My Twitter Feed

September 27, 2021

Headlines:

Oyster Roundup!

oysters2

Thick and fast, they came at last, and more and more and more! – Lewis Carroll

Be There for Health Care

I’ve had a few people ask me where Mark Begich stands on including a public option in the new healthcare plan.  The answer is….I’m not sure.  But you have an opportunity to raise your voice with the more than 75% of Americans who want a public option.  Senator Begich will have a Health Care Reform Town Hall Meeting tomorrow, Saturday, June 20, from 10:30 to noon at the Willa Marston Theatre in the Loussac Library. Grassroots outcry for a public option is happening across the country.  This is the time to make it happen, and speak your mind to one of the decision makers.

Got Gas?

With all the hubbub about the gas line, reminders come from all directions that we’ve got a long way to go before there’s an actual pipe with actual gas actually flowing through it.  Complications with demand, tax rate, red tape, Canadian tribal lands, and abundance of resources discovered in more convenient places are popping up like mushrooms.

CALGARY, Alberta, June 17 (Reuters) – Billionaire oil investor T. Boone Pickens said on Wednesday he doubts a $26 billion natural gas pipeline from Alaska will be built any time soon as abundant new shale gas supplies reduce the need for the expensive project.

Pickens, who is promoting a plan to boost investment in wind power and natural gas to cut U.S. oil imports, said at a Calgary appearance that he sees little need for Alaskan gas given massive shale gas discoveries in the Barnett shale play in Texas and elsewhere.

They Walk Among Us

That’s right…the infamous Pete Kott and Vic Kohring are free men, at least for now.  The big “do over” is on, and previously convicted corrupt bastards Kott and Kohring have been sprung from prison, and are back in Alaska.  No word yet what’s to follow, or whether the ex-lawmakers will be retried.

Here’s what Kott’s attorney had to say about the Bush Department of Justice that colossally botched the prosecution, not only in the case of Ted Stevesn, but also here.

“It is serious and disturbing that the government — the party that was claiming to attack public corruption — was the party that actually withheld these stacks of documents from the defense and the public,” said Sheryl Gordon McCloud, an attorney for Kott.

Lawyers representing other targets of the five-year-long Alaska corruption probe known as “Operation Polar Pen” report receiving hundreds of pages of materials from newly installed prosecutors in recent days.

Operation “Polar Pen?”  Hadn’t heard that one before.  Kinda funny, actually.

Murkowski Says ‘Yes We Can’

Take the stimulus money, that is…Alaska’s Senior Senator has piped up regarding that elusive $29 million.  She’s tried to be diplomatic about Palin, but I’m sure that challenge grows daily.  Hitching to the Palin wagon is a teeth-rattling, kidney-busting ride.  Looks like she’s getting closer to jumping off.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, however, said despite the objections from Palin, Alaska could use the funds effectively, the Platts news service reports.

“I understand the governor’s issues,” said Murkowski. “But as it was relayed and conveyed, the concerns that she had in terms of strings attached, perhaps there is a way around them.”

Murkowski, speaking on the sidelines of a U.S. energy forum, said the funds could be “well spent” in the Alaskan effort to reduce state energy costs.

And speaking of Lisa Murkowski, she apparently had a good meeting with Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor.  Both women shared a footstool to prop up injured limbs – Murkowski’s left leg from a skiing accident, and Sotomayor’s right ankle.

Climate Change Tour

Sounds like Mark Begich will be leading a Senatorial field trip to Alaska. 

“Since the day I arrived in the Senate, my colleagues have been suggesting a trip to Greenland to witness climate change first-hand,” said Senator Mark Begich.  “I keep reminding them that Alaska is ground-zero for the impacts of global warming so I’m pleased many are agreeing to visit our state,” Sen. Begich said. “Although our state is huge and senators’ time limited, I’m confident their visit will be an eye-opener and help shape national legislation on this vital issue.”

We don’t know who’s coming when the tour happens this August, but it should be interesting.  Hopefully it will give the Senator an opportunity to work his wiles and network about other issues critical to Alaska.

Comments

comments

Comments
84 Responses to “Oyster Roundup!”
  1. jammer5 says:

    CO almost native,
    True to a certain extent. I know there has been an ongoing feud between Colorado and Kansas over water rights, with Kansas winning the last round. But that was over river water. The aquifer extends under six states, and, according to geologists who have studied the situation, it would take two thousand years, with no water pumped out, to bring the aquifer back to historic levels.

    T. Boone’s objective is to own as much of the water rights to the aquifer as possible. The Kansas government wants to buy the water rights from as many Western farmers as it can. My fear is they will sell those rights to T Boone if the price is right. My opinion is the water is way too valuable to be playing games with. Once gone, it’s gone. We’re now wasting it on corn for methanol, and will be wasting more on the coal-fired energy plants approved for Holcomb, Ks, of which Colorado will be getting the bulk of the energy produced. Believe me, it’s got plenty of Kansans up in arms.

  2. Krubozumo Nyankoye says:

    Apologies to all mudflatters, the excess amount of widgets added to the site prevent me from posting anything of subtance in reply to previous messages.

  3. rant n' raven says:

    Kohring and Kott need to be remembered not as some heros returning back to Alaska, but as enemies of the people in this state, willing to take bribes to steal from them by reducing the taxes on the obscenely profitable oil industry here. There are others in high places as well. Our representatives are supposed to represent the people, not the corporates, be it oil, or healthcare…and need to be reminded BY the people, constantly. Whenever I made comment on anything with Kohring, he was only interested in making sure the ‘big boys’ got what they wanted first.

  4. clydedog says:

    deist Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 9:02 PM
    On healthcare:

    My mom was born in Alaska in 1925. She can’t find a doctor in Southcentral Alaska who’d agree to take a medicare patient.

    Anyone know a doctor?

    Why do we hang our old Alaskans out to dry?
    ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    Why do you think the AMA is against a single payer system. I worked in a hospital and doctors avoid Medicare and medical patients all the time. They would choose another patient first for surgery and make the other wait until the next shift. The big money doctors are just another corporation. Single payer does not mean single provider. You just have to work within the system.

  5. austintx says:

    79 LiladyNY Says:
    June 20th, 2009 at 4:04 AM
    67 DrChill Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 7:30 PM
    Heard on Letterman-

    Gay Pride week is coming up here in NYC. I love it. Where else can you see 300 gay guys dressed like Sarah Palin?

    Oh snap!
    **************************************************
    Oh Boy !! The best would be if Letterman did a “Man in the Street” segment and filmed the “sarah squad”. I’m laughing just thinking about it……

  6. LiladyNY says:

    67 DrChill Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 7:30 PM
    Heard on Letterman-

    Gay Pride week is coming up here in NYC. I love it. Where else can you see 300 gay guys dressed like Sarah Palin?

    Oh snap!

  7. TBNTJudy says:

    lettersfromeurope Says:
    June 20th, 2009 at 12:34 AM

    So much health can be preserved and problems minimised (and with that the costs) by routine checks. Investing in a healthy nation must be a must for a government!
    ___________________________________________
    Almost a year ago, I had the misfortune of having my business downsized by Bush’s economy. Then, it took me 7 months to find a job, and since it is not in my field, I am considerably underemployed, which means I am, like so many Americans, struggling to make ends meet. I have not had health insurance for approximately 7 years because it is too expensive, and my new employer provides no benefits. I have been putting off basic health exams because I cannot afford them, and I deal with health issues (or not) as they emerge. I have new problems with my eyes that I cannot afford to investigate. This system that we have in this country is vile. We need a single-payer system or at least a public option which will help make health care affordable for all. I watched the video avahome posted, and it just made me ill. These bleeping insurance companies, along with the AMA, are fighting tooth and nail to keep the status quo, and their rescission practices are unconscionable. I have really appreciated the commenters on this and other threads who are trying to get people involved in the health-care debate. There are many of us out here who cannot wait much longer for affordable health care.

