NYT: Big Oil Steps Aside in Battle Over Arctic

[quaoar]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/politics/21refuge.html?

By JEFF GERTH
Published: February 21, 2005

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 - George W. Bush first proposed drilling for oil in a small part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska in 2000, after oil industry experts helped his presidential campaign develop an energy plan. Five years later, he is pushing the proposal again, saying the nation urgently needs to increase domestic production.

But if Mr. Bush's drilling plan passes in Congress after what is expected to be a fierce fight, it may prove to be a triumph of politics over geology.

Once allied, the administration and the oil industry are now far apart on the issue. The major oil companies are largely uninterested in drilling in the refuge, skeptical about the potential there. Even the plan's most optimistic backers agree that any oil from the refuge would meet only a tiny fraction of America's needs.

While Democrats have repeatedly blocked the drilling plan, many legislators believe it has its best chance of passage this year, because of a Republican-led White House and Congress and tighter energy supplies. Though the oil industry is on the sidelines, the president still has plenty of allies. The Alaska Congressional delegation is eager for the revenue and jobs drilling could provide. Other legislators favor exploring the refuge because more promising prospects, like drilling off the coasts of Florida or California, are not politically palatable. And many Republicans hope to claim opening the refuge to exploration as a victory in the long-running conflict between development interests and environmentalists.

[hatrack]

1. USGS, known these days for cockeyed optimism . . .

. . . gives one chance in 20 that whatever's beneath the Refuge might hold as much as (maybe) 60% of the Prudhoe Bay complex.

So, toss in not-very-appealing projections, the cost of doing business in the High Arctica and the steadily shorter ice-road season (thanks to global warming) and you've got a project that only Tom DeLay could love. BP's already given up their role in Arctic Power, one of the main lobbying groups, and has given up their drilling leases on the western edge of ANWR. That should tell us all something.

[SomewhereOutThere424]

2. Heh

"And many Republicans hope to claim opening the refuge to exploration as a victory in the long-running conflict between development interests and environmentalists."

Why do republicans somedays remind me of a sub-intelligent child intent on finding out what happens when you poke out your own eye?

I guess alaska is begging for new types of prejaduices, those who are black (covered in oil from oilspill disasters like so http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/10/aleutian.oil.spill.reut/index.html), or green (covered in oil AND money). I just hope the alaskans pushing to destroy their own environment are the ones who sink into the permafrost when they try to drive over it with huge oil carriers.

[jdj]

4. eek, I just thought of something else.

I wonder if they are getting word that the environment is set to change so radically in the next ten years that they could lose billions and billions getting set up only to have everything sink and crack open with the permafrost melts. That has to be it, there's no stable way to build on an unstable icescape that could sink everything like quicksand . What ever their motivation, it sure ain't caribou.

[quaoar]

5. Republicans are going to push this anyway

Just so they can declare a victory over the evil tree-huggers.

[jdj]

3. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOLO

ROFLMAO!!!!

I'M DYING HERE...THERE'S NO FUCKING OIL THERE, OR NOT ENOUGH WORTH THE DOUGH.

LOLOL, GOD, IT'S TOO FUNNY.

They must have been doing some serious studies and figured out it ain't gonna be worth their time and money, plus now they got all that I-Rocky oil just a'waitin' to be put in the shipped over.

I heard just a while ago that Shell dropped out of the big lobby group for ANWR, maybe others will follow suit.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

6. I'm with you on this one.

BTW, would you please be so kind as to tell me what ROFLMAO means? I've been racking what few brains I have left, and I can't figure it out. Thank you so much...!

[Richard Steele]

7. ROFLMAO=RollingOnFloorLaughingMyAssOff

And I agree with jdj's thought...they know that anwar is gonna be swampland in a few more years.

Of course, the rePugs are still gonna push for it, just to be assholes.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

8. Thanks! Much appreciated........nt

[K8-EEE]

9. Christ -- The GOP Sickos Still Want To Do It Anyway

They never fail to amaze me. There was NEVER enough potential there to make the tiniest blip in the energy crisis....it was all about profits and apparently there aren't a lot of THOSE to be had but, they just want to do it to have a "victory?"

Sick mf's!

[DeepModem Mom]

10. kick

[liberalmike27]

11. Well

This is one of those issues I'd just as soon let go of, but just allow them to do it, but with the provisions that they use absolutely the most up to date methods, and perhaps add some conservation provisions so auto-makers have to increase the gas-mileage of their cars, trucks, and SUV's.