Senate Approves Oil Drilling in ANWR

[Tgace]

http://www.anwr.org/features/pdfs/faces-caribou.pdf

Recent surveys of the Central Arctic caribou herd near the Prudhoe Bay oil field shows the herd population at its highest level ever recorded in the past quarter century. The herd has grown more than sevenfold since Prudhoe Bay development began in the mid-1970s.

New oil development technology will allow companies to tap underground producing reservoirs with a much smaller "footprint" on the surface. Development in ANWR will impact only 2,000 acres of the 19.6 million acre Refuge.

http://www.anwr.org/topten.htm

1. Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected. That¹s less than half of one percent of ANWR that would be affected by production activity.

2. Revenues to the State and Federal Treasury Federal revenues would be enhanced by billions of dollars from bonus bids, lease rentals, royalties and taxes. Estimates on bonus bids for ANWR by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Interior for the first 5 years after Congressional approval are 4.2 billion dollars.


3. Jobs To Be Created Between 250,000 and 735,000 ANWR jobs are estimated to be created by development of the Coastal Plain.

4. Economic Impact Between 1977 and 2004, North Slope oil field development and production activity contributed over $50 billion to the nations economy, directly impacting each state in the union.

5. America's Best Chance for a Major Discovery The Coastal Plain of ANWR is America's best possibility for the discovery of another giant "Prudhoe Bay-sized" oil and gas discovery in North America. U.S. Department of Interior estimates range from 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

6. North Slope Production in Decline The North Slope oil fields currently provide the U.S. with nearly 16% of it's domestic production and since 1988 this production has been on the decline. Peak production was reached in 1980 of two million barrels a day, but has been declining to a current level of 943,000 barrels a day.

7. Imported Oil Too Costly In 2004 the US imported an average of 58% of its oil and during certain months up to 64%. That equates to over $150 billion in oil imports and over $170 billion including refined petroleum products. That¹s $19.9 million dollars an hour! Including defence costs the number would be nearly a trillion dollars.

8. No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska 's arctic. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd (CACH) which migrates through Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3000 animals to its current level of 32,000 animals. The arctic oil fields have very healthy brown bear, fox and bird populations equal to their surrounding areas.

9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller.

10. Alaskans Support More than 75% of Alaskans favor exploration and production in ANWR. The Inupiat Eskimos who live in and near ANWR support onshore oil development on the Coastal Plain.

Wilderness V Development

 

[michaeledward]

29.4 Billion Barrels of Oil at the top end of the estimate.

How much oil does the United States consume in a year?

 

[Tgace]

29.4 Billion Barrels of Oil at the top end of the estimate.

How much oil does the United States consume in a year?

http://www.anwr.org/features/issues/wilderness-dev.htm

Daschle's "six-months supply" is based on the low end of the range estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey of 5.7 billion barrels to a high of 16 billion barrels. Were the actual amount of oil in ANWR to be no more than 5.7 billion barrels, the most we could extract would be two million barrels per day because of the pipeline capacity. At that rate, the minimum estimated reserves would last 25 years.
The most probable quantity of ANWR oil is over 10 billion barrels, using today's extraction technology. Now we're talking about a 50-year supply, pumping at maximum capacity.
How can the Senate Majority Leader make such a misleading statement? Environmental organizations have twisted logic to divide the total daily U.S. oil consumption by the minimum estimated ANWR reserves, and concluded the supply would last only six months, totally disregarding the reality that there is no way to extract and distribute a supply to equal the total U.S. demand from any single source.

 

[Tgace]

The only way the more extreme environmentalists will be happy is to eliminate oil consumption. Conservation still does nothing to alleviate dependence on foreign sources like "friendly" Venezuela and the Middle East. We need to conserve, we need to develop alternate energies AND we need to explore our own oil sources....

 

[michaeledward]

Gee ... I hate to have to answer my own question ...

It seems that the United States consumes 20 million barrels of oil per day.

