Alaska Can Meet U.S. Energy Needs

The Wall Street Journal ^ | OCTOBER 1, 2009 | SEAN PARNELL (R-Governor of Alaska)

[kingattax]

The United States is now facing a decision on how to meet its future energy needs. In the coming months, the U.S. Department of the Interior will weigh whether to allow oil and gas exploration on Alaska's Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to be expanded.

Such exploration could set the country on a clear and sustainable energy path for decades to come.

Alaska's OCS contains an estimated 27 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 130 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. That's more than twice the amount of oil that has been produced on Alaska's North Slope since the Trans Alaska Pipeline System went online in 1977. Counting its OCS reserves, Alaska likely has more than 30% of the nation's recoverable oil and gas. Developing these resources will advance our national interests in three significant ways.

First, increasing oil and gas exploration and production will create good-paying jobs for Americans, particularly if this is combined with the construction of a natural gas pipeline from Alaska to the lower 48 states.

Increased production will reduce energy prices and lessen the kind of price volatility that contributed to our economic downturn last year.

Second, developing our own resources means that royalties from production will go to our government, not foreign governments. Today, Americans are concerned about the swelling federal deficit, so it is important to underscore that Alaska's OCS leases have already generated over $9 billion in revenue for the federal government since 1976 and promise much more, provided development is allowed to proceed.

Our massive trade deficit will also be reduced if we increase production because we will import less foreign oil.

[kingattax]

Such exploration could set the country on a clear and sustainable energy path for decades to come.

this is precisely why the treasonous marxists in our congress and government will oppose this.

[TChad]

Sarah’s successor seems to be getting off to a good start.

[TigersEye]

The Democrat "No Domestic Energy Policy!"

• No domestic drilling.
• No new refineries.
• No new nuke plants.
• No new dams for hydro-electric.
• No coal.
• No shale.
• Deplete the SPR.
• Let Iran get nukes.
• Let Iraq fall to Iranian domination.
• No Canadian tar sands oil.

All of that puts the U.S. in a position that war for oil or
complete economic collapse will be our only choices.
You can't frustrate every source of domestic energy
without consequences. Our enemies will blackmail us
to the extent that we are vulnerable to blackmail.

The Democrats are leading us into a real war for oil.
A war we won't have the energy to fight. A war we don't need to fight because we have our own resources.

[your local physicist]

yep...the early Vegas line is 3-1 that the Marxists in Washington will not allow expanded exploration in Alaska.

[Tempest]

most of it will be sold overseas though like it is now.

[your local physicist]

One of the most ridiculous aspects of our energy policy is the way the Canadians, not known for wrecking the environment, can produce oil offshore in Nova Scotia with no problems while we in America cannot dill for oil off our own Atlantic coast because environmental extremists fear that somehow this will damage the eastern coastal environment. Wacko environmentalists hold this irrational fear even though there are no significant environmental problems with offshore drilling in Canada and our oil companies will use the same drilling technology off our own Atlantic coast, if given the chance.

Another little known fact is that we actually produce relatively small amounts of oil with offshore wells in California without damaging the environment. I know this because I own stock in one of the companies that produces oil there—it’s named Venoco. They produce oil offshore near Santa Barbara without damaging the environment and oil companies could produce a lot more oil from the Los Angeles basin if offshore drilling is opened up on our west coast. (I’m not sure why Venoco and a few other companies are allowed to drill and produce oil off the California coast. There’s probably some kind of exception to the drilling ban that applies to a few small offshore areas in California.) Our energy policy has been dominated by environmental extremists and media jackals who don’t report on both sides of these issues, and that has to change.

[SolidWood]

Hmmm... I remember a certain Sarah Palin saying over and over again just that.

[TigersEye]

Our entire energy policy is being held hostage by enviro-wackos with the help of the fringe media. It is absurd and now so is every other area of policy with these far-left Marxists in power.

[your local physicist]

I think another reason why environmental extremists don’t want to produce oil off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts is because they want to limit oil production and drive up the price of oil, to thereby reduce oil consumption. That’s because they’ve been duped into believing extremist global warming theory and they want to cut oil consumption to reduce CO2 emissions.

[element92]

this is nice, but it doesn’t help me any.
the oil companies are not going to
charge me less than Arab demanded price,
just because it comes from Alaska.

better, would be the electric car,
as the E.C. cuts both the Arabs and
oil companies out of the deal

[your local physicist]

The oil market is a global market and we all pay the global price for oil. But it’s a finely balanced market which will only have about 4% excess capacity (the lowest in any major industry) after the global economy rebounds in 2-3 years. So just a 1-2% increase in global production out of Alaska could do a lot to hold down oil prices. Eventually we’ll also need more natural gas from Alaska, and NG can also replace oil in some uses and reduce our dependence on imported oil.

[WildWeasel]

Peak Oil my ass!

Plenty out there, just go get it!

[Talisker]

The Democrats are leading us into a real war for oil. A war we won't have the energy to fight. A war we don't need to fight because we have our own resources.

Like, major bingo, dude. Underlined. In boldface.

Written on the Empire State Building in lights, too (once it gets done celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Chinese communists slaughtering 60 million people, that is).

[Rummyfan]

Alaska's OCS contains an estimated 27 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 130 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. That's more than twice the amount of oil that has been produced on Alaska's North Slope since the Trans Alaska Pipeline System went online in 1977.

