to keep paying four dollars a gallon for family time on the road, getting to children's sports. Im a child and i sure dont. Yes i know we could do a littl bit more walking, but the Alaskans dont need to use cars..they can use dogs

Well, I think if we could set aside the enviromentalists and the 25,000 polar bears, we could agree to drilling in Alaska. I mean, yes, the world has different climates. Come on, you pick this year out of all the six million other ones. The world changes seasins, which means its going to change climate types. Do the polar bears even need to be protected by the U.S.? I dont think so, of course i think that we should keep them around because they are useful. But if we can be smart about drilling in Alaska, and not having oil spills, they can still be alive. Do you really want to keep paying four dollars a gallon for family time on the road, getting to children's sports. Im a child and i sure dont. Yes i know we could do a littl bit more walking, but the Alaskans dont need to use cars..they can use dogs

Anatoliy, Quite possibly the dumbest comment i have read on these blogs. It is that mentality that destroys our lives and prevents change.
And Rick, don't complain about the liberals and the oil drilling that didn't happen a decade ago. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that we would be further along into development of alternative forms of energy if they would have opened up Alaska to drilling. That is stupid. Technology is driven by a visible problem or issue as well as a bit of fortuity. By that account you are basically saying that we aren't looking for alternative forms because we know we can fall back on the Alaskan oil. Lastly, any person writing on this blog that thinks their lives are more important than those of other creatures on this planet need to seriously consider reading a biology book or at least look up the definition of an Ecosystem. All life is interconnected, they depend on us as much as we depend on them.

Why do they just want to open up Alaska ANWR to drilling? Why dont we drill offshore Florida and other east coast areas that are closed to oil exploration? Why are not these areas as well as the coast of California, Oregon and Washington in the debate? It will be " not in my back yard".
Lets save our coastal areas for future generations and learn to use less.

The U.S. should be open to drilling for any and all oil and natural gas in this country, which includes Alaska, immediately. We should NEVER be dependent on ANY country FOR ANYTHING.

No, by the time they manage to get it out of the ground and destroy the environment in Alaska it won't have made a dent in the cost of gasoline. And exactly how long would that oil last and would it prevent this country from using foreign oil? Probably not. So then with all of the intelligence in the world why not start or continue working on other means of energy. The use of Fossil fuels is one of the reasons for global warming.

If oil is available within the US, be it in Alaska or elsewhere, we should've been drilling for it years ago. We have been & continue to enslave our society to OPEC & foreign producers of oil, most of which seek our destruction. Everyone likes to jump on their soap boxes about losing jobs to foreign countries for products that can be made, in most cases, better in the US but those same folks will pitch a fit when the mention of drilling for oil in the US is brought up. Those that like to say this would just be a band aid & that we need to break free from our dependence on oil are possibly correct in that it would only be a band aid but we are decades if not more from breaking that dependence so why not use the "band aid" since it's needed. If you cut off a finger are you not going to bandage it up before you go to the doctor’s office to have it sewn up?

IF YOU NEED THE CODE ENTERED, WHY DO YOU MAKE ITSO HARD TO READ? WHAT IS THE SENSE OF SAYING ENTER THE CODE - WHICH ANYONE SITTING HERE CAN DO BECAUSE ITS DISPLAYED - BUT MAKE IT SO DIFFCULT THAT ITS OFTEN IMPOSSIBLE.

THIS MAKES THE SAME SENSE AS WATCHING OUR ECONOMYU GO DOWN THE DRAIN FROM INSANE OIL PRICES AND DECIDING NOT TO DRILL WHERE WE HAVE OIL SO WE CAN SEND OUR MONEY TO COUNTRIES THAT WILL DRILL WHEVEVER THEY FIND OIL.

28,500 SQUARE MILES OF PRISTINE WILDERNESS WHICH IS VISITED BY LESS THAN 1,000 PEOPLE A YEAR OUT OF 310 million.

MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

If these kooks were around when this country was founded, they would ahve sent the pilgrims home so the pristine landscape of America could remain unfettered.

Wise up jackasses. Five hundred billion is going to become six hundred billion and then seven hundred billion. OIL IS IN SHORT SUPPLY. WE NEED TO DRILL FOR IT WHERE WE HAVE IT BEFORE THIS COUNTRY'S ECONOMY IS RUINED. THERE ARE NO SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND THERE WON'T BE FOR YEARS.

