Is it Time To Drill in ANWR?

Squawker · 03-09-05, 05:57 PM

This has been discussed many, many times, but with the rising cost of gas and oil, isn’t it time to drill in ANWR? It will take years before we get any oil from there into the market place. China is demanding more crude every year and even though ANWR will not give us a lot of oil, it would give us an independent source that we made need in ten or twenty years.

Quote:

Developing the refuge's oil - possibly as much as 10.4 billion barrels - would help allay U.S. reliance on foreign oil, which accounts for more than half of the crude Americans use. Dependence on foreign oil "creates a national security issue and an economic security issue," said Bush, urging lawmakers to include ANWR drilling in a broad energy bill.
Republican leaders in Congress hope instead to use a budget measure to get approval for drilling in ANWR, thereby preventing Democrats from using a filibuster to block it.

Source

vauge · 03-09-05, 06:37 PM

Absolutely.

What gets me fired up is that the same folks that say to preserve wildlife in Alaska are the same ones saying we are in Iraq for oil.

anomaly · 03-09-05, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squawker

This has been discussed many, many times, but with the rising cost of gas and oil, isn’t it time to drill in ANWR? It will take years before we get any oil from there into the market place. China is demanding more crude every year and even though ANWR will not give us a lot of oil, it would give us an independent source that we made need in ten or twenty years.

Source

I say have the Alaskans vote on it. After all, they live there. I could care less about what happens to the Alaskan wildlife preserve. If the Alaskans say no, don't do it. If they say yes, do it. But why don't we, instead of continuing to depend on a vanishing resource, start to come up with ideas for alternative energy possibilities and then maybe try them out?

Squawker · 03-09-05, 07:13 PM

Quote:

But why don't we, instead of continuing to depend on a vanishing resource, start to come up with ideas for alternative energy possibilities and then maybe try them out?

We are doing that already and as some have said in the past, "when there is a demand, it will be supplied". There will always be some need of crude oil even if we find alternatives.

a.d.hettinger · 03-09-05, 08:54 PM

Well ya'll asked about drilling at ANWAR. I have news for you all, it has been being drilled now, successfully for over 10 years. What? you say, never! But alas it is true, only it hasn't been on the "western" edge but rather the "eastern" or Canadian side. Now all the tree huggers that envision Canada as their Mecca can be sure that this is the truth, and if pressed I can supply addresses and websites to prove it.

Next as far as asking Alaskans about drilling ANWAR the answer is an overwhelming YES. This of course will be rebuked by the tree-huggers but again I will present facts if asked.The native corporation that is behind Prudhoe (NANA) currently pays out dividends to the "poor, trampled and forgotten" natives of over $50,000 a year. Also due to evil big oil every state resident receives(not deserves) a yearly check from the state, last year we got $913.00 each.

Heres the thing folks, in 1998 the 20 Millionth barrel of oil was sent to Valdez via the pipeline, this was 10 years after its initial start. The THs squealed how the area will dry up in 5 years, the wild live would die, total kaos!..................hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Bad news, caribou herd on slope is stronger then ever, bears are doing very well, in fact almost all indigenous life is thriving. Currently there are 8 NEW discovery wells being drilled in Prudhoe, each of these wells will follow the "pad" plan of multiple reentry wells. Thats drilling up to 80 well paths from ONE location.

I was fortunate enough to be on the Coleville # 3 exploration well which is the offset well being studied to justify developing a new field. Initial well test show 20 BILLION recoverable barrels of oil.

So for the tree huggers that will be reading this post shaking their heads incredulously side to side i have this to say, put down your 5th cup of Starbucks in the Styrofoam cups, go look at the CAR you drive, parked next to the House you live in, and use something that seems lacking with you people, use your head for once and realize that it needs to be drilled in order to keep our country running.

Git 'er done you Red-neck, backwards, God- fearing, Conservative sister-kissers!
Andy

vauge · 03-09-05, 09:43 PM

Welcome to Debate Politics!

Quote:

Bad news, caribou herd on slope is stronger then ever, bears are doing very well, in fact almost all indigenous life is thriving.

I just heard on the radio that this is happening near the pipeline as well. The warmth of the pipeline is popular with the four legged. The slopes that were created by the movement of vehicles actually help them thrive as well because it increases a wind flow and the mosquitoes fly on by.

Because of the pipeline and the drilling it has increased the wildlife!

26 X World Champs · 03-09-05, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squawker

This has been discussed many, many times, but with the rising cost of gas and oil, isn’t it time to drill in ANWR? It will take years before we get any oil from there into the market place. China is demanding more crude every year and even though ANWR will not give us a lot of oil, it would give us an independent source that we made need in ten or twenty years.

