Jason Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 [url="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050316/D88S8V081.html"]http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050316/D88S8V081.html[/url] By H. JOSEF HEBERT WASHINGTON (AP) - Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush. The Senate, by a 51-49 vote, rejected an attempt by Democrats and GOP moderates to remove a refuge drilling provision from next year's budget, preventing opponents from using a filibuster - a tactic that has blocked repeated past attempts to open the Alaska refuge to oil companies. The action, assuming Congress agrees on a budget, clears the way for approving drilling in the refuge later this year, drilling supporters said. The House has not included a similar provision in its budget, so the issue is still subject to negotiations later this year to resolve the difference. 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. Drilling supporters acknowledged after the vote that for refuge development to get final approval Congress must still pass a final budget with the Senate provision included, something Congress was unable to do last year. Still, "this is a big step," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who said he had tried for 24 years to open the refuge, but failed because Democrats blocked the effort through filibusters. The budget is immune from a filibuster, meaning drilling supporters will need only a majority - not the 60 votes required to break a filibuster - to succeed when the issue comes up for final action later this year. Environmentalists have fought such development and argued that despite improved environmental controls a web of pipelines and drilling platforms would harm calving caribou, polar bears and millions of migratory birds that use the coastal plain. Bush has called tapping the reserve's oil a critical part of the nation's energy security and a way to reduce America's reliance on imported oil, which account for more than half of the 20 million barrels of crude use daily. It's "a way to get some additional reserves here at home on the books," Bush said Wednesday. The Alaska refuge could supply as much as 1 million barrels day at peak production, drilling supporters said. But they acknowledge that even if ANWR's oil is tapped, it would have no impact on soaring oil prices and tight supplies. The first lease sales would not be issued until 2007, followed by development seven to 10 years later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton said. "We won't see this oil for 10 years. It will have minimal impact," argued Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., a co-sponsor of the amendment that would have stripped the arctic refuge provision from the budget document. It is "foolish to say oil development and a wildlife refuge can coexist," she said. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., argued that more oil would be saved if Congress enacted an energy policy focusing on conservation, more efficient cars and trucks and increased reliance on renewable fuels and expanded oil development in the deep-water Gulf where there are significant reserves. "The fact is (drilling in ANWR) is going to be destructive," said Kerry. But drilling proponents argued that modern drilling technology can safeguard the refuge and still tap the likely - though not yet certain - 10.4 billion barrels of crude in the refuge. The vote Wednesday contrasted with the last time the Senate took up the ANWR drilling issue two years ago. Then, an attempt to include it in the budget was defeated. But drilling supporters gained strength last November when Republicans picked up three additional seats, all senators who favored drilling in the refuge. Opponents of drilling complained that Republicans this time were trying "an end run" by attaching the refuge provisions to the budget, a tactic that would allow the measure to pass with a majority vote. The 19-million-acre refuge was set aside for protection by President Eisenhower in 1960, but Congress in 1980 said its 1.5 million acre coastal plain could be opened to oil development if Congress specifically authorizes it. The House has repeatedly passed measures over the years to allow drilling in ANWR only to see the legislation stalled in the Senate. But last week, the House refused to include an ANWR provision in its budget document, although any differences between the Senate and House versions would likely be resolved in negotiations. Drilling supporters argued that access to the refuge's oil was a matter of national security and that modern drilling technology would protect the region's wildlife. Environmentalists contended that while new technologies have reduced the drilling footprint, ANWR's coastal plain still would contain a spider web of pipelines that would disrupt calving caribou and disturb polar bears, musk oxen and the annual influx of millions of migratory birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 [img]http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t047/T047854A.jpg[/img] [b]Ahhhhh...... the beauties of Nature [/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 [color="red"]Score another one for the Oil Cartel Administration!!!!!![/color] In 10 years we might be able to actually get some of that black gold, texas tea!!! [img]http://infosuds.free.fr/2004/oil-flag-tn.gif[/img] [color="red"]Ever seen these two together?[/color] [img]http://www.actorbuddyebsen.info/images/jedcl1f.jpg[/img][img]http://www.lcv.org/images/client/bush_rig.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 17, 2005 Report Share Posted March 17, 2005 [img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050315/billday.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 17, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Mar 17 2005, 02:47 AM'][img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050315/billday.jpg[/img] [right][post="63663"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] What's with the dead moose? Did you know that since the pipeline was opened, that the caribou (that the left was so worried about) has THRIVED? They seem to love the pipeline. Secondly, the amount of area of ANWR that will actually be used is less then 2% of the total area (based on the last estimates I remember hearing). Besides, we need to stop relying on Mexico, the Middle East, and Russia for our oil. The ONLY way to do that is to produce more of our own oil. And whine all you want about finding alternative fuels. That may work for gasoline, but gasoline is less than 40% of what oil is used for in the US. Plastics come from oil. Vaseline comes from oil. Motor oil comes from oil. And for the moment, i wouldn't expect trucks to go electric. Hybrid MAYBE, but you still need gasoline for a hybrid. Even if we could stop using gasoline completely, we would still need large quantities of oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted March 17, 2005 Report Share Posted March 17, 2005 [quote name='Jason' date='Mar 17 2005, 01:06 PM']What's with the dead moose? Did you know that since the pipeline was opened, that the caribou (that the left was so worried about) has THRIVED? They seem to love the pipeline. Secondly, the amount of area of ANWR that will actually be used is less then 2% of the total area (based on the last estimates I remember hearing). Besides, we need to stop relying on Mexico, the Middle East, and Russia for our oil. The ONLY way to do that is to produce more of our own oil. And whine all you want about finding alternative fuels. That may work for gasoline, but gasoline is less than 40% of what oil is used for in the US. Plastics come from oil. Vaseline comes from oil. Motor oil comes from oil. And for the moment, i wouldn't expect trucks to go electric. Hybrid MAYBE, but you still need gasoline for a hybrid. Even if we could stop using gasoline completely, we would still need large quantities of oil. [right][post="63809"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Isnt central america(mainly venezuela) our main supplier