...To Drill or Not to Drill HUM/114 November 26, 2010 Dr. To Drill or Not to Drill The topic “to drill or not to drill” is a very sensitive one and to be honest, one where my position is almost neutral, but if I must choose a standpoint, I think it is best not to drill. Even though there are some economic benefits as written by Edward Walsh “In a report ordered by Congress to assess the effects of drilling since the discovery of huge oil reserves in Prudhoe Bay in 1968, a committee of the Academies' National Research Council said oil production has transformed life on the North Slope, spurring an economic boom that is viewed by most residents as positive” (Walsh, 2003, Nation, A02). The harm is much greater. My view is assessed through my beliefs, and I do not think that the benefits outweigh the consequences. I believe that if there is a mean to resolve and reach a solution without loss of life, or significant environmental impact; that is the best approach to follow. Relying on foreign oil comes at a substantial price to the country, but it is a price that the men and women which volunteer are aware of. Drilling at home has the potential to impact the lives of many who do not have say on whether it harms them or not. As written in Chris Sorenson’s article about the April 20, 2010 explosion above an off-shore oil rig, 11 workers died, and it cost The United States a $350-million drill rig to sink...
Words: 419 - Pages: 2
...To Drill or not to Drill Darryl Brown Hum 114 Critical Thinking and Creative Problem Solving February 28, 2013 Barbara Johnson To Drill or not to Drill The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge consists of approximately nineteen million acres. If one would think that this area is larger than many of our states today. To name a few; New Hampshire, Vermont, Maryland, Connecticut, West Virginia and the likes of. The north edge itself is comprised of one and a half million acres and bordered by the Beaufort Sea, on the east with Canada and the west by the Canning River. Congress has considered drilling in this area repeatedly but due to the lack of sufficient votes to overcome a filibuster by proponents of the bill they have yet to pass such a bill. This area has the potential to produce over 3 million barrels of oil with the possibility of even greater number of barrels. Some estimates have gone as high as 9.7 million barrels of oil that could be recovered. Currently drilling in the Alaska area has produced just shy of 20 billion barrels since drilling began in 1977. Many still think that we shouldn’t drill but I for one think that the rewards outweigh the limited risk involved. Furthermore the recent technological developments make drilling in isolated areas much safer that previously determined. Inspire of some of the more high profile cases it is my belief that the process has only been made safer by the outcome of these disasters, despite opponents fears. Yes, some...
Words: 343 - Pages: 2
...To Drill or Not to Drill? HUM 111 Week 2 Assignment One of the hottest topics from the 2008 Presidential election was to drill or not to drill. It was one of the main talking points of former Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, who lobbied for drilling in the North Country. Governor Palin faced tremendous opposition my environmentalists and humanitarian organizations, as well as financial analysts who disputed the positive impact on the economy. The main arguments were the concern for environmental impact - both locally in Alaska and globally - and cost. The Royal Dutch Shell oil company has invested billions of dollars in lobbying for drilling rights, with the sole purpose of dominating the market. Although there are thousands of jobs generated by the oil companies willing to invest in drilling in such harsh conditions, safety, environmental impact on the wildlife, and the impact on local inhabitants is a continuing concern. “The stakes are huge--for Shell, for the environment, for the oil industry, and for the oil-addicted U.S. economy. The fact is, oil demand is soaring. Worldwide oil consumption is now running at 89 million barrels a day, according to the International Energy Agency. Not only is that up 6% from the lows of the recession--a big increase given tight supplies--but it's also above the pre-recession peak of 87 million barrels notched in 2008.” (Birger, 2012) There is also major concern about oil spills, especially since the 2010 BP Deepwater...
Words: 605 - Pages: 3
...To Drill or Not to Drill Barbara Jones HUM/114 February 21, 2013 Krieger, Brian To Drill or Not to Drill To state a position on something one should know what one is talking about, which at this time ample information is not known, so the verdict is still out. Both sides have benefits and pitfalls, which makes one want to go one way or the other depending on what is being read at any given time. One of the biggest issues is the cost. Going Green, Pricewise? Gas is $4.69 a gallon at the Kangaroo down the street. In 2001 it took $28., give or take a few cents, to fill up an Oldsmobile Silhouette Van, Yesterday it took over $92. to fill the same van. That is a huge jump in 12 years, especially since raises did not jump along with it. Going green is to be even more costly from all the articles that was read, though none said exactly what the difference in price would be. It does not sound like going green is the way to get prices down. Here is a thought to think about; is going green going to be the new segregation? Those that can afford to use it and those that cannot. Drilling deeper Drilling in deeper waters may not be the solution either. When oil spills happen it does not just affect oil prices, but it can take jobs away as well. Look at how many fishermen were put out of work had after the last oil spill. Then there is the toil it takes on Mother Nature, all the wild life that is killed, maybe even some species wiped completely out, after all there...