OK ... let's do the math ...

29400 million Barrels of Oil in Alaska (Top Line Estimate).

Divided By
​

20 Million Barrels of Oil per day consumption (Current Consumption)

equals
​

1470 Days of Oil in Alaska.

​

So, the best case scenario, is that what we may be able to get from the North Slopes could provide 4 years worth of oil at today's consupmtion rate. Regardless of how slowly it takes to extract the oil. We are trading a number of unknowns, for at best 4 years supply.

I suppose, if we don't define those unknowns, what caribou herd, what are dolly varden, or intentionally downgrade the impact - such as 'only 2000 acres' will be disturbed. We will never know what is lost.

Four Years.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Someone tell me...What's in Anwar again? Don't use vague terms like "Wildlife refuge" either. That's a dodge if I ever heard one. Someone explain to me, in plain english, what's so special about Anwar (other than oil) and WHY is drilling oil going to make it "Not special". If someone could do that, i'd be very greatful. :asian:

 

[Tgace]

Saw that Steven Segal movie one too many times? What was that one with the "evil oil mogul" where Steve blows up the oil deck after becoming an Eskimo and becoming one with nature?

 

[michaeledward]

I'm wondering .... how much oil is there in, say Afghanistan and Iraq?

We have spent well over 300 Billion Dollars taking over that land. Gee, there ought to be at least a couple of years of oil there, right?

Any one know, I mean, really, How much oil is there in Iraq?

 

[sgtmac_46]

I'm wondering .... how much oil is there in, say Afghanistan and Iraq?

We have spent well over 300 Billion Dollars taking over that land. Gee, there ought to be at least a couple of years of oil there, right?

Any one know, I mean, really, How much oil is there in Iraq?

You tell me. Wasn't your argument that this whole war was for oil? Yet we aren't really getting that much. So aren't you, in essence, now claiming that you were mistaken? What's more, the fact that your suggesting we SHOULD be taking their oil is kind of weird.

 

[Xequat]

The thing about ANWR is that it is such a beautiful, pristine, pretty, natural-looking place because it's a big piece of crap land that nobody ever goes to for any reason. If it's warm enough that the land isn't frozen, then it improves to a swamp. The caribou don't care about things like eyesores, either; they will simply walk around the pipes. Not too disruptive.

I will say this, however, I don't necessarily think we should do it unless we are aggressively pursuing fuel/energy alternatives, because I'd just as soon use up other countries' resources, even if it is expensive, and save ANWR as a kind of reserve in case we need it later. If what Mike said is true, then four years' worth of oil doesn't seem like it's worth using up now because although fuel is expensive, I don't think it's a national emergency yet. Unless there are many other untapped sources of oil in the US, of course, that I don't know about. Keep in mind, though, that it wouldn't suddenly be our only source of oil. Surely, we'll still import some, which will stretch out our supply for a while. The other thing is the crack spread. How much does it cost to refine the oil after it's been taken from this Ansel Adams picture? It's still going to cost some money to refine it, so the total cost needs to be assessed before moving forward, I think. Maybe it has, but I couldn't find any evidence of it via Google.

I think we need to look at this logically and strategically. Some of the counter-arguments I've heard have been (except Mike, who used some facts) emotional..."Oh no, it's so pretty! Oh the caribou!" and other such things. Every picture I've seen of the area has been perfectly untouched and perfect. Not even a footprint in the snow. Know why? Because nobody uses it for anything, menaing I've never been there, you've never been there, and nobody will ever be there unless they are working at an oil refinery. We wouldn't even know it existed if not for environmental extremists, so I think we should let this one go and focus on real environmental hazards instead of protecting useless land because it looks like such a nice, jolly place for all the happy little animals.

 

[michaeledward]

You tell me. Wasn't your argument that this whole war was for oil? Yet we aren't really getting that much. So aren't you, in essence, now claiming that you were mistaken? What's more, the fact that your suggesting we SHOULD be taking their oil is kind of weird.

