Bartlett drops opposition to oil drilling in Arctic refuge

Baltimore Sun/AP ^ | May 22, 2008 | staff

[saganite]

Congressman Roscoe Bartlett says high oil prices have prompted him to drop his longtime opposition to oil and natural gas drilling in a national wildlife refuge in Alaska.

The Maryland Republican has co-sponsored a bill that would allow for oil and gas production on part of the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

[Go Gordon]

I don't know how it would work, but a caller into a radio show today suggested that since 80% of the domestic oil we produce in the US is actually exported to other countries, maybe it is time that the congress introduces emergency legislation to stop that. If we kept 100% of our own oil, that would increase supply at a time we desperately need it

Oil is a fungible commodity. It makes no sense to ship oil from the northern slope of Alaska to Texas. It makes more sense to sell the Alaskan oil to Japan, and buy oil for Texas from Mexico.

[Uriah_lost]

Why is common sense so uncommon? Don’t you feel like you are pounding your head against the wall when you try to explain these simple concepts?

[Prokopton]

ATTENTION: Norm Coleman.....

Coleman would be foolish to continue to be on the wrong side of this issue during an election year.

[newnhdad]

Too late.

[SueRae]

Indeed. What the $#%% does it take for the light to go on for these people???

[Uriah_lost]

Your moral supperiority is duly noted. Did you type that while savoring the scent of your own farts?

[thackney]

Oil is a fungible commodity. It makes no sense to ship oil from the northern slope of Alaska to Texas. It makes more sense to sell the Alaskan oil to Japan, and buy oil for Texas from Mexico.

It also makes no sense to ship it to Japan when there are large markets for the oil closer on the US West Coast. Which is why that is where it is currently shipped.

[okie01]

Look at it from the standpoint of the Japanese market, rather than the Alaskan producer.

Without any domestic oil supplies, the Japanese have to choose between Persian Gulf oil and Alaska oil. Are they maybe going to pay a little more for Alaskan oil at Valdez than for Persian Gulf oil at Dhahran -- because the shipping costs would be less?

In the end, it will always be efficiency that will determine the distribution pattern.

I've no doubt that Japan is still acquiring a significant amount of oil from Alaska. But I can't imagine it's any longer a majority.

[bolobaby]

See #21 above.

It’s NOT too late.

[HD1200]

Oil is a fungible commodity; it would not matter if we shipped 100% of our oil out of country, we just turn around and import oil to replace it. What controls what oil goes out and what oil comes in is shipping costs. We ship a lot of oil off the Pacific Coast and replace it with oil brought in through the gulf because there are not enough refineries on the west coast.

Look up the definition of FUNGIBLE. I get sick of posts that evidence someone not thinking something through.

[personalaccts]

The house passed drilling everytime. It’s Senators:
MCcain
Collins
Snowe
Spector
Coleman

It’s there fault.

[HD1200]

Gee, if we BANNED PRIVATE JETS or surcharged their fuel 100% I bet in two days flat there would be a bill passed to DRILL IN ANWR!

[thackney]

Look at it from the Washington and California Refineries. The delta in differences for shipping between the Middle East and Alaska is much greater for them.

But this isn't a theoretical discussion, we already know it isn't shipped to Japan.

[HD1200]

Didn’t you leave off 51 Democrats from you list of Senators that are a problem????

Seems to me instead of pointing fingers at 5 Republicans that feel their responsibilites are owed to their constituents that have expressed concern over ANWR, you should be pointing your fingers at the Democrats who vote 100% to prevent drilling in ANWR.

[DB]

Well had you done so when Republicans were still in power a few years ago it would have mattered. It will take years to get Anwr online. Now it is too late and too little by political hacks/fools.

[thackney]

I've no doubt that Japan is still acquiring a significant amount of oil from Alaska.

You should doubt it. It was never true.

When first built the pipeline oil could not be exported; that was part of the deal to get the pipeline approved through congress. The ban against exporting Alaskan North Slope was lifted in 1996 yet 100% of Alaskan North Slope oil is kept in America. This has been the case for all but 4 years of the nearly 3 decades of Alaskan oil production. Between 1996-1999 5.5% of North Slope oil was exported to Asian countries. These exports were overwhelmingly supported by the US Congress and by the Clinton Administration to offset an oil glut in California at the time. In June 2000 Alaskan North Slope oil again ceased to be exported, and 100% of Alaskan North Slope production has stayed in America.

You can look at the export history from this area since the ban was lifted.

Exports, US West Coast including Alaska and Hawaii
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrexp51a.htm

Here you can see data from the California Energy Commission. They track the amount of oil brought into California from Alaska.

CALIFORNIA CRUDE OIL PRODUCTION AND IMPORTS
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-600-2006-006/CEC-600-2006-006.PDF

Here you can see from the Washington Government that 74% of the oil used in Washington State refineries comes from Alaska.

Washington State, Petroleum FAQs
http://qa.cted.wa.gov/portal/alias__CTED/lang__en/tabID__847/DesktopDefault.aspx

As for transportation costs, look at the distances:

Alaska Crude Oil Production
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrfpak2m.htm

US Crude Oil Exports by Destination
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_expc_a_EPC0_EEX_mbblpd_a.htm

U.S. Crude Oil Exports to Japan
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrexja2a.htm

[HD1200]

Why are you listening to clueless left wing talk radio and repeating that nonsense here? Oil is a fungible commodity.

Look up the definition of fungible.....

[DB]

It could also go the other way. People looking for profits while they can get them. It isn’t like other items that if you know the price is going down later you can hold off buying it for awhile.

[aculeus]

Bartlett has a pear?

[HD1200]

Dilbert cartoon that had free republic laughing a short while ago about those that don’t understand FUNGIBLE COMMODITIES.

Dilbert: I’m thinking about buying a more fuel-efficient car.

Dogbert: Why?

Dilbert: It’s my patriotic duty to reduce this country’s dependence on foreign sources of oil.

Dogbert: Why?

Dilbert: Because then the countries that hate us will have less money to fund terrorists.

Dogbert: Actually, developing countries would buy the oil you saved. Thus adequately funding those same terrorists.

Dilbert: At least I wouldn’t be funding them myself.

Dogbert: Oil is a fungible commodity. The capitalist system virtually guarantees that you’ll end up buying the lowest cost oil from sources unknown to you.

Dilbert: Well, maybe, but I want my car to make a statement.

Dogbert: And the statement would be “Hey, everyone, I don’t understand what fungible means.”