Interior Secretary Shows Real ANWR To TV Networks

CNSNews.com ^ | 4/02/02 | Jeff Johnson

[kattracks]

Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - If you've seen the lush green vegetation and animals frolicking through the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, you haven't seen the part of ANWR where oil exploration would be conducted under the Bush administration's energy plan, according to Interior Secretary Gale Norton.

In a letter to major news outlets around the country, Norton described the president's initiative to allow "environmentally sensitive energy production" in the far north slope of ANWR, commonly called the "10-02 Area." The Secretary's letter included a videotape of the region.

"I think it is important that you have video of the actual part of ANWR being discussed, so that your viewers can have a more accurate understanding of the issue," Norton wrote in her letter to more than a dozen network news anchors and talk show hosts.

"Frequently during the energy debate," Norton continued, "I have watched television programs feature video that resembles ANWR's Brooks Range. This area is designated wilderness in the central portion of the Refuge - and is not the area proposed for energy development."

Norton's letter went on to explain the steps the administration has proposed to even further limit the potential environmental impact of exploration and production, including only allowing work between November and May, outside the normal breeding months for all species that might enter the area. The plan also requires companies to use "ice roads" that melt each spring, protecting the underlying tundra.

"Moreover, the administration will require directional drilling and smaller production pads, so that energy exploration can be accomplished utilizing just 2,000 of the 1002 Area's 1.5 million acres," Norton concluded.

The "coastal plain" that is potentially available for energy exploration is only 8 percent of the 19 million acres that comprise ANWR. The 2000 acres actually authorized for exploration under the Bush energy plan encompass 0.08 percent of the Refuge.

A spokesman for Norton says the office of Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) called Friday afternoon inquiring about how much the Interior Department had spent on the video.

"So we did the tally to see how much money we invested," said Mark Pfeifle.

"ANWR videos: $95.81. Postage to send ANWR videos to network news anchors: $43.55. Informing Americans about what the real Alaska North Slope looks like in the dead of winter: Priceless," Pfeifle added, borrowing a theme from the popular series of Mastercard\super\'d2\nosupersub commercials.

The video was originally produced for Arctic Power, a group that describes itself as "a grassroots, non-profit citizen's organization with 10,000 members founded in April of 1992 to expedite congressional and presidential approval of oil exploration and production within the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge."

The group includes miners, fishermen, loggers, tourism operators, transportation businesses, labor unions, banks, non-profit organizations, local elected officials, and others. It receives approximately two-thirds of its funding from the Alaska state legislature.

Pfeifle says providing the video to major television outlets was necessary, because most had been using video provided by opponents of energy exploration in ANWR.

"Using footage from the anti-energy independence crowd is about reliable as having your fortune told by Miss Cleo on the Psychic Readers Network," he added.

Little by little, Pfeifle believes the administration is getting its message to the public.

"With new technologies, with tough regulation, and with common sense management, we can protect wildlife and produce energy in an environmentally responsible way in ANWR's 1002 Area," he concluded.

Markey, who has long opposed energy exploration in ANWR, as well as the entire nuclear energy industry, did not respond to a request for an interview or comment for this story.

E-mail a news tip to Jeff Johnson.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

 

[goody2shooz]

Senator Markey didn't respond to the request because he is a jerk, who when faced with the facts disputing his intervenor spinworks, can't rise to the occasion and debate the true issue. Will it be premium unleaded or tundra lichen? Take your pick.

[The Duke]

As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products - which is hardly something for us to get excited about (unless of course we're the special interest that stands to make a good buck off the deal).

If it is in fact the case that this petroleum source is so limited then why don't we simply make it part of the nation's strategic oil reserves?

[rhombus]

why don't we simply make it...

Why down't we let the people in Alaska decide?

[Willie Green]

Related threads:

US takes role in Colombia to new level
BP Cuts 500 North Sea Oil Jobs

---

U.S. Petroleum & Crude Oil Overview
(thousand barrels per day)

	1960	1965	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	2000
U.S. Crude Oil Production	7,035	7,804	9,637	8,375	8,597	8,971	7,355	6,560	5,834
U.S. Petroleum Imports	1,815	2,468	3,419	6,056	6,909	5,067	8,018	8,835	11,093
Total	8,850	10,272	13,056	14,431	15,506	14,038	15,373	15,395	16,927
Imports as % of Total	20.5	24.0	26.2	42.0	44.6	36.1	52.2	57.4	65.5

As North Sea oil production continues to decline, America's dependence on imported petroleum will shift even more towards OPEC. While drilling offshore and in ANWR may help, it would still be insufficient to dramaticly reduce our ever-increasing consumption.

The obvious solution to this dependency would be to begin construction of modern, efficient mass-transportation systems in our nation's most densely populated regions and urban areas. Electricly powered light rail, high-speed rail and maglev systems could be easily fueled by clean-coal and nuclear technology power plants.

