Posted on 05/25/2006 12:46:14 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
They shouldn't be "trading" on anything. They need to get off their a$$es and do what's right instead of pushing others people's agendas.
Between ANWAR, defense, and shamnesty... do we even need a Senate any more?
This is a site to which a lot of politicians read and know where a large sector of American's stand. The problem for this year is that the House is more on the right track and who are up for reelection where most the Senate can run astray and not give a damn for at least another 2-4 years and they think by then all will be forgotten.
Well, after passing that immigrant piece of trash legislation yesterday in the Senate, how could anyone be hopeful that the Senate will suddenly acquire some commonsense and finally vote for drilling in Anwar?
I have the solution. Hire some illegals to work up there; then the Senate has to pass ANWR drilling to avoid being mean to them.
This has passed the House a number of times. The Senate shoots it down everytime. I wouldn't get to excited.
the unfortunate thing is, ANWAR isn't going to help our energy dependency, except very very minutely. it's like a miniscule baind-aid on the fissure in the dike. moving toward more nuclear capacity is a good step, though. .
Where in the heck did you come up with THAT one? Geeez!! FIVE PERCENT! ANWR is HUGE!!
Conservative estimates place ANWR at about 10 billion barrels (the low estimate is 5 billion,,,,the high was about 15 billion as of two years ago. Advances in drilling technology have raised the high estimate to 20-25 billion barrels!)
But, just for the sake of discussion let's assume the low estimate of 10 billion barrels. All experts agree that when up and running, ANWR will produce about one million barrels/day. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY HUGE! With our daily consumption of just over 20 million barrels/day, that is FIVE PERCENT of our daily consumption. Again, when you import 60% of your oil, like we do---that is HUGE!
Do you know how much oil we import from Saudi Arabia every day? Hmmmmm,,I'll give you the answer to that one--about one million barrels/day--EXACTLY what we could get from ANWR!! THAT IS HUGE. At about $70/barrel, would you rather send $70 million/day to Saudi Arabia,,,,or keep that $70 million/day here? (not to mention the jobs)
Again, that is an absolutely HUGE contribution!
Let's see here, at one million barrels/day with the LOW estimate of 10 billion barrels,,,,ANWR could replace the oil that we import from Saudi Arabia for almost the next THIRTY YEARS!!
Maybe you call that a band-aid,,,but I call it a HUGE contribution to reducing our dependence (given the economic/geopolitical/military repercussions) on foreign oil!
Band aid? Give me a break.
Estimates about the amount of oil in ANWAR range, as you duly noted. CURRENT (and non-leftist, scientific) estimates range all the way from 3-20+ billion. However, they sway in the political winds. The more there is doesn’t equal less foreign dependency per se: with current technologies, we are expecting no more than 1 million barrels per day, also noted.
The following statistics come from the EIA, the U.S. Energy Information Administration. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/aong/anwr.html
“Using the mean estimates of the available resources, opening ANWR to crude oil development is expected to add 800,000 barrels per day to U.S. crude oil production in 2020, 9 years after production in ANWR is projected to begin.” Thus, it may be some time before it may be delivered in that capacity.
According to the administration’s own estimates (Cheney, to be exact), our demand for petrol is going to increase by 30% in the next 20 years. So, doing the math, our consumption, which you put at 20 million barrels/day, will increase to ~26 million/day. So, add in the ANWAR 1 million, and we’re still short.
Additionally, our domestic capacity has been in steady decline for a long time: From a production level of over 10 million barrels in 1985, it fell to 5.4 million in the first few months of 2005 (EIA estimates: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Usa/Oil.html). Although gulf (of Mexico) capacity is expected to increase from current levels, we still are not operating at full capacity, according to the Minerals Management Service, and it when we get back up to speed, we will be behind the curve.
The bottom line is, if we continue to expand our energy demands, which is inexorable at this point, none of these modest domestic petrol reserves are going to enable us to cut the cord with foreign oil. We need an honest assessment of our energy infrastructure. We needed it decades ago.
So all that means a net increase in foreign oil dependency. We don't have enough domestic oil to replace our dependency, no matter what. Especially if we want to continue to be economically dominant as a nation, we will need an ever-increasing supply. This is just a fact: we can't cut our energy consumption and hope to "grow" economically. So ANWR is just a band-aid on a larger, yet unsolved problem.
Dead in the water. Rino's with an attitude.
Because of political sensitivity to gas prices, and the fact that immigration is completely unrelated to energy policy.
Nor do I. But I will waste my little bit of time in contacting my senators, for whatever good it does. See my tagline.
Carolyn
The senate could use the passage of ANWAR as a carrot to get the congress to knuckle under to the Senate version of the Immigration Bill.
Energy problems will become completely related to our immigration policy if this fool Senate bill is accepted. We will then be dealing with millions of people who will be energy users.
And we're already pushing our limits and feeling the effects. An additional 11 million people isn't going to suddenly remind Congress that energy is in too short a supply.
Between deregulation, the allowance of oil exploration, new refineries, and new nuclear plants, we'll be okay. Bush is pushing for at least two of these, which is better than zero.
Florida and California need to step up and do their part and allow offshore drilling. Wind farms off of New England would be great too! We've got them in West Texas.
Florida in particular is so worried about its tourist industry. I can tell you that if gas prices stay up, I certainly will not provide Florida or California with my tourist dollar. My tourist dollar will be going to pay for my travels in Arizona, New Mexico, and my state of Texas!
Completely agreed. I think my state's senators (Martinez and Nelson, hopefully soon to be Martinez and Harris) should vote to repeal the ban. Oil rigs are tourist destinations in and of themselves--you get a helicopter or a boat ride out there, you get a nice tour, and you get a ride back. Charge a few bucks for the round trip, and you've got tourism.
We also need to drill of the coasts of Florida and California.
-
Especially Florida.
Last week Fidel Castro granted the Peoples Republic of China access to drill the same oil fields from Cuban waters.
The oil is going to be drilled, by China, or by America.
America is better.
We could use a HUGE 'band aid' right now more than ever.
P.S. I guess that you don't realize that the North Slope of Alaska also supplies ANOTHER 'band aid' of about the same amount--one million barrels/day. I guess we don't need that 'band-aid' either. I wish we had a couple more 'band aids' like the North Slope and ANWR. Have a nice day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.