Don't confuse a question with a position.

And you prefer, pick a friendly country ... How much oil is there in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or United Arab Emerate?

Another interesting tid-bit .... How many oil wells are there in Texas? How many oil wells are there in Iraq? Why the disparity?

 

[Makalakumu]

Someone tell me...What's in Anwar again? Don't use vague terms like "Wildlife refuge" either. That's a dodge if I ever heard one. Someone explain to me, in plain english, what's so special about Anwar (other than oil) and WHY is drilling oil going to make it "Not special". If someone could do that, i'd be very greatful. :asian:

Do you like going outside? Do you hunt and fish? Do you enjoy the peace and quiet and solitude of nature? ANWR is a place with a particular government label. Yet, that label does nothing to describe what lies in the hearts of outdoorsmen/(people). When ANWR was designated as ANWR, our country made a committment to preserving land in its natural state. Why?

Men like Sigurd Olson, put it best...

In some men, the need of unbroken country, primitive conditions and intimate contact with the earth is a deeply rooted cancer gnawing forever at the illusion of contentment with things as they are. For months or years this hidden longing may go unnoticed and then, without warning, flare forth in an all consuming passion that will not bear denial. Perhaps it is the passing of a flock of wild geese in the spring, perhaps the sound of running water, or the smell of thawing earth that brings the transformation. Whatever it is, the need is more than can be borne with fortitude, and for the good of their families and friends, and their own particular restless souls, they head toward the last frontiers and escape.

What is ANWR? I can only speak for myself. It is a place that is good for my soul...and maybe yours. And, I guess I can understand if you would rather put cheap gas in your gas tank. Somehow some children were taught to sell the most precious for the cheapest.

:idunno:

upnorthkyosa

 

[Makalakumu]

Here is some more from Sigurd Olson on wilderness

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/JMC/Olson/speeches/spiritual_need.htm

upnorthkyosa

 

[mrhnau]

Do you like going outside? Do you hunt and fish? Do you enjoy the peace and quiet and solitude of nature? ANWR is a place with a particular government label. Yet, that label does nothing to describe what lies in the hearts of outdoorsmen/(people). When ANWR was designated as ANWR, our country made a committment to preserving land in its natural state. Why?

Men like Sigurd Olson, put it best...

What is ANWR? I can only speak for myself. It is a place that is good for my soul...and maybe yours. And, I guess I can understand if you would rather put cheap gas in your gas tank. Somehow some children were taught to sell the most precious for the cheapest.

:idunno:

upnorthkyosa

Its good for your soul? Have you been there? hunting there? Will taking up a small fraction of a piece of land you would never see defile the entirety of Alaska? Will the entire wildlife ecostructure of the beauty of Alaska be tainted, and fishermen/hunters not be able to go there anymore? There are instances like the Valdez, but they are far and in between. Even that disaster did not defile the entire coastline if I recall.

There is already alot of oil drilling in Alaska. Will continue to be. Designating some place off limits is ok I guess, but it won't be affected too much if we choose to drill there. Go look up the location of ANWR on the map. Here is a small map of the area. Here are some other maps. This is the most barren land in the US. Its too cold to go hunting under most circumstances. Is hunting/fishing even allowed? How often are rivers even thawed? I honestly don't know if its populated, anyone know? Would you rather drill in a populated area and displace people?

We are taught to sell our most precious for the cheapest? A small fraction of this land will be drilled. Would you rather teach them depcy on countries that sponsor/produce terrorists? I don't see it as "selling our most precious". I'd consider it using our resources, and trying to use them wisely w/out destroying what beauty we do have. If they do chose to drill, I hope its monitored closely. I don't want the land destroyed completely, but there is going to be some kind of impact. The same kind of impact -your- land had when you put down a house. Same kind of impact of the office you work at (assuming you do).

It seems that the United States consumes 20 million barrels of oil per day.