No, no, no! We've got to spend billions subsidizing unproven and iffy green technology. Oil and natural gas, other than being cheap and plentiful, are just not acceptable as energy sources. /sarcasm

[mazda77]

Oil market prices are where they are because the largest user of oil products does not have the will to develop their own resources. Supply and demand. If our country were to exploit and explore for its own resources, the world knows the production capabilities of our country. Thus, they would instantly know the market would be flooded and their little speculation game would end. Then that goes to wonder who is really in control of the speculation markets?

[kevkrom]

this is nice, but it doesn’t help me any. the oil companies are not going to charge me less than Arab demanded price, just because it comes from Alaska.

Even if that were true (it isn't quite, because increased overall supply will lower costs globally, as well as domestically), at least those same dollars would be going to American companies hiring American workers and paying American taxes -- instead of going to fund those who are or provide aid and comfort to our enemies.

[SunTzuWu]

most of it will be sold overseas though like it is now.

That doesn't matter. Oil is fungible. As long as it enters the worlds supply and the initial sale is ours, it works to our advantage. Look at the Middle East. Most of their oil is sold overseas and they are rolling in surplus energy and cash.

[element92]

what you write,is exactly correct.

in the past,
I have been turned off, by Tirpo people telling me how
important the depletion allowance is.

[mtrott]

Parnell: “As our population grows and our economy expands, we will have to get our energy from somewhere”

Ahh, but that is the rub. The lefties now in charge DO NOT WANT the population to grow, OR the economy to expand. That would be antithetical to their belief system that man, especially in the US, is basically a plague on the world, and should be scaled back with regard to his “footprint” on the earth.

I believe they are so committed to this ideology, that they think it is OK to hinder and hamstring the US’ growth potential by making us a weaker player in the international arena through weakening our economy through things like cap and tax. No way can they allow us to become strong and energy independent again.

I think they are so committed that they even don’t care if it causes them massive losses in the next elections. Now is their chance to enact their 40 year long socialist, collectivist dreams, and they are not going to pass up this chance.

[thackney]

most of it will be sold overseas though like it is now.

Not 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.

Crude Oil Exports, US West Coast including Alaska and Hawaii
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrexp52a.htm

Essential all of our Crude Oil that is exported goes to Canada to the closest refinery from the source of that particular oil.

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

Japan has often be claimed to be the receiver of Alaskan Crude Oil. That myth is not true either. They received a tiny bit during the previously mentioned oversupply from 1996 to 2000, then no more.

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

Here you can see data from the California Energy Commission. They track the amount of oil brought into California from Alaska. Over 13% of their oil needs are met by Alaskan Crude.

Oil Supply Sources To California Refineries
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/petroleum/statistics/crude_oil_receipts.html

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://www.commerce.wa.gov/_CTED/documents/ID_2921_Publications.pdf

As for transportation costs, look at the distances:

It is 3,577 miles from Valdez, Alaska to Tokyo, Japan.

It is 1,274 miles from Valdez, Alaska to Anacortes, Washington. (largest Washington refineries)

It is 2,253 miles from Valdez, Alaska to El Segundo, California (major refinery near Los Angeles)

The largest importer of oil is also the closest customer for Alaskan Oil.

[upsdriver]

Second, developing our own resources means that royalties from production will go to our government, not foreign governments.

I always wonder why this fact isn't highlighted more? The government stands to take in a huge pile of money.

[upsdriver]

The oil companies don’t charge us, the market determines the price. Another thing, petroleum has a host of other uses besides running your car. We need oil.

The oil companies are not the bad guys. They risk a lot and work their asses off to make their enterprises successful.

[TigersEye]

Thank you. Actions have consequences and our economy runs on petroleum and nothing else. We could be hurt by the loss of availability of many other commodities but we could make do. We could cut back we could substitute we could do lot of things but we would survive. Even if it were very painful.

But a major loss of petroleum would shut this country down.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled celebration of murdering communist regimes.

[Straight Vermonter]

The urban legend that just won’t die.

[Elsiejay]

You are comitting the error of attempting to employ rational analysis, your basic mindset being that America shall prosper. However, the environmental wacko mindset is that capitalistic America is evil, and must be weakened and fundamentally transformed. Now, how can we explain the controlling influence that said wackos are able to exert among congressional Democrats? Does this not reveal something very unattractive about their view of America and its future?

[Tempest]

from your own link california oil should not be linked with Alaskan oil and that yes Alskan oil is being heavily exported.

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/PET_MOVE_EXP_A_EPC0_EEX_MBBLPD_A.htm

7.88 million barrels of alaskan oil left our nation last year alone.

[your local physicist]

Thank you, I'm usually logical to a fault, like Mr. Spock in Star Trek.

Oil production platform located off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada:

Notice the complete absence of oil slicks or any other environmental damage. If the Canucks can produce oil off their Atlantic coast, why can't we?

[thackney]

from your own link california oil should not be linked with Alaskan oil

The west coast (PADD 5) includes Alaska and California.

7.88 million barrels of alaskan oil left our nation last year alone.

How do you support that claim? That is over 21 thousand barrels a day. Where do you claim it is going? Only Canada receives that level of crude oil imports.

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

The West Coast, which includes Alaska as shown above is not exporting hardly any crude oil anymore.

We do see that the Midwest is exporting Crude Oil. It is going to the closest refinery to the production, which happens to be across the border in Canada.

Smaller amounts also ship out of the East Coast grouping, also to Canada for the same reason.