  8. On Healthcare : I sit nice and pretty in Europe, Germany. One of the reasons for thinking twice about going to the States – Health Care. I need a doctor here – I go. And we patients are fighting for coverage of alternative therapies and there have been successes on that side too (slowly, slowly).
    I was really shocked months back, when a contributor from the States said he couldn`t afford basic health checks for his baby!! That is unimaginable here. So much health can be preserved and problems minimised (and with that the costs) by routine checks. Investing in a healthy nation must be a must for a government!

  9. seattlefan says:

    Re: the Glacier tour.

    I hope they provide time-line pictures of the glaciers…before and now. I saw the Mendenhall glacier 2 years ago and was struck by by time-line pics of how it looked 50 years before. I actually saw it back in 1978 and was amazed how much it had receded in that time.

    I have watched the glaciers on Mt. Rainier shrink and it is definitely noticeable. I’m sure whomever goes on this trip will be amazed and hopefully alarmed.

  10. “Climate Change Tour–

    the Grand Tour of Alaska is always–

    always come during fishing season
    fly to Bethel on jet
    quick boat ride to nearest Village
    look at boardwalk
    step in mud
    act appalled at honeybucket
    mention how friendly natives are
    back to Bethel for lunch at restricted YKHC boardroom
    fly out on jet
    then get on with the fishing!”

    — if only it weren’t true…

  11. Bretta says:

    Silly Rabbit; Wally Hickel, our governor from a few years ago, of the Alaska Independence Party (TP’s party) had the great idea to haul icebergs from here to California – I don’t recall now why he didn’t get popular support at the time but it may be time to revisit.

    #28, June 19th, 2009 at 2:05 PM, bubbles Says: Alaska has plenty water in the form of ice and snow and rain… Why not put that water in the aquifers of the south west?

  12. Nan says:

    About the subsidence – this isn’t exactly the same, but I think it relates.

    Back in the 60s, the Rocky Flats Nuclear Arsenal was pumping waste water into the ground. When this started, Denver wasn’t considered a risk for earthquakes.

    Within a few years of the water pumping, Denver started having earthquakes occasionally, then more and more often, until someone figured things out and they quit forcing the stuff underground. Gradually, the earthquakes diminished in number & frequency until things were as they had been.

    As I said, it’s not exactly the same thing, but it’s related in that it alters the – a geologist would have the word, but I don’t. It alters the structure of the ground beneath our feet. I imagine there could be subsidence (think about all those sinkholes in Kansas and Nebraska, from all the aquifers “drying up.”)

    just my 2 cents
    Nan

  13. deist says:

    On healthcare:

    My mom was born in Alaska in 1925. She can’t find a doctor in Southcentral Alaska who’d agree to take a medicare patient.

    Anyone know a doctor?

    Why do we hang our old Alaskans out to dry?

  14. M. Bergert says:

    I have not heard anyone mention the subject of ground subsidence from the pumping of oil in Alaska. I know that there has been talk of how villagers are having problems with rising water and having to move to higher ground, but no one that I have heard has mentioned this as a possible consequence from all the pumping. Also in Texas, I know ground subsidence has occured from the pumping of oil, but has anyone mentioned that subsidence being a cause or contributing factor to the mild earthquakes. Maybe they have and I wasn’t paying attention, (not unusal). I also agree that the natural gas could be better used in state, but it seems no one is fighting for that to occur instead of pumping it out of state at a huge cost and gamble. And since the citizens own the gas, I would think it would be at a reasonable cost. But hey, I have been known to have my head up my a**, just ask my wife. After last winter, I would have thought that would have been the number one priority. Someone please educate this moron on the keyboard. Thanks.

  15. mae lewis says:

    @Dr.Chill#67 I hope that they buy their makeup at Bloomingdales, and wear those sexy red platform sandals!

  16. CO almost native says:

    Thank you, Krubozumo Nyankoye-

    Awesome information. Fracturing is a big issue in Colorado, as drilling companies do not want to divulge the chemicals used- and there have been noticeable increases in cancers and other major health issue clustered near drilling sites. This has not been resolved, even in the new drilling regulations; companies do not like environmentalists, ranchers, state officials having a say in approving new leases-

  17. zyggy says:

    67 DrChill Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 7:30 PM
    Heard on Letterman-

    Gay Pride week is coming up here in NYC. I love it. Where else can you see 300 gay guys dressed like Sarah Palin?

    *********************
    Sarah will be so envious they are wearing nicer clothes than her. lol

  18. DrChill says:

    Heard on Letterman-

    Gay Pride week is coming up here in NYC. I love it. Where else can you see 300 gay guys dressed like Sarah Palin?

  19. mpb says:

    Climate Change Tour–

    the Grand Tour of Alaska is always–

    always come during fishing season
    fly to Bethel on jet
    quick boat ride to nearest Village
    look at boardwalk
    step in mud
    act appalled at honeybucket
    mention how friendly natives are
    back to Bethel for lunch at restricted YKHC boardroom
    fly out on jet
    then get on with the fishing!

  20. HistoryGoddess says:

    I third the recommendations of “Cadillac Desert” and “When the Rivers Run Dry.” (Sorry for not using italics.) Last week I finished re-reading CD and appreciated it even more than I had almost a decade ago. I have spent the day reading Susan Strasser’s “Never Done: A History of American Housework.” What continually hit me as I read was how much a respect for resources at a particular point in time and space could be seen in housework. Her chapter “Fetch a Pail of Water” shows historically both the role and respect for water as seen in the home. While the first two books may make it easy to distance ourselves from the blame of wasting water, Strasser tends to bring it literally home. I started reading this in a hotel, but it really made a lot more sense reading it in my own home. Not that I am into housework, but because I could so easily compare what she wrote about to my own experiences.

    And, I must say, there are sure some hella smart Mudpups doing some posting. I was feeling a bit guilty for getting back on the computer, only to read some very educational posts on the very topics I was pondering. Thanks to all for the great resource and trade information!

  21. Krubozumo Nyankoye says:

    Greytdog,

    I am basically opposed to MT mining. It is too destructive and counter environmental responsibility. Clean coal is just a myth. But it needs to be discussed in terms of reality. I would like to write a good essay about it with the appropriate citations but time is a major constraint for me. I will see what I can come up with in a summary fashion.

    the problem child:
    I am afraid such a thing could never happen, after all, she is the foremost expert on energy in the US. I on the other hand am just a geologist with 35 years of experience. And I am not very photogenic.

    austintx

    You are correct of course, if he can sell water that costs him $0.02 per gallon for $0.50 per pint, he will do it.

    There is an underlying theme here that I failed to address in my previous post and that is who “owns” these resources. Some people asked about whether they could get a portion of the leases etc.

    Well, in my opinion, we all own these resources. The Federal and State governments auction off leases to mineral rights and the public is mostly unaware of these events. Once again, this gets into the realm of politics which I am reluctant to discuss because my personal experience is so biased and tends to accuse our elected representatives of being corrupt. Unfortunately, I think that the evidence will bear out that they are in fact corrupt and act not in the interest of their consituents, but of themselves.

    It is up to us, the consituents, to correct this.

    I will check back again for further comments. Thank you for your generous response to my post.

  22. drew from lil ol texas says:

    I’m sitting on top of the barnett shale field down here in Texas and this thing is huge, but’s it’s only a small portion of gas that has been discovered down here in the lower 48 in the past couple of years!

    If her gasline gets built, it won’t be based on supply/demand issues, it will be strictly politics and/or financial incentives.

    Kinda like TransCanada getting 500 Million and now Exxon jumps on board so they can get some of that 500 Million.

    Exxon is a company that just keeps on taking!