I'm going to assume your math is correct, and we have a four year supply out in ANWR. The logic does not hold though. We will not stop drilling in other locations! we will not stop importing oil from other countries! Just because we start drilling in ANWR does not mean we stop looking for other sources too. So, how much oil supply do we have in our entire country w/out ANWR? Would we last for 20 years? Then ANWR would make it 24. Within the next 24 years we would have time to explore other resources and alternative energies. How much oil do we have w/ imports? how long can we last on those resources? 100 years? ANWR would make it 104. I honestly don't know the figures, anyone know? Those 4 years provide more breathing room for alternitive energy research. If its just 4, I'll take them. Its 4 more than we had.

As I stated before, we need to guard consumption, but also plan for the future. Lets see if we can get that 20M down to 15M in 10 years. I'd be all for that. Conservation would cut our dependancy.

I will say this, however, I don't necessarily think we should do it unless we are aggressively pursuing fuel/energy alternatives, because I'd just as soon use up other countries' resources, even if it is expensive, and save ANWR as a kind of reserve in case we need it later. If what Mike said is true, then four years' worth of oil doesn't seem like it's worth using up now because although fuel is expensive, I don't think it's a national emergency yet. Unless there are many other untapped sources of oil in the US, of course, that I don't know about. Keep in mind, though, that it wouldn't suddenly be our only source of oil. Surely, we'll still import some, which will stretch out our supply for a while.

Well said. I pretty much repeated some of the things you said. One point I will add. If you want to consider this as a reserve, thats fine. However, you don't simply go and stick a pipe in the ground and out comes oil. It takes years to develop. You need more refinery capacity. It takes time. If we have an emergency and our oil supply is cut off, we are talking years before we can tap ANWR. If we plan on using it, the time for action would be now. Reserve or not, it would be wise. I don't want to wait for an emergency. Perhaps if we care to keep it as a reserve, maybe you can suggest setting up the structure, and running at low capacity until we need it? keep capacity in reserve for instances such as war or natural disaster? (think katrina/rita).

MrH

 

[BrandiJo]

my bfs from alaska, and they all are really excited about it. He says it will give them more main road systems, more govnment funding, and it wont hurt anything, odds are the anaimals will be drawn to it for warmth and so they could have a safer winter season. i dont know where i personaly stand on it cus iv never really looked at it but his arugemnts do sound logical

 

[mrhnau]

my bfs from alaska, and they all are really excited about it. He says it will give them more main road systems, more govnment funding, and it wont hurt anything, odds are the anaimals will be drawn to it for warmth and so they could have a safer winter season. i dont know where i personaly stand on it cus iv never really looked at it but his arugemnts do sound logical

I understand they get a check each year from oil receipts. I'm sure they might get a little bit more What part of AK? I'd love to visit one day soon...

MrH

 

[oldnewbie]

Gee ... I hate to have to answer my own question ...

It seems that the United States consumes 20 million barrels of oil per day.

OK ... let's do the math ...

29400 million Barrels of Oil in Alaska (Top Line Estimate).

Divided By
​

20 Million Barrels of Oil per day consumption (Current Consumption)

equals
​

1470 Days of Oil in Alaska.

​

So, the best case scenario, is that what we may be able to get from the North Slopes could provide 4 years worth of oil at today's consupmtion rate. Regardless of how slowly it takes to extract the oil. We are trading a number of unknowns, for at best 4 years supply.

I suppose, if we don't define those unknowns, what caribou herd, what are dolly varden, or intentionally downgrade the impact - such as 'only 2000 acres' will be disturbed. We will never know what is lost.

Four Years.

I've seem this type of math before.... the problem is we would not use ANWR for 100% of our consumption. ANWR would be a way to reduce our need of imported oil.

Using the above numbers of 20 Million/day = 7300 million /year
7300 million x 10% = 730 million less from imported oil.

29400 million / 730 million = 40.27 years we are less dependent.

