To: Drammach
Antarctic sites have generally been for scientific research, not commercial venture.. Can't think of one single reason to go to the trouble of trying to even start a commercial venture there..
Makes no sense..
We don't even have a clue what wealth the Antartic may contain. Kaktovik, Alsaka is 70 deg. north latitude, so I don't think temperature is a total impediment, if there is a fortune to be made. The point is nobody will try to find out what wealth Antartica has because this type of treaty regime is toxic to devlopement.
41 posted on
07/18/2004 7:26:09 PM PDT by
frithguild
("W" is the Black Ice President - underestimated until the left completely loses traction.)
To: frithguild
It used to be that Spitzbergen was the most northerly permanently occupied place on Earth, but there's an economic reason for its existence. Same goes for Alaska I suppose (oil?). Antarctica appears to have very little in the way of natural resources, and is even less inviting than the Arctic.
42 posted on
07/18/2004 7:57:28 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson