10 Reasons to support drilling for Oil in ANWR (Alaska)

[Snake Plissken]

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.

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 in 1995 on bonus bids alone were $2.6 billion.

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

4. Economic Impact Between 1980 and 1994, 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 25% 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 1.4 million barrels a day.

7. Imported Oil too Costly The U.S. imports over 55% of the nation's needed petroleum. These oil imports cost more than $55.1 billion a year (this figure does not include the military costs of protecting that imported supply). These figures are rising and could exceed 65% by the year 2005.

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) at Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3,000 to as high as 23,400 during the last 20 years of operation. In 1995, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd size was estimated to be 18,100 animals.

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.

 

[hellah10]

although those are excellent points...

iam still against it because in the end...it`ll be cheaper to just get oil overseas.

However, I find it hard to believe that No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska's arctic. :shrug:

 

[Snake Plissken]

hellah10 I am interested to hear what you have to say about this subject in more detail when you have time. Your a guy who seems very knowledgeable about this.

 

[djv]

Alaskans support this becase they all get reduced taxes or a check in the mail from proffits on oil. The rest of the USA gets nothing. Alaskans have gotten as much a 1000 dollars each in the past. Howeve last year do to decrese in production at orignal site. Plus oil companies saying proffits were down. They got nothing. So they want oil drilling starting tomorrow.
It's not needed. Will take 6 years to get it here for us to use. We can in same 6 years get our autos/trucks mileage up 2 gallons more per mile. This will save us more then the estimate 8 to 12 billion barrels of oil that is there.
People say thats alot of oil. not really. Texas at one time was estimate to have 150 billion barrels. Lot of it used. Iraq has 115 to 125 billion barrels second only to Saudi with 150 to 175 billion barrels. When you see these numbers 10 billion is just a drop.
We will be getting much more from Iraq when are action is completed there. You know most folks don't even know we get 7 to 9% of our of oil from there now. Believe that is about to grow to 10 or 12%. That ends the need of drilling in Alaska to.

 

[dr. freeze]

looks to me like the rest of the USA gets $$$$ pumped into economy, thousands of jobs created, increased supply meaning decreased prices.....

i'd say thats a something

 

[hellah10]

The question of drilling Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is a double-edged sword. On one hand, domestic production of petroleum is one of the most important things the US can do to reinforce our economic independence from far more polluting and politically unstable regions of the world from which we get over half of our current energy. And since ANWR contains one of the largest untouched oil reserves in North America, why not drill there as long as it is done in a manner respectful of the environment? <-- rightttt

What our country needs is an effective and comprehensive energy policy, not drilling for oil in the ANWR. The United States government designates a limited number of ecologically important sites "National Wildlife Refuges" to protect them from harm. Yet, President Bush, has stated that he`s in favor of removing ANWR's protected status to allow companies to drill for oil. Either we have protected areas, or we do not. Changing the status for financial gain jeopardizes the integrity of our entire National Parks system.

As you know, many scientists and local Gwich'in Native Americans have spoken out against drilling in ANWR. The refuge is
home to an abundance of migratory birds, polar bears, musk oxen, caribou, grizzly bears, wolves, salmon and unique plant life. Because of the very short summer growing season, extreme cold, nutrient-poor soils, and permafrost, vegetation grows very slowly. Any physical disturbance, from tractor tire tracks to large oil spills, can scar the land for decades.

I don't buy the argument that the drilling will be done without ecological damage. The four companies most likely to drill in the Refuge (British Petroleum, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Phillips Petroleum) have demonstrated their inability to prevent spills. A few of the many examples from Alaska: These companies are responsible for the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history (the 11 million gallon Exxon Valdez oil spill), a 9,700 gallon oil spill on February 20, 2001 (caused by BP Amoco in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, the area to the west of the ANWR), and an April 14, 2001 leak of 92,400 gallons of saltwater and crude oil from a pipeline on the Kuparuk oil field operated by Phillips. These four companies alone have been ordered to pay nearly $1 billion in fines and have been responsible for over 150 spills over the past 10 years. These four companies are responsible for over 100 Superfund sites. Bottom line: Drilling for oil is dirty and transporting oil is risky.