That seems like a do-able situation. Less dependency means savings in the tank.

What we really need to do is to build more/better refineries.....

 

[arnisador]

I'm not surprised to hear that Alaskans see it as an economic boon.

If I understand, ANWR was created by an act of congress, right? (Or could it have been by presidential order?) Making it out now to be sacred ground is too much.

 

[michaeledward]

Folks, my math example is not presented to suggest that the entire consumption of the United States be transferred from foreign sources to ANWR - like turning off valve A and turning on valve B.

The math is presented to demonstrate one half of the 'what is it worth' equation. If we are not clear on what is to be gained, then we can not make an informed decision.

I understand completely that it will take a decade to build the extraction and transportation capabilities from ANWR. It will further take decades to fully extract what carbon may be hidden in the ground.

But, the best case scenario is that we are going to extract 4 years worth of fuel for our country.

Someone else has asked the other half of the 'What is it worth' Equation: what is there in ANWR that is worth preserving.

If preserving rare habitat, and rare wildlife is not worth the 4 years of fuel, then support drilling.

One other thing to consider, how difficult is it to extract oil from the ground in ANWR; especially when compared to how the oil comes out of the ground in other parts of the world.

 

[Makalakumu]

Its good for your soul? Have you been there? hunting there? Will taking up a small fraction of a piece of land you would never see defile the entirety of Alaska? Will the entire wildlife ecostructure of the beauty of Alaska be tainted, and fishermen/hunters not be able to go there anymore? There are instances like the Valdez, but they are far and in between. Even that disaster did not defile the entire coastline if I recall.

There is already alot of oil drilling in Alaska. Will continue to be. Designating some place off limits is ok I guess, but it won't be affected too much if we choose to drill there. Go look up the location of ANWR on the map. Here is a small map of the area. Here are some other maps. This is the most barren land in the US. Its too cold to go hunting under most circumstances. Is hunting/fishing even allowed? How often are rivers even thawed? I honestly don't know if its populated, anyone know? Would you rather drill in a populated area and displace people?

Those maps are beautiful...

The kind of impact drilling and pumping would have is debateable. Oil companies claim that they can do it without much impact. Others disagree. The impact of drilling is an issue, but that isn't necessarily what I'm talking about.

In 1964, our country made a comittment to wilderness because of people like Bob Marshall and Sigurd Olson. We, as a nation, said to the world that we valued this undeveloped land and that we to preserve it for future generations. The Wilderness Act was a promise and I want my nation to stick to that promise.

We are taught to sell our most precious for the cheapest? A small fraction of this land will be drilled. Would you rather teach them depcy on countries that sponsor/produce terrorists? I don't see it as "selling our most precious". I'd consider it using our resources, and trying to use them wisely w/out destroying what beauty we do have. If they do chose to drill, I hope its monitored closely. I don't want the land destroyed completely, but there is going to be some kind of impact. The same kind of impact -your- land had when you put down a house. Same kind of impact of the office you work at (assuming you do).

The fact that a pile of money exists under ANWR shouldn't challenge these values IMO. We have so many more effective options that could be used to reduce our dependence of foriegn oil. Lets go there first, before we even consider going back on our word...before we violate that promise to our children.

Drilling in ANWR is not a wise use of resources. Not when we waste as much as we do. Not when we have to go back on our word in order to feed the machines that make us fat and lazy. For me, drilling in ANWR has become a symbol of the gluttony and greed that I feel has taken over our nation. If it does occur, I would have to mourn the loss of those values that I hold so dear.

It truly is selling the most precious for the cheapest and I want to believe that America is so much better then that...

upnorthkyosa

ps - the terrorist angle is nothing but nasty right wing propaganda. It doesn't fool me and it doesn't scare me. We could change some laws and easily stop buying oil from the "bad guys". This is just another instance where "terror" is being used as a social hammer...

:bs:

People need to learn how to call it like it is and quit feeding this beast.