of cruide oil? I remember something about that when there was shortages because of all the civils wars/genocide that seem to pop up in that region like herpies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted March 17, 2005 Report Share Posted March 17, 2005 [quote name='Ben' date='Mar 17 2005, 02:16 PM']Isnt central america(mainly venezuela) our main supplier of cruide oil? I remember something about that when there was shortages because of all the civils wars/genocide that seem to pop up in that region like herpies. [right][post="63814"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Canada is who we get most of our Oil from, followed by Saudi Ariba. [url="http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html"]http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html[/url] Edit: here is the list from the USDE (Sorry to change this again, but I found something more up to date) [url="http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/2004/fcvt_fotw350.shtml"]http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuel...t_fotw350.shtml[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted March 17, 2005 Report Share Posted March 17, 2005 On the subject ..... [i]Vast untapped reserves of frozen natural gas lie beneath the oceans. Trapped in ice, which literally burns, the gas deposits could provide energy for decades, and scientists are starting to figure out how to mine it.[/i] [url="http://wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66925,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4"]http://wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66...tw=wn_tophead_4[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 Save the penguins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 [b]Map of the area... for those interested[/b] [img]http://i134.exs.cx/img134/2763/anwrmap4yl.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nati Ice Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 [quote]What's with the dead moose? Did you know that since the pipeline was opened, that the caribou (that the left was so worried about) has THRIVED? [u]They seem to love the pipeline[/u].[/quote] haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 i'm tired of getting raped by the middle east and central america... we need to start drilling and building at least some oil refineries... they can also do underwater drilling... its about time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted March 18, 2005 Report Share Posted March 18, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 18 2005, 03:32 PM']i'm tired of getting raped by the middle east and central america... we need to start drilling and building at least some oil refineries... they can also do underwater drilling... its about time... [right][post="64252"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Alternative fuel...thats the key...reliance on no other is what sets us free! Power to my brothers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 [quote name='Beaker' date='Mar 18 2005, 03:11 PM']Alternative fuel...thats the key...reliance on no other is what sets us free! Power to my brothers! [right][post="64319"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] commie! un-american! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 There are less than 10 visitors a year to that place! I say we cur every tree down and milk every bit of resources we have so I can save 10 cents a gallon on gasoline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 More nukes, less kooks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dan_Bengals_FL- Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 People who think the environment will actually thrive under the conditions that will take place in 10 years are beyound ignorant. The roads and traffic brought through that area alone will destroy the life of the polar bear. I am minoring in Honors Humanities and in order to complete that I take an Environmental Ethics class, and we have discussed this topic extensively. If you are for destroying the environment to get the oil, then fine, you see what you want, and the consequences and you'll get it. If you are against destroying the environment then you should not support this. Personally I'd take every drop of Iraq's oil before I touched Alaska and ruined America's own prestine areas. The Bush administration has pushed for this since the begining of its term, and recently became successful. Some conspiracy theorists believe that the gas price rise is actually being pushed for by Bush, so that he would get more support by going into Alaska. Personally I think it more has to do with making his buddies and the people who supported his campaign money. I don't think drilling in Alaska should be an option at this point. First of all, we won't see any of that oil for at least 10 years, and by then hydrogen cars and hydrogen filling stations will be rolling through Europe. Personally I think we should save the oil for the future, maybe even more a time when it would be more valuable than it is now. Use the 10 years to develop new technology and instead save the area. In addition, at the current state of technology a lot of natural gas is wasted while retreaving the oil. It is just burned off. Why not save the oil for a time when you can retrieve not only the oil, but the natural gas as well. Personally I think this decsion is a bad one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 The reason for the rise in oil prices has nothing to do with Bush or any American companies it has nothing to do with any conspiracy theory at all. We have been buying our oil well below market value for years while our European and Asian counterparts have been paying the going rate, there has usually been a bi supply which allowed us to continue the great deal we were getting but now China and India are building their infrastructure for the booming middle class of the 2 countries which in turn requires a lot of oil which has dwindled the supply causing us to have to compete for the oil at the going rate. It all boils down to supply and demand Also drilling the oil in Alaska would provide less than 1% of the oil we use which to me makes it not worth the time and effort much less the enviromental concerns it would cause. I believe our only hope is the fuel cell which uses hydrogen to produce electricity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dan_Bengals_FL- Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 [quote name='Storm' date='Mar 19 2005, 12:44 PM']Also drilling the oil in Alaska would provide less than 1% of the oil we use which to me makes it not worth the time and effort much less the enviromental concerns it would cause. I believe our only hope is the fuel cell which uses hydrogen to produce electricity. [right][post="64680"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Exactly! Europe will have hydrogen cars and filling stations by 2012. Anyway I wasn't saying that Bush had anything to do with the rising oil prices, I just said cospiracy peoople say that. I do believe that he has a desire to make his campaign funders money, and that is a large reason why he pushes so strongly for drilling in Alaska. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 Alternative fuels...reliance on nobody else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 [img]http://www.sierraclub.org/globalwarming/images/windmills.jpg[/img] [b]We should mandate that every home have a wind turbine on the roof [/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 [img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050318/huffaker.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 [img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050318/thompson.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 [img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050318/plante.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dan_Bengals_FL- Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 Some great cartoons BJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.