  23. avahome says:

    Re: Healthcare…. Please have a look at this video posted on dKos. Watching CEO’s get grilled on denial of coverage is a real trip……

    We need 10 million views of this YouTube by next week.

    Rep. Stupak Questions Witnesses On Rescission Triggers:

    Here is a link to the diary….time is awasting. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/19/744559/-We-need-10-million-views-of-this-YouTube-by-next-week

  24. Greytdog Δ says:

    Krubozumo Nyankoye WOW!. Thanks! That was pretty awesome. What’s your take on mountaintop removal, clean coal, etc??? I’ve cut & pasted your post onto a word doc. just so I can go back and read over & over. Wow.

  25. the problem child says:

    Wouldn’t you love to see a debate between Sarah Palin and Krubozumo Nyankoye?

    Thank you for your real-life expertise!

  26. austintx says:

    57 SK from MN Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 5:41 PM
    Wouldn’t you love to see a debate between T. Boone PIckens and Sarah Palin?
    ******************************************************
    He would have her chasing her tail in 3 minutes…………
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/23/60minutes/main4541322.shtml

  27. austintx says:

    56 Krubozumo Nyankoye –

    Thank you for your insightful post. Now that you pointed out the use of water in injection of shale beds , it looks like T-Boone is going for a “twofer”. Down here , there is talk of him selling water too. sigh….He is one wily guy. Again , thank you for your post.

  28. SK from MN says:

    Wouldn’t you love to see a debate between T. Boone PIckens and Sarah Palin?

  29. Krubozumo Nyankoye says:

    A lot being discussed here some of it connected some not so much, I will try to resist the temptation to deviate from what I actually know something about except to point to possible links and connections.

    Natural gas is a good fuel, not perfect but better than coal, or oil. When it’s burnt it produces water and CO2. It produces minor amounts of other volatiles but by comparsion to other fossil fuels it is clean. The CO2 is problematic,
    we need to reduce *release of CO2* into the atmosphere. The water we can use.

    Ground water aquifers are nearly ubiquitous. That is there is reasonably pure, often potable water underground nearly everywhere. It is not always possible to get it out in any significant quantity. It is not always pure enough to use as drinking water, it is almost always usable for irrigation but that too can cause problems. They tend to be fairly shallow, i.e. easily reached by vertical drilling, but vary tremendously in their overall volume.

    Oil, gas and water occur together almost universally as well. But in much deeper horizons and you wouldn’t want to try drinking the water that comes out of an oil reservoir. By the same token, if you are using water to produce hydrocarbons from an oil or gas horizon, by injecting it to displace the latter, you have to be careful about its chemical composition or you can destroy the productivity of the reservoir rock. Two factors are critically important to the reservoird rock itself. Porosity is one, that is generally the ratio of pore space per unit volume of rock expressed as a percentage. It is an indication of how much fluid the rock can contain. The other is permeability, that is a more complex concept that involves how much connectivity there is between the pores in the rock. Low permeability simply means that no matter how much fluid a rock may contain, it will be difficult to get it out in any sizeable quantity. Other factors also come into play, most important probably is the viscosity of the fluid you want to proudce but that can vary tremendously also and can be “manipulated” in various ways to some extent.

    In the case to the so-called shale plays, the nature of the rock is a strongly controlling factor. Shale is made up largely of partially lithified clay particles that are small, thin and flat. They occur as very finely bedded horizons where there can be good permeability between thin laminae but virtually no vertical permability through lower laminae to upper, or lower beds to upper, hence the development of hydraulic fracture. It is intened to increase the vertical permeability of the shales. Water is injected at pressures higher than needed to counter the confining pressures at the depth of the hydrocarbon horizon in order to fracture the laminae and beds within the shale. As mentioned above, the native water that occurs in parallel with hydrocarbons is not “pure” at all, it usually has a fairly high TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) and its composition of TDS can also vary tremendously. Why this is important is simple in concept but extremely complex in reality. The short answer is, if you inject the wrong “kind” of water you will cause chemical reactions that effectively reduce the permeability of the rock and thus choke your ability to produce (mobilize) the hydrocarbons. Not what you want to happen. Particularly if you are spending lots of money to inject said water in the first place.

    Having said all that, we can start to think about the relationships between these factors and what motivates producers, what their goals are, and what they have to do to achieve them. Most of Texas and a fair amount of everywhere else, though it has some ground water that is easily produced and marginally potable from aquifers, has no where near enough water to carry on full scale production of natural gas. Remember the volumes we are talking about at trillions of cubic feet of gas. I don’t know because I am not a petroleum engineer, but I suspect that ratio of water required to gas produced is close to 1:1. So, Picken’s e.g. is locking up access to cheap ground water from the Ogallala aquifer so he can inject it into the shale beds and a) produce hydraulic fracturing, and b) displace hydrocarbons, i.e. methane.

    Someone above mentioned there were questions about what was being used in the injection water to produce hydraulic fracturing. In a sense that is a red herring because #1 the water that is injected will go to much deeper horizons than any extant aquifers, #2 the already extant problem that there is little if any permeability to shallow horizons from the hydrocarbon horizons, and #3 that although useable irrigation water is being changed into something very much like reservoir water, it is not anything really terrible and dangerous as anyone who has ever spent a weekend in rural W. Va. can testify. The water reeks of sulfur, but you cans still boil decent rice with it. One might well ask, why not use ocean water instead of pure ground water? Well, its much easier to “contaminate” pure water with the particular mix of TDS that you want for your injection project than it is to doctor the interesting contents of ocean water to the same end. Simple economics, it’s a lot cheaper.

    All the things said above regarding the superficial economics of NG (natural gas) are more or less true. The one caveat that I think it is important to take into consideration is that none of them operate in isolation, rather the interplay of many factors ultimately will determine what the cost of the resource is. At the risk of straying from my selfconstraining rules of discourse, politics, is one factor that is irrational and nearly impossible to predict with reliability. Especially politics based upon absolute convictions that have no foundation in fact or reality. That said, IMHO, the trans canada deal is a huge negative for Alaska, a zero gain for the US, and a fairly large negative for Canada. The only people who stand to gain from it are the pipeline owners, the politicians who subsidize them with tax money, and the ultimate resource owners, namely the corporations who own, not the gas, but the oil shales. Without the gas the oil shales cannot be produced.

    Someone above suggested that the focus should be on developing alternative fuel sources for Alaskan domestic consumption. I agree, the resource is on the N. Slope and currently, it is my understanding that the NG is being pumped back into the depleted reservoir rocks for “storage”. Rather than build a massive continent spanning pipeline from Alaska to the nearest pipeline hub in the lower 48 (I don’t know where that is, but I doubt actually that it would ever get past Calgary anyway), why not build a cheaper smaller scale distribution system to get LNG to the isolated communities of Ak.? If pipelines are not feasible, what about alternatives? USE the gas in Ak.! Obvious counter incentives to that plan come to mind readily such as maximizing profits. Especially if you can get a $500 million downpayment from Alaskans from which they will never see one cubic ft. of NG.

    Someone mentioned earthquakes in Texas. It is easy to debunk this claim just go to the USGS earthquake monitoring web site and look up the historical data. Yep, there have been earthquakes, the most recent are just on the threshold of being “felt” if you happen to be sitting on the epicenter and are quietly reading a book at the time they occur. I will add to the alarmism perhaps and mention a web article I saw somewhere that spuriously linked some dubious nuclear underground test to hydraulic fracturing. Accepting at face value that such a test might have been done 20-30 years ago, there is zero evidence that anyone is suggesting using that kind of technique to mobilize NG today. By the same token, very low magnitude earthquakes occur all the time in a whole lot of places. Compare the relative seismicity of S. California to central Texas for some perspective at the USGS site. And recall that their have been two large damaging earthquakes in the LA area within my memory. Nothing like those is likely to occur in Texas. To any skeptics to want to have a discussion, do some research on the New Madrid suture zone and get back to me in this thread, I am not a seismologist either, but I have used the technique so I know a little more than the average bear.

    Finally, and discrete from all of the above, I think Begich(sp?) could make his case fairly easily regarding getting the Senate to look at Alaska instead of Greenland for several reasons. Foremost is, Alaska is about 26% smaller than Greenland and has a vastly more developed infrastructure. Second is that a modest effort to obtain and compare satellite imagery from Alaska for the Malaspina ice field from say 1980 and the present would suffice to quantify how much change there has been in the past 29 years. Such data is public domain and readily available. Moreover, there are any number of universities with glaciological specialists who could no doubt provide it in a heart beat.
    Glaciers per se, however, are not really the issue. Of much greater importance is the perma frost. For example, and to connect this issue back to the issue of the hydrocarbon things, the Alaska pipeline was built on perma frost and to withstand the changes in perma frost that occur year to year. To my knowledge, it was not engineered to withstand the destruction of the permafrost. Nor were the communities that were built thereon, nor the roads, railroads, bridges, airstrips, etc. etc. Alaska is looking at probably billions of dollars of remedial construction to cope with the effects of global warming and the melting of perma frost. I could mention other environmental effects that might be significant but I have already spent so much time on this post that I have probably fallen very far behind in the thread and missed the attention of a lot of people.

    Ultimately, it is up to us. If we want to reduce the adverse effects of oil shale development in Canada, then the most important thing we can do is use less gasoline. I have said it before but it bears repeating, go back to a little Shaker ditty…

    Use it up,
    Wear it out,
    Make it do,
    Do without.

    Kindest regards to all…

  30. nswfm CA says:

    That move by Ossiander makes her look like a tool.

    Sempra in San Diego is getting LNG from Baja. Other firms like BHP Billiton, the largest mining firm in the world got turned down in my neck of the woods for bringing in LNG from Indonesia. They were trying to say we needed it, but I think it was BS. Especially when we have as much sun in So Cal.

    Waves from the opening night of the Hollywood Bowl (celebrating my dad’s birthday)!

  31. Sammy says:

    Why is no one in Alaska asking Lisa Murkowski why she is holding up President’s appointments?

    Just wondering.

  32. GreatGrey says:

    Anchorage Assembly Chairwoman Debbie Ossiander is going to allow more people to sign up for comments on the anti-discrimination ordinance. You can bet Prevo’s puppets will all sign up in order to delay any passage to such a date that incoming Mayor Dan Sullivan will be able to veto the ordinance.

    Pure thuggery by Prevo if anyone asks me.

  33. CO almost native says:

    @jammer5 # 47:

    The Ogalla aquifer goes under parts of eastern Colorado also, and there is an extensive agreement between Kansas and Colorado, and one between Colorado and Nebraska concerning water rights to aquifers and stream flows- to make sure one state doesn’t dry up another. I think if Pickens tried to buy leases, he’d have junior rights, and wouldn’t get much.

    Here on the High Plains Desert we tend to watch water use like a hawk, and are very suspicious of “flatlanders” wanting to take a long drink of the liquid gold.

    That’s one of the main issues with shale drilling in Colorado- we have huge deposits, but the current technology takes more water than is available, even if it was diverted from agriculture and urban areas.

  34. KaJo says:

    AKPetMom said June 19th, 2009 at 1:01 PM “Hubby and I were laughing this morning about the tour of Alaska regarding global warming and the demise of our glaciers..”

    AKPetMom…me too…(sigh)…I’ve been watching Mt. Rainier since I was a kid (50+ years), and every trip we’ve taken up to Paradise Lodge and Visitors Center, to hike or to just have Sunday brunch, I’ve been more and more aghast at how the glaciers on the Mountain have shrunk to practically invisibility. They used to be HUGE. That’s just in 50 years!

  35. LiladyNY says:

    Second chart shows how all 99 senators will be voting on the public option for healthcare at about 2/3 of the way down.

    Sen. Murkowski votes No. Sen Begich votes ????

    http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/on-health-care-whos-hooked-on-special.html

  36. InJuneau says:

    I second jammer5’s recommendation of Cadillac Desert. I read it in college for an environmental geology class, and it’s excellent (the author was also an alumnus of my college!)

  37. pearl89 says:

    Pretty cool video of a surfer riding a wave created by a calfing glacier.

  38. jammer5 says:

    For those interested in just how water, and the lack of, will effect everyone, I recommend two books: Cadillac Desert by Marc Reisner, and When the Rivers Run Dry: Water–The Defining Crisis of the Twenty-first Century by Fred Pearce.

    It is true water will be more valuable than oil in the not too distant future, and T Boone has no qualms about controlling it. The amount wasted everyday is unconscionable.

  39. Tealwomin says:

    Mommom: saw your comment RE: Keeping Ethics Complaint filed against GiNO at Huff-Post…THANKS, interesting article to boot.

    THEN: Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Chairwoman Sarah Palin said Friday she is resigning amid frustration that she is being forced to KEEP SILENT about ETHICS ALLEGATIONS against Republican Party of Alaska chairman Randy Ruedrich.

    “I’m forced to withhold information from Alaskans, and that goes against what I believe in as a public servant,” Palin said in a Friday interview.

    NOW: Anchorage Republican Rep. Bob Lynn, a supporter of Gov. Sarah Palin’s, said he’s going to introduce a bill to stop ethics complaints against the governor or members of her staff from being publicly discussed unless the state finds they have merit.

    OMG! GiNO has other do her dirty work & says what ever she thinks will get her – her way.
    What happened to what she believed way back then [not so long ago – by the way]

  40. CoyoteMarti says:

    AKM, thanks for the update on Begich’s town hall! For all of you who can attend, it’s important to dig for some details, not just “public option”. Specifically, Dr. Dean is asking us all to query our senators:

    •Do you support a public healthcare option as part of reform?
    •Do you support a public healthcare option that is ready on day one (vs a 7-year “trial” period. yeah, right)?
    •Do you support a public healthcare option that is national, available everywhere, and accountable to our government (vs a co-op and/or state-based” option)?
    •Do you support a public healthcare option that has the clout to establish rates with providers and big drug companies?
    •Do you support mandated coverage for everyone (like auto insurance), which is critical to get control of risk and costs.

    What we want to see is support of what’s currently called Senate Option A (if we can’t get single-payer), or better yet what’s just come out of the House today, which looks very strong.

    Wish I could be there, but it’s a long haul from Chicagoland. Go get ’em!!

  41. Martha says:

    mommom Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 2:34 PM

    I did not mean to be harsh in any way, but so many folks just don’t know.
    If you speak of Americans receiving foreign oil to a Canadian, they will immediately think of the middle east too.

    Considering that…….

    Currently, up to 1.2 million barrels of oil (bpd) are produced from the tar sands every day, and the
    goal of 5.3 million bpd could be reached by 2020. The United States have already said that they
    hope to eventually be able to buy up to 6 million bpd of tar sands oil, and expect to be able to buy
    3.1 million bpd by 2015.

    ============================
    What else could the gas be for, BUT to develop tar sands for oil? Maybe we need to go “Iranian” here in Canada too.

    I think we are having the wool pulled over all of our eyes and I am worried for ALL North Americans.

    By the way, what is all that news of ” a series of earthquakes, due to drilling for natural gas in Texas’? Please fill me in…………….thanks ……M.

  42. AKPetMom says:

    Here’s the article from the March National Geographic that talks about the Alberta tar sands and the environmental impact.

    http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/kunzig-text

    It’s a good read and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in this subject.

  43. Marnie says:

    Keep in mind that removing oil from shale is, like oil drilling, coal, bauxite, gold mining very dirty and destructive.

  44. Marnie says:

    Are Alaska’s senators joing with Maine’s senator to try to do something about the price of oil/fuel oil being falsely driven up by speculators.?

