March 16, 2005

Senate votes to drill in ANWR for oil

The US Senate, weathering a 51-49 vote to prevent a Democratic measure to stop it, decided to permit drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil.

Treehuggers and others are upset that critters will be disturbed while they go about their daily duties, or that the "evil, rich Republicans" will get more money. None of them seem to remember that we, as a nation, are at the beck and call of the Saudis and OPEC.

The action, assuming Congress agrees on a budget, clears the way for approving drilling in the refuge later this year, drilling supporters said.

The oil industry has sought for more than two decades to get access to what is believed to be billions of barrels of oil beneath the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in the northern eastern corner of Alaska.

Current USGS research indicates that there is at least ten billion barrels sitting untapped in Alaska, which would replace Saudi imports for at least 30 years.

But the treehuggers and liberals would rather see us twist in the wind at the behest of the Saudis and other entities.

Let's put this into perspective: ANWR, itself, is the size of the state of South Carolina. The area proposed for drilling is a mere fraction of that -- 2000 acres. The vast majority of ANWR will remain untouched.

Now. Isn't that worth ensuring energy for ourselves and our children?

Posted by mhking at March 16, 2005 02:40 PM

Current USGS research indicates that there is at least ten billion barrels sitting untapped in Alaska, which would replace Saudi imports for at least 30 years

Think about this for a bit.

Global companies will extract the oil. The oil will be refined at locations any place in the world.

The global companies will then send the refined products to where ever the market dictates that it go.

There is no guarentee that the refined product will go to the U.S. for further refining (turning into plastic products) or consumption (fuel).

Thus the opening of ANWR and U.S. dependency on foreign oil can't be determined.

You've been flim-flamed.

Posted by: DarkStar at March 16, 2005 04:09 PM

The vast majority of North Slope oil is refined in the United States. There is no reason to believe that anything different would happen with oil from ANWR.

And if even the chance exists that we can reduce foreign dependancy, then I'd say it was worth the effort. If nothing else, it would generate US-based dollars (whether from domestic sales or global sales) that do not presently exist, which would help the economy.

Posted by: mhking at March 16, 2005 04:18 PM

I heard that there are only 6 mos. of oil reserve. It that is the case, this drilling is absolutely shameful. We all know that the U.S. is dependent on foreign oil, but if you look at all the U.S. military bases in the middle east, they are all in strategic locations, therefore, it appears the U.S. although is dependent on foreign oil - is still in control of those reserves. Why don't the rich oil tycoons, the government come up with other alternatives to fossil fuel?

Posted by: Cynthia at March 16, 2005 05:48 PM

The vast majority of North Slope oil is refined in the United States. There is no reason to believe that anything different would happen with oil from ANWR.

Even if it is refined in the U.S., that doesn't mean the refined product will stay in the U.S.

One of the strangest things about the refining process is, the oil can be pulled from the U.S., go to another country to be refined, and then go to a 3rd country, or back to the U.S., or to many countries.

It's more oil on the market, but ANWR doesn't appear to be a big enough reserve to make a difference on the global market.

It doesn't mean that it shouldn't be tapped, but people are being snowed if they believe ANWR will make a difference.

Posted by: DarkStar at March 16, 2005 09:05 PM

We need to worry about more important things than where we think the oil will be refined. At the moment we get more oil from Venezuela than SA. Iran has just signed a treaty on oil with Chavez(who hates our guts BTW). ANWAR needs to be done, and done fast, when we have breathing room we can have the luxury of being ecologically aware.

Posted by: Mike H. at March 16, 2005 10:41 PM

The technology has improved were drill bits are guided by computers. With powerful computers and satellite images, location of oil found with drilling. My wallet hurts (which paid $20.00) for half full tank.

Posted by: James M. Barber at March 17, 2005 02:26 AM

The point of my response was the oil taken won't neccessarily cause U.S. oil prices to go down because it's not about the U.S., it's about world oil prices.

Posted by: DarkStar at March 17, 2005 07:52 PM

Ah, but should other OPEC nations all of a sudden get 'snippy' about U.S. foreign policy and decided to *cough* adjust their production levels, the United States has an alternate supplier of crude to fall back on.

Actually, we should be using ANWR as a primary source of crude.

Posted by: Mad Mikey at March 23, 2005 08:14 AM

The thing is that the oil will not be extracted at one time. The actual rate of production will be around 1% of our current demand. So assuming that every drop of oil goes to the US, it still will not make a difference. There is no such thing as foreign oil. Oil is completely fungible. There is one world market. The specific origin of a barrel of oil does not matter to the market. If we do not buy middle east oil, someone else will. The only group that stands to benefit from ANWR is the oil industry. Incedently, it is important that we protect the middle east oil fields. Even if the US did not need any of it, the loss of these fields would be a global financial catastrophe making the great depression look like a day at the beach.

Posted by: WHM at March 26, 2005 02:07 PM

What needs to be done is a tightening of effieciency standards and a small invesment in alternatives for such materials as plastic. A 5% improvement in efficiency saves more oil than we'll ever get out of ANWR and saves money - tons of it - for you and me. Drilling in ANWR is a corporate welfare payment to a handful of oil companies who hardly need the money. Unless we promote innovation, this country is going to continue to fall behind. But like a heroin addict, we are grovelling in the dumpster for one last fix instead of really attacking the problem. Have a look at for a project tha hopes to change things around.

Posted by: Nick Aster at May 24, 2005 05:50 PM

Still don't want to increase the supply of oil and the refined product. Who is really getting hurt here the poor. They'll pay at the pump and when the economy slows down will be the first to get laid off. Yes we need balance so we don't harm the enviroment, but the liberals want it all their own way. But check out the Sands Oil project in Canada. Those enviromental Canadians will be laughing all the way to bank as they plan on increasing the production of that field from 1 to 4 million barrels a day. And also becasue of this they will be building new refineries, something you on the left have fought for decades here in the US. I've given you some specfices, something you lefties never do. We have more oil here in oil shale rich areas of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming just begging to be produced than Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq have.

Posted by: Big Mac at September 1, 2005 03:21 PM

What is your definition of a treehugger? someone who cares about the earth God gave us to take care of? someone who fights for the rights of American Indians, animals, plants, ASmerican's, and our children?
Drilling will only save us .01 gal in the year 2026? what's wrong with clean technolgy? do u work for exxon??

Posted by: erin at September 23, 2005 10:47 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?