Unfortunately, RINOs have been bought-out by Big Oil special interests. Alaskan representative Don Young, who chairs the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, continues to sidetrack and delay implementation of energy efficient mass-transportation systems. A whole contingent of Nevada RINOs unite to obstruct our nation's efforts to utilize abundant nuclear power. And Dubya's own sibling, Jeb, brags about his obstruction on his re-election website:

Protecting Florida’s Coasts From Offshore Drilling – Thanks to Governor Bush’s hard work and leadership, Florida’s coastal and marine resources will continue to be free from the threat of offshore drilling. Protections secured by Governor Bush far exceed those agreed to by former President Clinton, former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, and the late-Governor Lawton Chiles.

[Dog Gone]

You understand wrong. Prudhoe Bay oil was discovered in 1968 and we're still shipping it to West Coast refineries today.

You've bought into the environmentalist Big Lie.

[LoveUSA]

As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products...

From www.ANWR.org:

The USGS report is thorough, presenting estimates that use a number of alternative resource concepts. Industry is often accused of distorting ANWR’s potential by focusing on the highest of these estimates. Not true. Numbers cited by advocates of ANWR drilling accurately characterize the USGS study conclusion — that ANWR contains undiscovered resource volumes of 5.7 to 16 billion barrels of crude oil, with an expected value of 10.4 billion barrels. Moreover, the USGS standard practice does not include any prospective effects of future technological change. One could argue, therefore, that USGS numbers are more likely to be conservative estimates of the true recovery potential of ANWR. On the flip side, several other numbers are cited by various opponents of development. Many are simply incorrect. An example is the 3.2 billion barrel estimate often attributed to the 1998 USGS study. This may have originated with the 1987 BLM EIS, or it may be based on a misinterpretation of data presented in the 1998 USGS report. In either case it is wrong.

[lawdude]

"As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products - which is hardly something for us to get excited about (unless of course we're the special interest that stands to make a good buck off the deal)."

Misleading info and, as I understand, wrong. Do you honestly believe any, ANY oil company would invest billions in setup costs and prep to suck out a small amount of oil? Would your company build the infrastructure to open a new facility only to be assured of having to close it down in two weeks? I think not.

I have seen factual data regarding ANWR and I believe it represents a couple years of total US consumption of oil. That amounts to billions of barrels and the numbers are minimally low estimates.

Finally, have you EVER seen truth flowing from the pens of environmentalists? NO, they rely on stretched truth and downright lies to further an agenda that is so flawed that full truth and disclosure would render them silent!

[Piquaboy]

I am sure we will see that video all over the evening snooze. Not!

[sasquatch]

why don't we simply make it part of the nation's strategic oil reserves?

Why? Because another corrupt administration, like the last one,
will use it to feather their own nest.
Remember Elk Hills, Occidental, Algore??
Stratergarie(sp?) reserve

[Phantom Lord]

When looney envirowackos I know complain about drilling in ANWAR and how it will "destroy" it i bring it home to them in the form of a simple example. I suggest you do the same. Here it is...

Tell the envirowacko to walkout into their yard. Then have them place a postage stamp on the groud. Then tell them that their entire yard is ANWAR and the postage stamp is where the drilling will occur.

Sure puts it in a different prespective than is normally presented doesnt it.

[Stand Watch Listen]

ANWAR

Taken from the February issue of Oil & Gas Investor, page 11:

EIA estimates total US production at 5.78 million barrels of oil per day (BOD).
Shell Oil's Brutus offshore platform (Gulf) is expected to peak at 100,000 BOD this year. Production from the Mars, Troika, Ursa, Dianna-Hoover and Brutus offshore Gulf fields could account for 9.7% of total lower 48 oil production by fourth quarter 2003.

Alaska will produce 17.2% of total US production (including Gulf production) in 2003 with the addition of the Colville River, Aurora, Polaris and Borealis satellite fields located on the North Slope.

LET ME BE CLEAR: with TOTAL US production at 5.78 million BOD, the addition of modest ANWR estimates of 1 million BOD, is equal to 17.3% of TOTAL US PRODUCTION

ANWR Fact Sheets http://www.anwr.org/

ANWR Oil Estimates

Myths of ANWR

Arctic Shoreline

ANWR Wilderness

Arctic Oil Technology

Native Alaskans and Development

Jobs,Jobs, Jobs

Caribou in ANWR

Which is the Real ANWR?

National Security

Oil Exports

• ANWR total area: 19,600,000 acres
• ANWR designated wilderness part: 8,000,000 acres
• ANWR coastal plain (not part of wilderness area) designated long ago by Congress for oil exploration study: 1,500,000 acres
• Coastal plain area needed for oil extraction: 2,000 acres (0.01% of the total ANWR area)

In 1998 the USGS did a study that concluded that there are between 5.7 billion to 16 Billion barrels of recoverable Oil in the "1002" Area of ANWR. That is a LOT of oil!

and it doesn’t even take into consideration the nearly 200 TRILLION cubic feet of natural gas there (over 150 years supply at the current rate of use in the U.S.)