    The more the merrier on that hayride and potential for northern states’ Congresspersons to get a real bipartisan thing going.

  45. mommom says:

    I was reading this today

    CALGARY — Abundant cheap supplies of natural gas from new shale deposits, plus growing imports of liquefied natural gas flowing into the United States, push back by 15 years the need for Arctic gas and make it difficult for higher-cost gas from Western Canada to compete, says pipeline executive Steve Letwin.

    The North American natural gas industry is “overbuilt,” pointing to weak prices for a long time, said Mr. Letwin, Houston-based executive vice-president, gas transportation and international, at Canadian pipeline giant Enbridge Inc.

    Years of worry about supply shortages because of the maturing of conventional supplies have been replaced by worries there aren’t enough customers for the 1,200 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in shale deposits — enough to last a century — found in the past three years, plus liquefied natural gas coming from offshore that is “needed like a hole in the head,” Mr. Letwin said in an interview.

    “The biggest issue that we now have is [insufficient] demand,” said Mr. Letwin. “And in the absence of demand, you are going to see a price for gas that is going to be kept between US$5 and US$7 for a long time to come.”

    Enbridge moves 15% of the natural gas in Texas, the largest producing state in the United States.
    The Calgary-based company, Canada’s largest oil pipeline operator, is proposing the $1.5-billion LaCrosse Pipeline.

    That pipeline would link shale gas producers in the Fort Worth, Barnett and Haynesville regions of Texas and Louisiana to the U. S. southeast, where power markets are developing. Enbridge also runs a large offshore pipeline system in the Gulf of Mexico.

    While oil prices have increased by 60% since the beginning of the year, on expectations that global supplies will be tight due to lack of investment when the economy recovers, natural gas prices are down 30% over the same period.

    Natural gas closed in New York at US$3.857 on Friday, down US7.6¢, on concern that demand from industrial and power plant consumers will be below normal levels until the end of the year.

    Mr. Letwin said prices could weaken further before the heating season starts in November.

    Shale producers in the United States can make money at low prices, he said. But the trend is not promising for natural gas stranded in the Arctic, which has been waiting for decades for pipelines to be built so it can be commercialized
    Last week, TransCanada Corp., Enbridge’s top Canadian rival, and Exxon Mobil Corp., said they are partnering to build the US$26-billion Alaska pipeline project, with the goal of moving four billion cubic feet a day beginning in 2018 from Alaska’s

    North Slope to the rest of the United States.

    Mr. Letwin said it’s unlikely Arctic gas — whether from Alaska or from Canada’s Mackenzie Delta, where there are seven tcf of stranded reserves — will be needed until 2025, given the high cost of transportation, which he estimates at about US$5 per million British thermal units for the Alaska line.

    Gas from the Mackenzie Delta would have an advantage over gas from Alaska because it has a closer market in Alberta’s oil sands, where projects need gas to power operations.

    “Alaska has 36 tcf of gas, way up in the North. Haynesville [in Louisiana and Texas] has potentially 70 tcf of gas [close to the market], so where are you are going to go?” Mr. Letwin asked.

    Enbridge will make a pitch to be part of the Denali project, an Alaska pipeline proposed by another group, BPPLC and ConocoPhillips, Mr. Letwin said, just to stay in the game, but “it’s going to be a long game.”

    Meanwhile, cargoes of excess liquefied natural gas from offshore projects in Australia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are aiming for the United States because it has storage capacity that other regions don’t have, he said
    Despite low prices, the LNG is shipped anyway because LNG producers want to recover “sunk costs” for projects that were built when global demand was expected to soar.

    The high-cost gas sector in Western Canada will find it difficult to compete, he said.

    “We are seeing the lowest rig count [in Western Canada] that we have seen in our history,” he said, noting only a tenth of Canada’s fleet is working.

    Even Canadian shale plays like Horn River and the Montney, both in northeast British Columbia, are disadvantaged because they are so far from markets, he said.

    According to a report released on Friday by Bryan Mills Iradesso, a communications and research firm, only six of the 63 Canadian public junior oil and gas companies it follows reported a profit in the first quarter, and only 10 out of 23 intermediates reported profits, showing the cost of Canadian oil and gas production is too high. Smaller Canadian companies produce predominantly natural gas.

    http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/energy/story.html?id=1696088

  46. InJuneau says:

    bubbles–if you Google Ogallala Aquifer, you can find bunches of info. The problem is that water is held in the pores between the rock particles, much the way oil is, but I think it bonds more tightly to the minerals, making it difficult to get out. Once it’s out, it’s much more difficult to “re”displace the air that moves into the spaces with water than it was to get the air to displace the water in the first place.

  47. mommom says:

    How to get a lease in a “shale play” ? You must first own the land that gas is found under.Threy do not have to drill on your property.do something called sideways drilling to access gas from large parcels of property at once.Water is injected into the shale rock to fracture it and release the gas. We are beginning to have concerns with the content of some of the water used,they do add some things to help in the fracturing process. Testing is being done to determeine if there are risks.

    “””In oil and gas exploration, shale used to be considered the sorry rock we drilled through to get to good reservoir rock — sandstone, limestone or dolomite. Over the past 20 years or so, shale has come to the forefront as a major productive formation, primarily due to three factors… a production stimulation technique known as hydraulic fracturing, horizontal drilling and escalating oil and gas prices.

    ~ ~ ~

    The Haynesville shale of Northwest Louisiana and East Texas is the hottest thing in 2008. Some predict it will prove to be larger than the grandaddy, the Barnett shale of the Fort Worth basin.
    ~ ~ ~

    The term “play” means area where oil and gas companies are targeting exploration activity. There are many other shale plays in the USA. As time goes on, we’ll provide information on all of these emerging oil and gas targets
    The Haynesville shale is the hottest one but we will cover all shale plays. Here is a brief list:

    •Barnett shale, Fort Worth basin, Texas
    •Woodford shale, Oklahoma
    •Marcellus shale, Pennsylvania
    •Haynesville shale (Bossier shale), Louisiana and Texas
    •Utica shale, New York
    •Fayetteville shale, Arkansas
    •Horn River shale, Canada
    •Bakken shale, Montana and Canada
    •Green River shale, Colorado and Wyoming
    •Colony Granite Wash shale, West Oklahoma
    These plays feature organic-rich shales, meaning they are loaded with hydrocarbons — oil and gas. The problem is they are “tight,” meaning very low permeability. Most of the emerging shale plays produce mostly natural gas but some, such as the Bakken, produce oil. Some, such as the Green River oil shale, require mining but most are produced by drilling with conventional oil and gas rigs.

    Shales were deposited millions of years ago in a deep water environment. Primarily consisting of super fine clay particles, they are rich in carbon (which can become oil and natural gas) from the remains of tiny marine life forms. “””

  48. bubbles says:

    injuneau thank you for replying. i was just trying think how can we put back what we are taking out of the aquifers. i thought if they can take oil from deep under the ground why can we not put some water back in. i downloaded google earth last night because i want learn more about the earth and what’s underneath. forgive me for sounding ignorant. i am ignorant but read your comments and learn…love b

  49. Bretta says:

    Re: Pickett and the Gas Line
    This news came from the American Petroleum Institute a few days ago.

    “Encana will reduce natural gas output”
    Encana announced it will reduce natural gas output in Canada and the U.S. because low prices mean production costs are too expensive. Natural gas prices are now around $4 per 1,000 cubic feet. The Globe and Mail (Toronto) June 16, 2009

    In other words, there is no incentive right now to build the gas line. TransExxon is playing Palin for a fool.