I also don't buy the argument that this will significantly reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. The U.S. Geological Survey assessment of the coastal plain estimates that the oil found in the Arctic Refuge would meet the energy needs of the United States for only four to six months, and, even if we started drilling today, that oil wouldn't reach American consumers for another 10 years. In fact, according to leading nonprofit groups, increasing the average fuel efficiency of cars and trucks by a mere two percent per year would save at least twice as much oil as is found in the coastal plain! And, five years ago Congress lifted the export ban on oil shipped through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system, allowing oil from Prudhoe Bay to be exported to Asia. How does that help our national security?

On Feb. 28 by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and Reps. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., and Edward Markey, D-Mass., introduced a bipartisan bill that would designate the coastal plain as wilderness and off-limits to oil exploration. I support that legislation and believe that drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be a terrible, shortsighted mistake.

Iam all for the country trying to make some money...but my dad spent the last 15 years working for Sohio/BritishProtroleum/BP Amoco - before he went back home(Lebanon). I remember him telling me years ago they wanted to drill in Alaska's undiscovered parts....he thought it was a bad idea for the simple reasons that it wont be till 10 years to the oil is consumed.

Drilling in ANWR is only a bandaid on a much bigger problem. The only thing the Bush administration (or ANY administration, for that matter) cares about is what happens during Bush's term. He will be the big hero (to some) if he gets oil from American soil.

But what about 10, 20, 30 years from now????? The way we (Americans) consume oil has GOT to change. Our attitudes have got to change. There IS in fact a LIMITED supply of fossil fuel on this planet.

If the Bush admin. would only put this much commitment into finding alternative energy sources instead of looking for more fossil fuels, we could be FREE of our fear of the 'unstable' countries who have all the power in terms of oil.

It is painfully obvious to me where Bush's heart is, and it certainly isn't in a good place. We can't continue to hope that politicians will solve these problems. These politicians have to stop deciding the fate of the world....

 

[Snake Plissken]

Why would it take 10 years for the oil to be consumed?

 

[hellah10]

maybe i said that wrong...

i mean it`ll take 10 years(after transporting it..refining it..yada yada) THEN after those 10 years...we(the consumers) can use that oil.

 

[Snake Plissken]

No you said it right it just seems like an incredible long time after the oil is drilled before it is actually used.

Interesting stuff

 

[hellah10]

well as you and everybody knows....almost everything on this planet has oil tied to it.

Lets say for example....Toledo is a hot spot for oil drilling...

It takes years and years and years to drill it. Because oil is deeepth beneath the Earth(past the topsoil, past the aquafiers)...and its not like your gonna drill out 3 million barrels just like that. So after thats drilled...you have to refine it....and that takes just as long. Everything in this world is oil...no matter what. At the BP/Amoco Oil Refinery...they produce...

- Gasoline
- Liquefied Petroleum Gas
- Diesel Fuel
- Jet Turbine Fuel
- Sulfur
- Petroleum Coke
- Propylene
- Aviation Gasoline
- Kerosene
- Asphalt
- Heating Oil

Now when you drill for oil...you get that thick, jet black, hot bubbling oil from the Earth. But when you wanna make it into Gas(put in yo car) then its a longgggggggg process. You have to clean it, filter it, add all the clean air shit to it...its a pain in the ass. If you ever pass by an Oil Refinery near you...you`ll see some huge pipes coming out of the ground - in those pipes is the raw thick black oil...and its going to different places around the refinery to be filtered, cleaned, boiled...whatever the case maybe. And that process takes forever...THEN you have to put it into those HUGE bowls - where you check on it hourly and to maintian it and so on and so forth.

I would be able to even give you more on this had BP/Amoco hired me 3 weeks ago But I learned alot from my dad on how this stuff works.

Hopefully the Gov will pull their heads out of their ass and put money into Research and Development to find an alternative to our energy woes - rather then drilling...

 

[djv]

They said 3 to 4 yeasr just to get going and get pipe line built and wells hoked up. First pipe line took over 4 year to complete and get oil flowing to it. Jobs were big talk then. But it created around 25000 jobs. And once pipe line was complete half those were gone. Seems everyone over estmates these things if they can get what they want. The cost to get that oil and get it down here will not make it cheap.
And half the oil we get from Alaska right now we dont get to use here in the USA. It goes under contact from the companies and us the USA to Asia. Places like Japan, S Korea and Tiawan. Good reason for that two. Those countries pay a preium for it. I do hope they tell the complete story this time. We Americans never new the truth about first oil from Alasaka untill few years after it start to flow.

 

[ferdville]

It is a damn' good thing that the people that built this country didn't have to worry about keeping caribu, shrimp, and butterflies in a prim environment. We never would have built anything under those "in a perfect world" conditions. In California we had to spend millions to elevate a highway so the butterflies could travel beneath it rather than above the road. Farms are going under because diverting water might affect the ever popular snail darter fish. Acres and acres of privately owned coastland cannot be developed because an endangered mouse family lives there. If it wasn't so sad it would be funny.

 

[djv]

ferdville and you talk about oil. If estimates are correct there is more off the Calf cost then whats left in Alaska. Think we will ever use any of it. Schould be cheaper to. Transportation is in 5 to 8 mile range. Not through a 500 mile pipe line then 900 miles by ship. I dont know why we dont get that first.

 

[djv]

ferdvillie I understand theres a chit load of the cost of florida to. Not sure what the reason for not drilling there. I would think with Bush as Governor he could push that through. I would think it to would be cheaper then coming down from Alaska.
Heck between Calf and Florida cost estmates are over 35 billion Barrels. Thats hell of alot more then 8 to 10 billion in Alsaka.

 

[edludes]

Snake Plissken-that was the most well informed post about the subject that I've read from someone that doesn't live here.We want to drill in 2% of the ill-named Artic National Wildlife Refuge.Each of you could ask everyone you meet for the rest of your lives if they've ever been thereand probably not get a yes.Hellah,there is no proof that there is any "untapped" oil reserve here,only speculation that it is the next best chance for domestic oil.Djv-you apparently aren't concerned with facts:Every Alaskan got a $2000 dividend check last year.This is the year there will be nothing due to the market crash.Also nobody in the oil biz contends that theres more oil potentially off California's coast than here.Thats more BS.In the long run,even if they did strike oil there,it likely wouldn't be enough to run the country for a serious amount of time.It is unbelievable how misinformed many of the good people in the "lower 48" are about this issue.It is the #1 emotional fundraising issue the environmental groups use for fund raising,by disseminating misinformation about harming the wildlife.Field and Stream magazine once wrote an article contending that workers at Prudhoe Bay hunted the animals there.Thats a baldfaced lie!!I worked inPrudhoe Bay for two years.The Caribou walk around the camps like sacred or at least tame cattle,oblivious to man because they are never harmed or hunted by them.80% of our state economy is oil driven.Tourisms shot by the terrorist/war fears,fishermen are dead and they just don't know it yet.Timbers gone.If our well intentioned countrymen don't let us use what is our only resource of consequence,our oil.Prudhoe Bay is about 75% gone,and there isn't anything here to remotely replace it.This in a state that is 2 1/2 times the size of Texas,the vast majority of which is undevelopeable and is never going to to see a road,an airport or even a building,just untouched,Pristine Wilderness.Can't we use 2000 acres in a state that big if that what it takes for the people other than the military to live here?People who have never even seen the state and are totally misinformed about the issues (kinda like Djv) are making the decisions for us,and the decisions are so serious that many may not get to live here in 15 years if Anwar isn't opened.So,Snake Plissken, thanks for writing such a well informed post!!

 

[djv]

edludes I dont say they cant drill there. I just ask why do we not try to make our self less oil dependent. And when that 10 billion barrels are gone then what for Alsaka. You need to find more. And since we only get half of it to use in the lower 48. They drill for this they need to handcuff the oil companis and see it all come here. No one can tell me it will be cheaper then what we can get off the cost of Calf and Florida. Yes were they estimate there can be upto 30 billion barrels total. Hey its our government and the oil companies throwing these numbers around. In a recent hereing on this subject last year. They even question if there is 10 billion barrels in this new Alsake field. It's nice to keep depending on oil. But for our kids and grandkids sake. We better get started in other directions. You at least up there when it.s Gone will have the same big tourist attraction you always have. You mentioned the timber is all gone. You mean the timber that was left on protect only. Or did they just go and use it all up. That would be sad if true. 2000 bucks for just liveing there. I called that a good deal. Hard tobelieve you wont get it this year. i mean price per barrel is higher then heck. Someone must be making abuck or two.