A little perspective on the size of ANWR development:

An exploration rig on the tundra and the absence of any wildlife in this region

Beautiful Spring day in this coastal plain

Coastal Plain
      spring                                             summer                                       winter

Only 2,000 acres out of 19.5 MILLION are even under consideration for drilling. And those 19.5 million acres are but a FRACTION of the total land mass of Alaska. Also, contrary to dire predictions of the devastating impact on wildlife that would occur when the pipeline in Prudhoe bay, the caribou herd there have actually grown to record numbers.

SITE MAP (background / technology)

http://www.anwr.org/sitemap.htm

FROM http://www.anwr.org/topten.htm

TOP 10 REASONS TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT IN ANWR

1. Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected.

2. Revenues to the State and Federal Treasury Federal revenues would be enhanced by billions of dollars from bonus bids, lease rentals, royalties and taxes. Estimates in 1995 on bonus bids alone were $2.6 billion.

3. Jobs To Be Created Between 250,000 and 735,000 jobs are estimated to be created by development of the Coastal Plain.

4. Economic Impact Between 1980 and 1994, North Slope oil field development and production activity contributed over $50 billion to the nations economy, directly impacting each state in the union.

5. America's Best Chance for a Major Discovery The Coastal Plain of ANWR is America's best possibility for the discovery of another giant "Prudhoe Bay-sized" oil and gas discovery in North America. U.S. Department of Interior estimates range from 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

6. North Slope Production in Decline The North Slope oil fields currently provide the U.S. with nearly 25% of it's domestic production and since 1988 this production has been on the decline. Peak production was reached in 1980 of two million barrels a day, but has been declining to a current level of 1.4 million barrels a day.

7. Imported Oil too Costly The U.S. imports over 55% of the nation's needed petroleum. These oil imports cost more than $55.1 billion a year (this figure does not include the military costs of protecting that imported supply). These figures are rising and could exceed 65% by the year 2005.

8. No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska's arctic. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd (CACH) at Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3,000 to as high as 23,400 during the last 20 years of operation. In 1995, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd size was estimated to be 18,100 animals.

9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller.

10. Alaskans Support More than 75% of Alaskans favor exploration and production in ANWR. The Inupiat Eskimos who live in and near ANWR support onshore oil development on the Coastal Plain.

RELATED ARTICLES

Bush Renews Campaign For Arctic Oil
Source: AP; Puublished: February 25, 2002;
Author: AP

Fresh from Asia ~ Bush bonks Daschle head with ANWR club
Source: Reuters / Whitehouse.gov; Published: February 23, 2002

Inupiat Views Ignored in ANWR Debate
Source: ANWR; Anchorage Times Editorial;
Author: Tara MacLean Sweeney

INUPIAT LEADER ASKS SENATORS TO . . .Visit ANWR
Source: Anchorage Daily News; Published: February 17, 2002
Voice of the Times

ANWR Showdown -- Liberal Caught Playing Loose With The Facts [My Title]
Source: The Fargo Forum and the Grand Forks Herald; Published: February 14, 2002;
Author: Chris Beachy; John Bluemle

Kerry and Lieberman ignore invitation from native villagers in ANWR
Source: USNewswire; Published February 13, 2002;
Author:| Village of Kaktovik Alaska

ANWR Survey
Source: City of Kaktovik, Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), Web Page;
author: City of Kaktovik

Listening to Alaska
Source: National Driller; Published: September 27, 2001

ANWR and Oil
Source: Town Hall.com; Published April 11, 2001

Bush Is Right: Opening ANWR To Oil Exploration Would Help Consumers Without Hurting Environment
Source: The National Center for Public Policy Research; Published: January 23, 2001
Author: John Carlisle

Time To Permit Oil Drilling In the Arctic Refuge
Source: Heritage Foundation; Published: October 17, 1995
Author: John Shanahan

It has been mentioned that the caribou herd had over tripled near the pipeline!

Seems other species have flourished as well

[SteamshipTime]

Great stuff! Right-clicked and downloaded!

[StriperSniper]

an agenda that is so flawed that full truth and disclosure would render them silent!

This video is a small part of that job. :-)

[NittanyLion]

As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products - which is hardly something for us to get excited about (unless of course we're the special interest that stands to make a good buck off the deal).

If you're correct, then the oil companies will choose not to drill. Development would hardly be profitable, right? Simple enough, provided we let them make the decision.

[Dog Gone]

Bump for a great post.

[FreedomPoster]

If it is in fact the case that this petroleum source is so limited then why don't we simply make it part of the nation's strategic oil reserves?

It isn't a "reserve" unless exploratory drilling has been performed and basic infrastructure for production installed. Your solution sounds like a delaying tactic from the Greens.

[lepton]

As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products

Known reserves represent replacing ALL OTHER sources, foreign and domestic, and running the ENTIRE COUNTRY for 18 months.

[webstersII]

A better number is probably about 2 years worth of oil at current consumption rates. This is extremely significant in the scheme of things.

[finnman69]

As I understand it ANWR represents only a couple of month's of US consumption of petroleum products - which is hardly something for us to get excited about (unless of course we're the special interest that stands to make a good buck off the deal).

Are you sure you are not Lil' Tommy Dashole?