THE PROBLEM HERE IS TOMORROW MORNING!!!!

okay so what no one, or very few anyway, seem to get is that alternative energy sources and "renewable" energy sources are for the future and i mean wayyyy future. power sources such and wind, solar and water produce a vary small percentage of energy because they are so inefficient. it would take windmills covering every square inch of connecticut to power new york city alone. now is it just me or is that neither cost,time or power efficient. i hear people saying " it wouldn't bring gas prices down or at least not very much" okay well even if that is true we need to get away from foreign oil! hello people, don't you get it even if it doesn't bring prices down we'd be funding our own economy, Paying AMERICAN employees. there are ways of drilling oil that arent' so destructive. oh and the hype about global warming is bs, oh sure there is such a thing but there is also global cooling which is a natural earth process set off by the sun. all these liberal bogies want to scare us with the earth getting warmer and that we're all gona die but did you know the anarctic is actually getting colder funny isn't it. but back to the oil, yes i do admit we need more refineries before we can even start drilling oil but we still need to do both. as for better conservation and what not yes we need that too but do you not know there are people who cannot afford to buy expensive efficient cars. they have what they have and that's that. so you talk about americans being selfish and greedy well you're an american and probably not much better yourself. oh the animals*sarcastic whiny tone* who cares? especially since polar bears are not endangered and the drilling can be done in such a way as to not affect the environment so drastically. i know i care more about my self and my fellow humans and being able to drive my car. there are people who have to drive to work and the wages aren't raised to acommodate gas prices. like here in montana the nearest walmart or big grocery store is 60 miles away. you need a new pair of work pants, you gotta go to billing well at least where i'm at. so don't give me "animals wah" "we're destroying the earth" because a lot of us in my are are ranchers who have big trucks because they need them and most run on diesel and they are paying money out the a** to go to billing or even to come into town. oh and i hope by the time it's 50 or 100 years or so from now we're technologically advanced enough that we don't need oil anymore so we're not using up future generations resources. oh and i have a solution for you people who think we shouldn't drill. well kill off about 4 billion people and we won't have to because these developing nations who have 1 billion each and they all want cars that need oil to run. there your solution. then you can save your animals.

The rising gas/oil prices will surely drive more people to reconsider where they work. I look at my 30-mile each way commute, and if prices go up much more, then working closer to home at even a lower wage would save me money.

And what would be wrong with that? People(who can)working close to home means they are "investing" in the local (city) ecomomy, the local schools and perhaps the local farmer's markets. People would be driving less or perhaps even walking/biking to work (where possible), reducing demand for foreighn oil (and food) even more.

I say raise the price another $4 a gallon, Exxon. See how many consumers you will have for your product then. And thank you for helping to promote local investment.

I find it interesting that this debate seems to be (like most political disagreements these days) an argument against Republicans or liberals.
When did my declaration of political party mean I had to become a clueless tree-hugger or a thoughtless money-hungry tyrant? Do you think it is possible that there are left-wingers who 'DO NOT CARE about you, me, or anyone. They are self-serving, and short-sighted'? Do you think there are nice right-wingers out there just as much as left-wingers?

I get frustrated that just because the hot-buttons of my political views fall under one party that means I must believe in all the views of that party. If I don't support the war in Iraq does that mean I must also be against drilling in Alaska? If I don't support homosexual marriage then I must obviously be a careless right-winger who wants to mutilate the Alaskan wilderness as much as possible... sheesh.

Try to have a political discussion that doesn't generalize a person to Democrat or Republican. Look at the argument and try to understand why one person believes the way they do, rather than lumping them into a category that you immediately determine to be evil for whatever reason.

As for the Alaskan drilling, I am in favor of it. I would like to have alternative energy, but know that we are years away from it and need to do something in the interim that puts more money in American pockets than the pockets of those who want every last one of us dead. Our enemies don't care what your views on global warming are, they don't care how much you worry about the caribou, and they don't really care if you voted for Bush or someone else - they want you dead regardless of what you believe, just because you are an American. The most ironic part is that we are the primary funding source for their religious war against us.

Drilling in Alaska means that even if we are giving more profits to the evil American oil companies, we are giving less money to foregin countries who want us dead.

I have been required to work more hours to pay for the increased cost of goods (food, medical supplies, etc. all increase because the cost to ship them to the store increases with rising fuel costs) for my family. If I need to work more and see my children less to keep a caribou alive thousands of miles away, I think that is silly. If I need to pay more to get my daughter the medicine she needs each month, just so a polar bear is more comfy, I think that is idiocy.

If it comes to an animal thousands of miles away or one of my children... the choice is obvious. Until the alternative sources are affordable to the rest of us (it would cost us $48,000+ for wind power, $32,000+ for basic solar, $35,000+ for an adequate hybrid vehicle, etc.), the choice will stay the same.

And with all those beliefs, I'm not a Republican!