Source

Bush and his henchmen are LYING to all of us to make money for his cronies. According to the NRDC:

Quote:

For the Bush administration, the Arctic Refuge represents another kind of icon: the next frontier. The administration is poised to let oil and gas companies stake their claim to the refuge. Officials say this will help end our dependence on foreign oil. In reality, there is less than a year's supply of oil in the refuge, and it would take 10 years to access it. The administration's real reason to open the Arctic Refuge is more strategic: if it can violate this sanctuary, then it can invade our other cherished wild places as well.

SOURCE: http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic/

The greed factor for Bush's boys is truly vulgar.

Fortunately there are Republicans who care more about the environment for this and future generations. This happened today:

Quote:

BILL WEAKENING CLEAN AIR ACT DIES IN SENATE COMMITTEE

Tri-Partisan Group of Senators Nix Corporate Polluter Plan

Statement by John Walke, NRDC Senior Attorney

WASHINGTON (March 9, 2005) -- In a 9-9 vote, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee today rejected a bill (S. 131) that would have weakened Clean Air Act public health safeguards and postponed deadlines for industrial polluters to significantly reduce their toxic emissions. Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R.I.) and Sen. James Jeffords (Vt.), an independent, joined the committee's seven Democrats in voting against the bill.

Below is a statement by John Walke, clean air project director, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):

"Today senators on both sides of the aisle stood up for the American people against a corporate scheme to weaken federal law and delay the day we all can enjoy breathing clean air.

"If the Senate wants to pass an air pollution bill, that bill would have to clean the air faster than the current Clean Air Act. The bill that died today, which was crafted by industrial polluters, failed that basic test. What's more, it would have worsened global warming by locking the electric power industry into investments that exacerbate, rather than control, global warming pollution."

shuamort · 03-09-05, 11:35 PM

I am an environmentalist. I try to live my life as green as possible while still living a life:
I haven't owned a car for about 6 years
I've got a 3 block walking commute to work
I've got a 4 different recycling bins in my apartment
My heat is supplied by District Energy which is quite environmental in its ways.
I eat a lot of organic/hydroponic foods
My shampoo, soap, and laundry detergent are all eco-friendly.

Thems my credentials.

As for Alaskans and whether they'd support opening ANWR up further, well, it's a complete given that they would. The Trans-Alaskan pipeline has been an economic boon and as a.d.hettinger mentioned, the residents get a check once a year (and according to my friend's sister who lives up there, it's a big deal for the citizens with all of the local stores trying to get the citizens to spend their checks there). Alaska's economy is definitely oil dependent.

As for environmental impact, well, it's really hard to tell. As many reports about the environment and impact of ANWR, I find reports that rebuke them. For every Greenpeace urgent action, there's an ANWR.org . One of the biggest problems with studying the environment is that there are a lot of factors to take into consideration and it takes a long time to find out how much impact that makes.

Right now, there are a lot of problems with the countries that we're importing our oil from. From the dictatorships of the OPEC countries, to the human rights abuses in Africa, over to the health problems of drilling due to lax regulations in Ecuador, drilling in the US is a bit more responsible and much more regulated.

My opinion is to encourage people (friends, neighbors, and even online forums) to be more eco-friendly. To think not only of ourselves, but to think of the next eight generations that we procreate. As we're doing that, we should SLOWLY, let me stress that again, SLOWLY, open up ANWR for drilling and decrease foreign oil dependence. Be cautious, careful, and keep an eye out for negative environmental effects.

skabanger13 · 03-10-05, 01:15 AM

hay I'm from Texas so of course i say drill. any one watch the south park with Peta?

vauge · 03-17-05, 02:22 PM

UPDATE

Source: seatlepi

Quote:

WASHINGTON -- With a hard-fought Senate vote yesterday clearing the way, supporters of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge said survey teams could arrive on the harsh landscape within a year and leases for tapping its significant deposits of oil and natural gas could be sold as soon as 2007.

And according to Interior Secretary Gale Norton, if all goes according to plan, oil and natural gas could be flowing from ANWR in seven to 10 years.

Those predictions, which once seemed unthinkable, emerged as far more likely in the wake of a 51-49 Senate vote to allow drilling for oil and natural gas in a protected part of the Alaskan wilderness. The vote was a major victory for President Bush and his supporters in business and elsewhere who had long advocated drilling in ANWR as a way to ease the nation's dependence on foreign supplies.

The breakthrough came after two days of heavy lobbying on both sides of an emotional issue that has dominated environmental politics for nearly a decade. Until yesterday, opponents had always been able to stop legislation to open ANWR, an ecologically rich and largely untouched area of northern Alaska that defenders said is far too valuable to threaten with development.