Words: 514 - Pages: 3
...To Drill or Not to Drill HUM/111 Many debates are centered on energy. Some people think that we should decrease our dependency on oil and invest in alternative energy, other people believe that we do not need a new power source; we should be using our own oil and not that of foreign countries. I am not on one side or the other necessarily. I think that we should decrease our dependency on foreign oil. I also think that we should look into alternatives to oil. Many people choose one side or the other based on political bias. Many people do not want change, they believe that oil has worked or for so long why change now. Political roles and views play a large part in deciding about energy sources. Republicans and democrats are the two main parties with different views. “Republicans overwhelmingly push for more oil drilling. Democrats back conservation and new energy sources such as wind and solar power” (Republicans, Democrats at odds on energy issues, 2012). Neither side is right or wrong; there is common ground on most issues. People are blinded by the political parties they fall into the trap of stereotypes. Democrats are typically viewed as tree huggers. They do not want the land destroyed to drill for our own oil. Republicans are generally viewed as people who want nothing else but to drill for our own oil, at any cost. People are blinded by political stereotypes and also use the face saving tactic to avoid confrontation or to avoid taking responsibility...
Words: 557 - Pages: 3
...To Drill or Not to Drill HUM/114 March 25, 2014 Teresa Konigsburg The understanding that America needs to drill for oil here domestically is the general consensus for every American, if you don’t see it this way then you may want relocate elsewhere. But this may not be any easy task for us to accomplish. First off, there are those that oppose the drilling not on the grounds of not wanting to see America get off of foreign oil but those that see us getting off because we should be looking alternative ways for energy. The term going green is really big thing these days; solar power, biofuel and wind should be the next step in dependable and safe ways of obtaining energy independence. Another thing we have to take into consideration is that, the oil industry employees a lot of people, what are we going to do with those people when oil isn’t the main source of energy anymore. Where do these people find work when the major oil companies have cut production because the need is low and they have to start laying these people off? This is the question that we have to ask ourselves because there are no answers for that part of the equation as of yet. Do you start training these men and woman how to set up solar panel and have to store that energy that is come from the panels, where does the money come from for this? Same can be said about the wind and biofuel, where does the funding coming from to get these people trained up on this. Simply put, we have not set a clear path...
Words: 370 - Pages: 2
...To Drill or Not to Drill? That Is the Question Kay Bey Hum 114 March 6 2011 Mz Bacco To Drill or Not to Drill? That Is the Question Many people are debating how to best meet energy needs in the United States. Some argue that the country must decrease its dependence on oil and invest in alternative sources of energy, such as wind and solar power. Others argue that changing to new power sources is unnecessary and expensive. They state that the United States should search for oil in Alaska, the Gulf Coast, and other areas within the country that are currently not being explored. I believe that the United States should invest money into alternate fueling sources. Off shore drilling at this point is environmentally unsafe. Our environment is changing due to global warming, and off shore drilling makes this worse. I feel very strongly about greedy oil companies destroying the planet in pursuit of more oil at the cost of our endangered species and the health of the American people. Oil companies already hold 5,500 offshore leases that are not being used. I do not know why they need to occupy more space, when they can use what the government has allowed them to use. Now, I do agree changing to solar and wind powered fuel sources will require research and additional funding, however those fuel sources are more eco friendly and in the long run may leave the world in a better position. I must admit, sometimes I fall in to a mindset that is commonly known as stereotyping. As...
Words: 611 - Pages: 3
...To Drill or Not To Drill Dontavies Newton HUM/114 CRITICAL THINKING AND CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING 2/7/11 Professor Janet Wiedman Drilling for oil is not worth the risk. Oil companies refuse to pay attention to the harm they cause to the surrounding environment. The reason put forth by the oil companies are as follows people have cars they need to be filled with gas; we give people warnings about the harmful effects of the surrounding drilling areas, and it too expensive to change from oil to other clean resources. The oil companies know the harm they cause to the people in the surrounding area. The diseases that come from drilling on land are unsafe drinking water, cancer, and tumors. British Petroleum (BP) is one of the first oil companies that are directly evolved in causing national disaster. The inhabitants of the coast do not want off shore drilling. Many businesses took a deep plunge in revenue because of the oil spill. One oil company mistake cost the state of Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana close to a billion dollars. BP should have known that do to the deepness and pressure of the drill no man can get any near the problem if something were to happen. (Margolis pg. 1) Drilling the earth for fossil fuel is one of worst things people can do the earth. Oil companies only have one thought and that thought is about money. Money is the main power of the oil industry. The oil companies do not care about people lives, animal safety, and environmental procedures...
Words: 496 - Pages: 2
...To Drill or Not to Drill? Many people are debating how to best meet energy needs in the United States. Some argue that the country must decrease its dependence on oil and invest in alternative sources of energy. The United States uses tons of oil daily which tends to be very expensive. Many people believe to best meet energy needs would be to find alternative sources , such as wind, and solar power. The simple fact is, renewable and alternative energy should be a major investment for everyone. Energy conservation can result in increased financial capital, environmental quality, national security, personal security, and comfort. Individuals and organizations choose to conserve energy to reduce energy costs and promote economic security. However, industrial and commercials users can increase energy use efficiency. Repeated use of alternative sources would help the United States to gradually clean up pollution and also save millions of dollars in the future. Renewable sources of energy vary widely in their cost-effectiveness and in their availability across the United States. Their cost comes in collecting, harnessing, and transporting the energy so that it can do useful work. The price of electricity will increase which will cause citizens to spend thousands of dollars on electricity because of the rising cost of oil. Also the oil supply is decreasing daily and eventually that source will be extinct so why not start with alternative sources. Some argue that alternative...
Words: 383 - Pages: 2
...Drill or not to Drill There are many people who are debating against oil drilling in the world. Some of them are discussing how to meet the best energy needs in the United States. Several people argue about how the country should decrease the dependence on oil and how it's invested in several sources of energy. The United States seems to be using huge amounts of oil on a daily basis and can be very expensive. I believe in order to meet energy needs we have to find another kind of source such as wind or solar power. I believe that the major can be an alternative and renewable energy that people should have an invest ment in. Energy conversation might be a result for increasing environmental quality, financial capital, comfort and personal security. Organizations and individual people should choose save and reduce energy costs and promote economic security. I think that the commercial and industrial users should be able to increase energy use of performance. I beliave that if the United States would repeat the alternative sources it should help clean up the pollution. It would also save a lot of money in the near future. In order to have the availability in the United States they need to renew the sources of energy to get better grades that are cost effectiveness. People can start doing their work if the cost comes from harnessing, transporting and collecting the costs. If people would spend a lot of money on electricity it would because of the rising of the...
Words: 417 - Pages: 2
...To drill or Not to Drill Brett Bartlett HUM/114 November 28, 2012 Brian Townsley The United States uses about 18 million barrels of oil per day and most of that oil is imported from other countries. I believe that we can drastically reduce that number by looking into using renewable sources of energy such as solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro energy. Using this type of energy reduces the amount of pollution in the air and will always be there for us to use. Fossil fuels are a perishable item and resources will soon run out one day. What will we do then? The best way to avoid this situation would be to start investing money and research into these renewable sources of energy now while we have the time. I can understand some of the arguments on the other side of the matter with the reliability of renewable energy not being there. The whole world runs on fossil fuels and has been doing so for more than a hundred years. The geographical location makes a big impact on how efficient this renewable energy will be. For example in a climate that is mostly over cast and rainy solar panels have trouble absorbing the suns energy. With hydro energy you have to be near a large body of water. Wind energy needs a large open place to put up the large number of wind mills needed to create a sufficient amount of energy and it has to have constant wind. Although renewable energy can be cost effective in the long run it is expensive for the initial start up. This usually deters people from...
Words: 453 - Pages: 2
...Critical and Creative Thinking To Drill or Not To Drill Mary Crook 9/15/13 The issue is that there are many people who think that the carbon economy will always exist. They would like to see the United States use the abundant coal reserve and turn that into liquid fuel to power cars, trucks, and planes. Those opposed to renewable energy would like to see the United States continue to drill off the Gulf Coast, Alaska, and other areas in our country. On the other hand, you have those who think that creating more power by solar panels and wind turbines is the way to go. Yes, it may be expensive, but I believe that it will free America from depending on foreign oil and add more jobs. “According to some estimates, the world will run out of coal sometime in the twenty-third or twenty-fourth century. These same estimates predict that the world will run out of natural gas and oil during the twenty-first century”. (GALE|EJ3010573101) I have not given too much thought about renewable energy. I will have no choice but to purchase what is available. If oil will not be available for whatever reason, then I will have to purchase the alternative. But I think I would have to take the side of those in favor of promoting renewable energy. “Solar and other renewable energy sources will not only help create a more stable energy supply that will never run out, but can also reduce pollution and environmental degradation, reduce the need to import oil and other fossil fuels from foreign countries...
Words: 379 - Pages: 2
...To Drill or Not To Drill William D. Colbert III HUM/114 September 9th, 2013 Amanda Freeman There is an ever increasing demand to meet fuel requirements within the United States. High oil and gasoline prices make this demand a costly one. With the future availability of these finite resources in question, it is imperative that alternative energy sources be found immediately. At present, fossil and nuclear fuels provide over 80% of the world’s energy. By utilizing alternative, renewable forms of energy could considerably reducing the United States’ financial burdens associated with dependency on foreign oil. In addition, alternative sources such as geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, and wind energy can drastically reduce carbon dioxide emissions produced by fossil fuels. (M. S. Dresselhaus & I. L. Thomas (2001, Winter). The reduction of drilling for and process fossil fuels will lessen the long-lasting environmental hazards like that experienced during the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill of 2010, which saw the discharge of over 185,000,000 gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. (Algarin, Matt. 2011) There is much skepticism concerning the transition to alternative energy sources. Many questions regarding the reliability of new forms of energy lead one think if the exploration of new sources of energy are worth the trouble. But, it is here where critical thinking must...
Words: 646 - Pages: 3
...Jj This is a hard choice to make because at the same time while we are drilling we are getting oil that is needed to other purposes but I do agree that we need to go green no matter what. I believe we need to look at both sides of the situation and find a solution that will help both parties out. I do agree that drilling oil is the way to go but we need to find alternative ways on drilling without harming the ozone layer and earth. By thinking of the fall backs of going green in drilling oil, we might lose the number of employments there currently are, domestic production and ever-increasing imports. By continuing to drill we are either saving money from importing oil from other countries. We need to start thinking about the future and how it would affect us if we don’t go green. I do believe in solar power because that would promise a better recovery for America and also grant us more jobs. For example talking about solar energy, I have seen a movie where its in the future and how it would look. I don’t think I could adapt to that type of atmosphere because people aren’t allowed to go outside because of the hot temperatures. This is likely to happen if we continue to damage the ozone layer and continue damaging the earths surface that protects us. As we can se and heard in news, its getting hotter and this is a cause of all the damage that we have done. What’s to happen later on, are we going to damage ourselves because...
Words: 275 - Pages: 2
...One if the hottest debates right now is that of clean energy, or being able to meet the demands of renewable energy. Some say that we as a nation need to invest more money into energy sources like solar energy and wind energy. On the flip side, those in support of our current energy plan, oil, state that all we need to do is drill in places that we have not already, in places like in Alaska and in international waters. Both arguments are valid argument, but with our country already in a monetary crisis, one must think which would save us the most right now, versus in the long run. As of July 2012, the United States has an overall debt of 15.8 trillion dollars, in 2010 alone the federal government spent 2.7 million dollars (a new addition to the budget), in the advancement of wind energy and solar energy. Wind energy and solar energy are by far the energy of the future, just not the future right now. The biggest thing we have to focus on as a nation is to decrease that debt to zero. Something that has already been in the budget and we as a nation have been spending money on for years is our current method of energy, oil. There are several prospects to increasing the amount of oil. One is to start drilling again in Alaska, while the other is to start drilling off the Gulf coast and into international waters. Unfortunately with drilling in general you run the risks of it interfering with the wildlife. Drilling underwater is known to interfere with whales, dolphins, and other sea...
Words: 476 - Pages: 2