  50. mommom says:

    Martha –I guess I didn’t express myself well,I agree with all you have to say
    I am not blaming Canada in any way ,it is greed on the part of individuals and businesses in both countries.I have read quite a bit on the subject and I think it is a travesty that such a beautiful and ecologically rich area is being devastated because of the consumers and business owners alike,along with the governments of both countries.
    My point was ,I guess,that it is my feeling that agreements have been made for this pipeline knowing and planning for its main use to be for the tar sands development. GINO and her ilk have spouted a bunch of hooey about “hungry markets in the lower 48”.They know exactly where it is needed.
    The real reason for the pipeline ? To sell that gas and get those tax dollars to support the salaries of the Alaskan politicians. The very people who get to sign off on sending that gas out of state forever.

    I wish I was more eloquent. I am not .But,Martha,I agree with all you say.

  51. Nan says:

    I’m going to study that info about NAFTA and oil etc. But thought I’d mention that bottled water can be had at Sam’s (Costco, too, I’d imagine) for nearly nothing pr bottle. A case of 32 bottles goes for less than $5, last I checked (about 15 cents per bottle)

  52. InJuneau says:

    Martha–I suspect they’re just going to wait it out to see if it actually gets introduced (which I think can’t happen until shortly before Session) and then how his House colleagues react to it. They don’t need to fight battles till they appear.

  53. bubbles says:

    thank you martha. i am having dinner with a friend this evening. i am saving this page for after dinner discussion. martha i voted for clinton thinking he would be better than bush one. clinton proceeded to inflict everyone of the republican agendas. i believe because they had him by the short hairs due to his disgusting sexual proclivities. remember that despicable trial. there was no way i was going to vote the clintons back in the white house. i know the impact his policies had on my people and i will forgive him. i am so sorry that our elected officials have let us all down. thanks again. bubbles has much to learn and remember from you….loveb

  54. InJuneau says:

    Geologically it’s quite difficult to get water into the deep aquifers. Additionally, the stuff that’s being pumped out of there now is paleowater, meaning that it was “deposited” in the aquifer during the last ice age.

  55. Martha says:

    InJuneau Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 1:46 PM
    Martha–Bob Lynn is a State Representative, in the House, which has an R majority. The D Senators in the Senate Bipartisan Working Coalition (or whatever it is they call themselves) prob. won’t have anything to say about this until such time as it officially introduced AND makes it to the Senate. It’s no use getting involved in such things until such time as it’s “real”.
    ===========================================
    Thanks. Just thought the DEMs would have a short public statement, or guffaw, because this is so outrageous .

  56. Martha says:

    bubbles Says
    martha. oh my god. the north american free trade agreement. that is the extent of most of our knowledge. but does the agreement benefit canadiens in other ways? otherwise why did canada’s prime minister agree?
    =============================================
    Mulroney is our version of G.W. Bush, but then along came the liberal leader
    Chretien , literally speaking from both sides of his mouth. ( worse than a forked tongue). He and Bill Clinton finalized the agreement. The entire thing needs to be reworked, in order to be fair to Mexico, the US and Canada AND to protect our environment.

    The tar sands are a dangerous travesty. That’s why the US does not develop their own similar sources.

    Excerpt “in a nutshell”, from Wikipedia;

    Canada
    The earlier 1988 Canada-U.S.trade agreement had been extremely controversial and divisive in Canada, and the 1988 Canadian election was fought almost exclusively on that issue. In that election more Canadians voted for anti-free trade parties (the Liberals and the New Democrats) but more seats in parliament were won by the pro-free trade Progressive Conservatives (PCs). Mulroney and the PCs had a parliamentary majority and were able to easily pass the Canada-U.S. FTA and NAFTA bills. However Mulroney himself had become deeply unpopular and resigned on June 25, 1993. He was replaced as Conservative leader and prime minister by Kim Campbell, who then led the PC party into the 1993 election where they were decimated by the Liberals under Jean Chrétien. Chrétien had campaigned on a promise to renegotiate or abrogate NAFTA, but instead negotitated the two supplemental agreements with the new U.S. Democratic president, and ideological ally, Bill Clinton.
    ===========================================

    How Canadians were screwed by Cretin (what WE call him);

    Canadian disputes

    Garmeorkers assemble suits in a Toronto factory in 1901
    There is much concern in Canada over the provision that if something is sold even once as a commodity, the government cannot stop its sale in the future.[24]

    This applies to the water from Canada’s lakes and rivers, fueling fears over the possible destruction of Canadian ecosystems and water supply.

    In 1999, Sun Belt Water Inc., a company out of Santa Barbara, California, filed an Arbitration Claim under Chapter 11 of the NAFTA claiming $10.5 billion as a result of Canada’s prohibition on the export of bulk water by marine tanker, a move that destroyed the Sun Belt business venture. Sun Belt maintains a website where many documents concerning the Arbitration are posted http://www.sunbeltwater.com. The claim sent shock waves through Canadian governments that scrambled to update water legislation and remains unresolved.

    Other fears come from the effects NAFTA has had on Canadian lawmaking. In 1996, the gasoline additive MMT was brought into Canada by an American company. At the time, the Canadian federal government banned the importation of the additive. The American company brought a claim under NAFTA Chapter 11 seeking US$201 million,[25] and by Canadian provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade (“AIT”). The American company argued that their additive had not been conclusively linked to any health dangers, and that the prohibition was damaging to their company. Following a finding that the ban was a violation of the AIT,[26] the Canadian federal government repealed the ban and settled with the American company for US$13 million.[27] Studies by Health and Welfare Canada (now Health Canada) on the health effects of MMT in fuel found no significant health effects associated with exposure to these exhaust emissions. Other Canadian researchers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency disagree with Health Canada, and cite studies that include possible nerve damage.[28]
    The United States and Canada had been arguing for years over the United States’ decision to impose a 27 percent duty on Canadian softwood lumber imports, until new Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper compromised with the United States and reached a settlement on July 1, 2006.[29] The settlement has not yet been ratified by either country, in part due to domestic opposition in Canada.

    Coniferous trees reflected on Buntzen Lake in British Columbia

    Ponderosa Pine logs taken from from Malheur National Forest, Grant County, Oregon
    Canada had filed numerous motions to have the duty eliminated and the collected duties returned to Canada.[30] After the United States lost an appeal from a NAFTA panel, it responded by saying “We are, of course, disappointed with the [NAFTA panel’s] decision, but it will have no impact on the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders.” (Nick Lifton, spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman)[31] On July 21, 2006, the U.S. Court of International Trade found that imposition of the duties was contrary to U.S. law.[32][33]

    [edit]Canadian government challenged on change in Income trust taxation
    On October 30, 2007, American citizens Marvin and Elaine Gottlieb filed a Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim to Arbitration under NAFTA. The couple claims thousands of U.S. investors lost a total of $5 billion dollars in the fall-out from the Conservative Government’s decision last year to effectively tax income trusts in the energy sector out of existence.
    Under the NAFTA, Canada is not allowed to target other NAFTA citizens when they impose new measures. Canadian Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is on record that energy trusts were included because of their high U.S. ownership, while Real Estate Investment Trusts, owned mostly by Canadians, were excluded. NAFTA also stipulates that Canada must pay compensation for destroying investment by U.S. investors. The Government of Canada’s 2006 Halloween tax changes for income trusts were designed to eliminate the income trust model for investment by U.S. citizens. The NAFTA says that U.S. investors are entitled to rely upon Canadian government promises. Harper repeatedly made a public promise that his Government would not tax trusts, as had the previous Liberal Government. Canada’s tax treaty with the United States also says that trust income will not be taxed at more than 15 percent.
    The Gottliebs maintain a website for American and Mexican citizens interested in filing a NAFTA claim against the Government of Canada.[34]
    ==============================================

    How NAFTA screws The US;

    U.S. deindustrialization
    For more details on this topic, see NAFTA’s Impact on US Employment.
    An increase in domestic manufacturing output and a proportionally greater domestic investment in manufacturing does not necessarily mean an increase in domestic manufacturing jobs; this increase may simply reflect greater automation and higher productivity. Although the U.S. total civilian employment may have grown by almost 15 million in between 1993 and 2001, manufacturing jobs only increased by 476,000 in the same time period.[35] Furthermore from 1994 to 2007, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000, and during this period several other free trade agreements have been concluded or expanded.[35

  57. bubbles says:

    serious question. we have talked about the disappearing glaciers and global warming. one pint of bottled water goes for a $ 1.25 at the bodega across the street. that is much more than a gallon of gas. alaska has plenty water in the form of ice and snow and rain. that is your gold and platinum. why not put that water in the aquifers of the south west?

