Companies get OK to annoy polar bears
June 14, 2008 By DINA CAPPIELLO , Associated Press Writer
This undated file photo from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service\'s Alaska Image Library shows a polar bear. Less than a month after declaring polar bears a threatened species because of global warming, the Bush administration is giving oil companies permission to annoy and potentially harm them in the pursuit of oil and natural gas. (AP Photo/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
(AP) -- Less than a month after declaring polar bears a threatened species because of global warming, the Bush administration is giving oil companies permission to annoy and potentially harm them in the pursuit of oil and natural gas.
Content from The Associated Press expires 15 days after original publication date. For more information about The Associated Press, please visit www.ap.org .
Similar stories from PHYSorg:
New federal climate change agency forming
Feb 08, 2010 |
1.8 / 5 (10) |
9
Even if you're careful, drugs can end up in water
Feb 08, 2010 |
4 / 5 (1) |
1
Wind power capacity grows at record pace, but industry jobs actually fall
Feb 05, 2010 |
4.2 / 5 (6) |
1
According to new survey, Americans support strong climate, energy policies
Feb 04, 2010 |
2.8 / 5 (8) |
5
Obama unveils new biofuels, carbon capture, initiatives
Feb 03, 2010 |
2.6 / 5 (10) |
5
Feb 08, 2010
Bush ... what a disgusting MoFo. His admin also gave coal companies permission to dump mine tailings in surrounding hollows and valleys with no liners and no water treatment ... in short, no regulations at all. How the executive branch is re-writing a sovereign agency's (EPA) regulations is beyond me. He's a damn enviromental criminal. I hope the impeachment gathers some major steam. Since McCain is turning into a major Bush cronnie, it's looking like Obama or a Libertarian would be the wise choice to vote for.
That's right Mike but but change the "use" in "block humans use of the earth" to "overuse" then figure out how to mockingly put words like polluted, sterile (or lifeless), and toxic in there too. I would guess you support drilling in the AWR too.
Bush is horrible. McCain is no Bush or Bush cronnie. He's using him to get money, something he needs to win. If I had a choice at voting for a presidential candidate that has fabulous ideas with no chance of winning or voting for a presidential candidate who has some good ideas with a real chance of winning the presidency, I would vote for the guy who has a *chance* to make a positive impact. If you vote for someone you know isn't going to win how are you helping the Earth? You are only satisfying your own conscience and thinking "I did the best I could." When that person doesn't win, all you can do is throw your arms up and say, "Hey, don't blame me."
I am a Druid, and I am voting for McCain, no doubt about it.
the area to be drilled in ANWR may be comparatively small, but both it and much of the surrounding area has been explored/surveyed. do you know how they do that? with large, heavy tracked vehicle, among other things. damage is done whether we drill or not. do you have any idea how excruciatingly slow the carbon cycle is up there, and how long the native flora etc takes to recover? and the caribou depend on the land, too. sure, they'll browse around oil rigs -- but they won't calve there. but, yeah, we're all just whackos, i know.
and "high arctic desert", huh? aren't MOST terrestrial arctic landscapes pretty much arid (ie, desert)? and the coastal plain of northern alaska is hundreds of miles further south then, say, ellesmere island (the actual HIGH ARCTIC). learn some geography and ecology, why dontcha? jeez, come to a science site, and still, crackpots as far as the eye can see....
zeev
If these environ-mental cases at AP had been around when humans learned to control fire, they would have tried to ban its use because it annoyed wooly mammoths. Who gives a ratsazz whether polar bears are annoyed? Answer: People who are so rich they don't notice the price of gas, or someone else is buying it for them.
wow, the world would get very small very fast if that was policy, thanks be to Whoever that you're not in charge. (btw, "ambivalent" means being conflicted on a subject, which is kind of the opposite of the way you're using it here....)