7starmantis said:
The truth is there is no way to tell the true amount of oil or natural gas in ANWR without drilling.
That is false. Oil and natural gas leave a particular magnetic signature on the surface of the earth. Satalites can read this signature and estimate the EXACT volume of the oil in the ground.
Recovering that oil is a different story. In any oil field, it is impossible to get all of the oil out because of the granular cappilary action of the trapping medium. Different minerals and grains can speed up or slow down the process and can hold on to varying amounts of oil.
The USGS has taken drill core samples of ANWR and from this, coupled with satalite data, we know to a degree of 95% accuracy, how much recoverable oil is in ANWR.
Exploratory drilling is a thing of the past. Our geopetroleum models are way more efficient.
Right now we import about 60% of our oil at a price of around 50 billion plus. We must reduce that dependance. Now, DOI estimated that "in-place resources" range from 4.8 billion to 29.4 billion barrels of oil. They also reported identifying 26 separate oil and gas prospects in the Coastal Plain that could each contain "super giant" fields (500 million barrels or more). That amount of daily oil would do much for our dependance on foreign oil.
No it wouldn't. We use 7,305,000,000 barrels per year. All of ANWR's recoverable oil would give us .068% of that figure. Drilling ANWR would do almost nothing to reduce our dependence of foriegn oil.
In 1996 the North Slope oil fields produced about 1.5 million barrels of oil per day, or approximately 25 percent of the U.S. domestic production. However, Prudhoe Bay, which accounts for over half of North Slope production, began its decline in 1988, and no new fields have yet been discovered with the potential to compensate for that decline. (anwr.org) See the issue isn't a static dependance on foreign oil, but that we are sliding further and further into dependence. We must reverse that trend.
That is absolutely impossible. See the work of M. King Hubbert. The US peaked as an oil producing nation in 1971. Our production has declined ever since. This is due to the nature of oil fields and the granular cappilary action above. We will never EVER reach a point where our production could even possibly meet demand no matter how much we drill or how good our technology becomes. Our country is perhaps the most closely scrutinized country in the world when it comes to oil exploration. We know exactly where it all is...and it ain't ever going to be enough.
So the issue is dynamic in its problems and its soutions. ANWR is a big step in turning that trend around.
Not according to the actual numbers.
No one wants to use wildlife land, but we must do what is necessary to sustain our economy and the lifes of our citizens.
We don't need to use the refuge at all. This point has been made three times already. One mph saves 25 times the amount of oil than exists in all of ANWR.
ANWR may very well not contain enough oil to make much change, but we wont know that until exploratory drilling is done.
See above.
If it doesn't contain enough to make a big dent we move on and return the small bit of land we used to wildlife. Its a decision we must make, not one we like, but one we must be responsible about.
If we decide to drill, the operation will be there for more then 40 years. That is how long the field will produce...0.068% of our countries yearly demand. Its not worth breaking into a wildlife refuge.
Conservation is great, but it is not the final answer.
I think that it should be apparent by now that conservation is the only real answer that will make a difference in the short term and in the long term. The numbers are staggeringly in favor of it. The only real way to cut our dependence of foreign oil is to cut our demand of all oil.
