TRAVEL.com ® Travel Forums - View Single Post

5th May 2008, 04:18 PM

Ruben wrote:
> On Mon, 05 May 2008 02:15:32 -0400, Bolwerk wrote:
>
>> If the feds are going to spend money on
>> transportation projects, at least put them where there are people. $300
>> million is a good LRT system for a city that might need one. There's
>> no point in encouraging development in rural Alaska.
>
> We could use the oil, not to mention to help in saving the environment up
> there. Hnestly, I have no idea the direct affect of Alaksa on NY, but I'm
> sure we make money of Alaskan progress somehow. Exxon does own a building
> here.

Who said anything about oil? Getting oil out of Alaska *at a faster
rate* is a matter of drilling for more. I don't know how feasible that is.

What is feasible, maybe, is drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve,
where there could be more oil. It might make a few people rich, but
everything I've read seems to suggest that it won't have any meaningful
effect on supply.

5th May 2008, 04:18 PM	#20 (permalink)
Bolwerk Guest Posts: n/a Classified Rating: % ()	Transit fares and high gas prices Ruben wrote: > On Mon, 05 May 2008 02:15:32 -0400, Bolwerk wrote: > >> If the feds are going to spend money on >> transportation projects, at least put them where there are people. $300 >> million is a good LRT system for a city that might need one. There's >> no point in encouraging development in rural Alaska. > > We could use the oil, not to mention to help in saving the environment up > there. Hnestly, I have no idea the direct affect of Alaksa on NY, but I'm > sure we make money of Alaskan progress somehow. Exxon does own a building > here. Who said anything about oil? Getting oil out of Alaska at a faster rate is a matter of drilling for more. I don't know how feasible that is. What is feasible, maybe, is drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, where there could be more oil. It might make a few people rich, but everything I've read seems to suggest that it won't have any meaningful effect on supply.