  58. InJuneau says:

    Martha–Bob Lynn is a State Representative, in the House, which has an R majority. The D Senators in the Senate Bipartisan Working Coalition (or whatever it is they call themselves) prob. won’t have anything to say about this until such time as it officially introduced AND makes it to the Senate. It’s no use getting involved in such things until such time as it’s “real”.

  59. AKjah says:

    Thanks Martha. that looks to be some good reading.
    Hmm need gas to get oil…Hmmm gas is cheap oil is going up…Hmmm Exxon is up to something right now…Hmmm

  60. austintx says:

    yellerdogg – Yup , they say water will ultimately be the most precious commodity , and he is goin’ for it. It’s all about the deal with him. That is why I said he’ll do anything to stop anyone from horning in on his action. T-Boone will try to queer the Exxon deal every chance he gets. Gotta think 4 steps ahead with him , because he is thinking 3 ahead.

  61. bubbles says:

    martha. oh my god. the north american free trade agreement. that is the extent of most of our knowledge. but does the agreement benefit canadiens in other ways? otherwise why did canada’s prime minister agree?

  62. yellerdogg says:

    austintx Says:
    June 19th, 2009 at 11:29 AM
    Like him or not , Pickens is a smart bidness man. He is buying up a lot of water rights in north Texas.

    ******************************************************
    I’ve heard speculation it’s the water rights that Pickens is truely seeking. The wind farms proposal is merely a beard. The aquifer levels have seriously declined due to decades long drought. The land use rights for the wind farms sought by Pickens correspond to underground water reserves.

    Only irrigation allows these areas to be agriculturally productive. WITH irrigation these croplands form part of the world’s most proficient breadbasket.

    Is it probable, austintx, that Pickens is using deception to go for the real gold?

  63. Martha says:

    As someone who has an oil lease in the Hayesville shale play in Northwest Louisiana and East Texas,and a daughter who also has a lease in the play,I have said this before.There is a lot more gas here in the lower 48 .We have the Barnett play inTexas that was the laegst in the USA,now we also have the Hayesville play,the new largest in the USA. Additional deposits have recently been found in many places,like New York,Pennsylvania,and Wyoming,along with all of the other known gas deposits. Gas from Alaska would be too expensive compared to gas from more local sources.

    Alaska gas will only be attractive to the Canadian Tar Sands interests. What a shame that GINO wants to take a clean burning fuel source that Alaskans will need in the decades to come and allow the it to be wasted on this horrible use.
    =========================
    WOW…………………WOW

    I’m not trying to be mean here, not at all. It is not the way of the mudflats to be like that. I must say that knowledge is power, I’m sure we can agree.

    Your Ideas here are woefully ignorant.

    First of all do you know anything at all about the NAFTA agreement between the US and Canada?

    Our lousy Primeminister, Brian Mulroney , set up Canadians to provide the US with continuing increases in all forms of our energy, even to our detriment.

    “In the spring of 2004, Canada surpassed
    Saudi Arabia to become the largest foreign
    supplier of oil to the U.S.

    Given the uncertainties
    of the Middle East and Venezuelan supply lines,
    the U.S. steadily increased its oil imports from
    Canada, facilitated in large measure by the proportional
    sharing clause on energy that had been
    incorporated in the North America Free Trade
    Agreement (NAFTA).

    As a result, Canada has
    become the largest foreign supplier of oil, natural
    gas, electricity, and uranium for energy to the
    United States.” (see below)

    As it is we buy imported oil to attempt to keep up to US demand.

    The oil from the tar sands goes directly to the mid US corridor.

    As filthy and disgusting as it is, we can’t stop until US demand goes down!

    I am giving you a couple of links so that you can see for your self, it is quite shocking. By the way, while most American are totally ignorant of these things, many, many Canadians are ignorant too.

    Knowledge is power, so here you go! All of the following can be found at this main website;http://www.tarsandswatch.org/
    ==========================================
    Fueling
    Fortress America
    A Report on the Athabasca
    Tar Sands and U.S. Demands for
    Canada’s Energy

    For Canadians, petro-rage also has important
    continental implications in terms of our relations
    with the U.S. In the spring of 2004, Canada surpassed
    Saudi Arabia to become the largest foreign
    supplier of oil to the U.S. Given the uncertainties
    of the Middle East and Venezuelan supply lines,
    the U.S. steadily increased its oil imports from
    Canada, facilitated in large measure by the proportional
    sharing clause on energy that had been
    incorporated in the North America Free Trade
    Agreement (NAFTA).

    As a result, Canada has
    become the largest foreign supplier of oil, natural
    gas, electricity, and uranium for energy to the
    United States.
    =============================================
    Latest from Polaris
    TAR SANDS SHOWDOWN IS NOW AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE!
    Buy it here.

    “Tar Sands Showdown”
    By: Tony Clarke
    Canada’s oil patch is booming. The Alberta tar sands have become the number one foreign oil source for the United States, replacing Saudi Arabia. Within the next 15 years, Canada will be pumping four to five times more crude than today from the tar pits of northern Alberta into the US market. The tar sands are key to the claim that Canada is the new “energy superpower”.

    As the new backbone of Canada’s economy, the tar sands are bound to define and shape Canada’s role and destiny as a nation in the twenty-first century. What is lacking is independent, reliable information on the host of questions raised by the tar sands – and thoughtful analysis of the issues they raise. What is the real cost to Albertans and to Canadians? How far are we willing to go to fuel America’s oil addiction? What will the ecological and social impacts be? What can be done to build an alternative energy future in an age of global warming.

    Tar Sands Showdown provides a tool for stimulating public discussion and debate about these important issues.
    You can check out Tony Clarke on YouTube talking about the tar sands

    And for some great photos taken of the tar sands CHECK OUT
    http://www.egamiimage.ca/alberta_tar_sands.html
    =================================================

    A Dirty Little Secret:
    Canada’s Global
    Warming Engine

    Foreword
    Alberta’s tar sands, containing an estimated 185-200 billion barrels of recoverable oil based on
    current technologies (of a total of 1.7 trillion barrels), are surpassed only by Saudi Arabia in terms
    of quantity. With technological advances, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP)
    estimates that the tar sands could produce as much as 315 billion barrels, surpassing Saudi Arabia
    and providing vast incentive to money hungry oil giants.
    Currently, up to 1.2 million barrels of oil (bpd) are produced from the tar sands every day, and the
    goal of 5.3 million bpd could be reached by 2020. The United States have already said that they
    hope to eventually be able to buy up to 6 million bpd of tar sands oil, and expect to be able to buy
    3.1 million bpd by 2015.

  64. bubbles says:

    sad but not for long. austin you are right. i am rich with friends and my child and i blessed with every good thing. i will be grateful for these mudpups all my days..loveb

  65. jammer5 says:

    T. Boone wants the natural gas and wind energy from Kansas so he can gain water rights to the Ogallala aquifer. His main goal is to pump the water in the aquifer to Texas. The aquifer is the primary source of water for farms in Western Kansas, and without it, wheat production will be almost guaranteed to stop. While his intentions may be outwardly innocent, his main intention is to control the flow of water to Texas at the expense of Kansas, Oklahoma and Nebraska.
    http://jalopnik.com/5041513/t-boone-pickens-has-secondary-motivation-for-wind-farm-push-the-ogallala-aquifer

  66. AKPetMom says:

    Hubby and I were laughing this morning about the tour of Alaska regarding global warming and the demise of our glaciers. We began our discussion of this regarding the Portage glacier and the decrease in it’s profile since we first visited the glacier together back in 1994. (he’s from Haines and I was a transplant to AK in 1990, we hooked up in 1994, thus the first trip together to Portage in 1994)

    Yep, it’s pretty much gone, can’t even see it from the Visitor Center now. Except, you can take a boat to the face and it still looks very impressive if you did not know that it used to extend well into the lake in the early 90’s.

    Same with the other glaciers close to Anchorage. If one cruises on the 26 glacier tour from Whittier annually or spends time in the Prince William Sound fishing each summer, yes, we notice that the glaciers are definitely receding, same as if you travel to the Mat glacier to walk and ice climb a few times each summer and fall. The glaciers in this area are definitely not advancing.

    But, to the unseasoned out of state visitor, they will most likely see great huge piles of ice that seem to be never ending and almost permanent. These people who visit for the first time have no historic visual reference by which to judge the recession of the glacial ice. It is happening, but one has to basically view these areas on a yearly basis to see the change. Granted, someone can impart the scientific information on where the foot of the glacier was 10 years ago as opposed to today, but it doesn’t have the impact of witnessing the actual change over a couple of decades.

    I must applaud Mark Begich for at least trying to give willing parties a glimpse of what could be lost in our future, but I doubt they will understand what they are seeing.

  67. bubbles says:

    aw shucks mommom. i googled new york shale play and i have own land where the oil might be. you can’t invest like stock. doggone it. thought i was gonna finally find the pot at the end of the rainbow. boy oh boy. sad now

  68. austintx says:

    bubbles – We’re filthy rich in friends here in the ‘flats !!

  69. anon blogger says:

    #8 mommom

    Thank you, mommom!

    Great info. The energy expert slipping?!

  70. bubbles says:

    austintx!! mommom has a lease on a play[ mommom what is a play?] we mudpups need a lease on a play also.too. how do we get us one? i am sick and tired of being a’ busted valise’ we pups need to get rich or at least well to do.

  71. austintx says:

    Here is a map of what mommom is talking about. My son’s Grammy has extensive holdings in this area. And about T-Boone , he will do everything in his power to stop any new gas pipeline from horning in on his action. He ain’t skeered of any boys from Exxon.
    http://cenlamar.com/2008/07/28/nyt-gas-rush-overwhelms-small-louisiana-town/

  72. Polly says:

    mommom Says: — you know if oil and gas go dry here in Louisiana we will be hot without our AC,but Alaskans will freeze to death.
    —-
    We can all move to Hawaii!

  73. mommom says:

    If GINO was thinking of the people of Alaska,she would encourage only local Alaska pipelines for gas.When the oil that has already slowed runs out,where will todays children of Alaska turn for energy sources ? Alaska seems to have the most need of all of our states to retain as much of its future energy resources,you know if oil and gas go dry here in Louisiana we will be hot without our AC,but Alaskans will freeze to death.

  74. AKjah says:

    And how long before they stop shale shattering? About as long as it takes to stop MT-top removal?. So pipeline looks precarious at best. I’m liking the rail line to the slope idea. But i am sure the producers would not like that. They seem to have a gameplan that excludes any good for Alaskans–well the ones not getting payed off anyway.

  75. HistoryGoddess says:

    Although I am out of state, I do feel John McCain and GINO’s inability to blink at the right time gave me a right to follow and comment on her antics. I may have strong feelings on an Alaskan topic, but it is not my place to interject unduly into the politics there. I absolutely think it is WRONG that people not affected by the ordinance were allowed to speak, especially to the point of dragging it out and influencing the outcome.

    Is there a rule that stated testimony couldn’t be limited by both number and time? And again, why were non-residents allowed to testify?

    I just called Maria Cantwell regarding the health care vote. I only get to count with the right zip code (and I would think the right phone number on their caller ID.)

  76. DrChill says:

    The FEDS: Care for some standards?
    Palin : Make it a double.

    On Palins rejection of Energy Efficiency Standards Money

    Palin rejects them because the Federal Government’s suggested energy codes, because ‘they are too expensive and will not work in Alaska.’

    It seems that Alaska is one of those states that has “home rule”, meaning that the state doesn’t have jurisdiction over the entire state’s building & energy codes& standards.

    So they can’t adopt the suggested codes and implement them state wide, nor can they make and enforce their own. How can they enforce any codes state-wide? They can’t, and so they are not required to.

    Alaska just have to make a good faith effort to implement energy efficient standards.

    They could start with their own Building Energy Efficiency Standards (BEES) program. The state requires new buildings using state money or financing, to follow ASHRE standards. Who is ASHRE? The same building engineers that wrote the standards the federal government is suggesting.
    The same ASHRE that Palin says is – “from Bureaucrats in Washington DC” – “it won’t work in Alaska” and is “One size fits all.”

    So in Alaska if you accept state money for your building there are – uh – strings attached! Just like in the federal program. Except the federal program is more lenient than Alaska’s.

    Double standards anyone?

  77. mommom says:

    As someone who has an oil lease in the Hayesville shale play in Northwest Louisiana and East Texas,and a daughter who also has a lease in the play,I have said this before.There is a lot more gas here in the lower 48 .We have the Barnett play inTexas that was the laegst in the USA,now we also have the Hayesville play,the new largest in the USA. Additional deposits have recently been found in many places,like New York,Pennsylvania,and Wyoming,along with all of the other known gas deposits. Gas from Alaska would be too expensive compared to gas from more local sources.

    Alaska gas will only be attractive to the Canadian Tar Sands interests. What a shame that GINO wants to take a clean burning fuel source that Alaskans will need in the decades to come and allow the it to be wasted on this horrible use.

  78. Polly says:

    Objectively, I can see the ordinance being “doomed.” Too much controversy. I don’t think it should be put on a ballot either. Then it would be set in stone. Should wait a few years, or change the wording. I don’t like the wording options that were presented. Leave like it is for now. Revisit…after various leaders representing all the factions have some roundtable discussions. Too many uneducated people… sad, but true.

  79. Martha says:

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/1104653.html

    Alaska GOP Rep. Says Palin Ethics Compaints Should Be Kept Private

    First Posted: 06-19-09 09:00 AM

    Anchorage Republican Rep. Bob Lynn, a supporter of Gov. Sarah Palin’s, said he’s going to introduce a bill to stop ethics complaints against the governor or members of her staff from being publicly discussed unless the state finds they have merit.
    =======================================
    WHAT is going on in the Alaskan senate? How are the Democratic senators responding to this?

    Another rubber stamp for corruption in Alaska, is the last thing the state needs. The “personnel board” is a rubber stamp in itself, now Palin has gotten so bad she needs two!

    Between this and the “Arctic Cat secret”, Palin locks more like Rod Blagojevich every day.

  80. BigPete says:

    Yes, we will.

    Murkowski sure has the magic touch.
    Mention that you “understand” the governor’s issues.
    Appeal to the Alaskan independent spirit; there is usually a way around the issues, just grab the money!

  81. InJuneau says:

    Lilybart–Well thank goodness for that!

  82. Laurie says:

    OT ADN is reporting the ordinance is doomed. Could this be true AKM?

    I don’t think it is doomed. There are other factors coming into play that are not talked about in that article. I’m going to post on this tonight. AKM

  83. Lilybart says:

    T Boone must not be susceptible to winks.

  84. austintx says:

    Like him or not , Pickens is a smart bidness man. He is buying up a lot of water rights in north Texas.

Leave A Comment

%d bloggers like this: