|
|
|
|
dxmetal
Nov 4, 2005, 3:59 AM
Post #1 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 461
|
Senate backs oil drilling in Alaskan refuge
By Tom Doggett Thu Nov 3, 4:56 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to allow oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), narrowly rejecting a Democratic attempt to strike the plan from a budget bill.
Drilling supporters said developing the refuge's 10.4 billion barrels of crude would raise $2.4 billion in leasing fees for the government, reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil imports and create thousands of American jobs.
However, it remains far from clear whether a final version of a federal budget-cutting package can be approved by both chambers of Congress. The U.S. House of Representatives plan would open ANWR to drilling, but also aims to cut politically sensitive programs such as food stamps and Medicaid.
"This vote today sends a signal to OPEC and the rest of the world that America is serious about meeting more of its own energy needs. America will not let our consumers or our economy be held hostage to runaway global oil prices," said Republican Pete Domenici of New Mexico, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
The United States has to import almost three out of every five barrels of oil it consumes, with total demand averaging about 20.5 million barrels a day this year.
ANWR is "the nation's single greatest prospect for future oil," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Opponents said there was not enough oil in the refuge to lower gasoline prices by more than a penny per gallon, and what crude is there would not get to the market for at least a decade. They also warned drilling would threaten ANWR's habitat for migratory birds, polar bears, caribou and other animals.
"America wants a better energy plan than putting a sweetheart deal (for oil companies) in the budget," said Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington, who was the main sponsor of the amendment to strike the drilling language.
"Let's not pollute one of the last great remaining wildlife refuges in America," she said, referring to more than 500 oil spills that occur annually on the nearby Alaskan North Slope.
The Senate voted 48 (yes) to 51 (no) on her amendment to remove the ANWR provision from the budget bill.
Lawmakers also voted, 83 to 16, to ban ANWR oil from being exported to China and other countries to ensure the crude stays in the U.S. market.
"There is no assurance that even one drop of Alaskan oil will get to hurting Americans," said Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon, who opposed ANWR drilling but co-sponsored the oil export ban amendment.
The Senate also rejected, 48 to 51, another Cantwell amendment to stop ANWR oil production if the Alaskan government sued to get a bigger share of the leasing revenue, which the drilling plan splits 50-50 with the federal government.
When Alaska became a state, it kept 90 percent of the lease revenue from oil production and the government received 10 percent. Alaska's legislature has indicated it may sue to maintain the 90-10 split with the ANWR revenue.
Domenici said Cantwell's revenue-sharing amendment was a "back door attempt to kill ANWR" drilling.
ANWR sprawls across 19 million acres, about the size of South Carolina. Republicans have sought to pry open the refuge to energy exploration for more than two decades, while Democrats and environmental groups have argued that Congress should focus on stricter energy conservation measures.
Under both Senate and House drilling plans, the refuge's 1.5 million-acre coastal plain would be opened for energy exploration, but no more than 2,000 acres of the surface area could be covered by production and support facilities, such as airstrips and piers to hold up pipelines.
The close vote in the Senate on striking the ANWR provision may make it difficult for the chamber to accept in a final budget bill the House's proposal to open offshore waters to drilling where energy exploration is now banned.
The Senate is expected to approve its bill cutting federal spending by around $35 billion over five years. The House of Representatives' version seeks to slash more than $50 billion, and a floor vote has not yet been scheduled. The spending cuts are intended to help reduce the federal budget deficit.
So when your grand childrens asked about Alaska's caribou, polar bears, wolfs ...etc, give em this.
Pricelss Notable Republican Quote: ""This vote today sends a signal to OPEC and the rest of the world that America is serious about meeting more of its own energy needs. America will not let our consumers or our economy be held hostage to runaway global oil prices," - Republican Pete Domenici of New Mexico, who CHAIRS the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
BTW, Exxon posted a $10 BILLON profit last QUARTER.
|
|
|
|
|
mistymountainhop
Nov 4, 2005, 4:20 AM
Post #2 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 410
|
i want to puke.................. can i get a web address for that???
|
|
|
|
|
dxmetal
Nov 4, 2005, 4:27 AM
Post #3 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 461
|
http://news.yahoo.com/...y_congress_alaska_dc
Just think bout it guys,
The entire US has only 3 percent of the known oil reserves in the world, and we consume 25 percent. How do we drill our way out of this problem. Today, we will sacrifice a wildlife refuge. Whats for tomorrow ?
Here's a humble average joe/jane idea, How about leadership and vision for an energy policy that reduces dependencies on foreign oil with responsible environmental production, conservation techniques, energy efficiency, renewable and sustainable fuels ?
|
|
|
|
|
dxmetal
Nov 4, 2005, 4:27 AM
Post #4 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 461
|
http://news.yahoo.com/...y_congress_alaska_dc
Just think bout it guys,
The entire US has only 3 percent of the known oil reserves in the world, and we consume 25 percent. How do we drill our way out of this problem. Today, we will sacrifice a wildlife refuge. Whats for tomorrow ?
Here's a humble average joe/jane idea, How about leadership and vision for an energy policy that reduces dependencies on foreign oil with responsible environmental production, conservation techniques, energy efficiency, renewable and sustainable fuels ?
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Nov 4, 2005, 4:31 AM
Post #5 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
"This vote today sends a signal to OPEC and the rest of the world that America is serious about meeting more of its own energy needs. America will not let our consumers or our economy be held hostage to runaway global oil prices," said Republican Pete Domenici
how about sending a signal to the world that we're gonna stop using an energy source that is the main cause of all the pollution and IS eventually going to run out without a doubt. What a fucking douchebag. I want to puke. Seriously, God forbid their god damn oil cronies didn't make a friggin fortune on every policy made this adminstration. Ugh.
|
|
|
|
|
iltripp
Nov 4, 2005, 4:36 AM
Post #6 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1607
|
In reply to: Pricelss Notable Republican Quote: ""This vote today sends a signal to OPEC and the rest of the world that America is serious about meeting more of its own energy needs. America will not let our consumers or our economy be held hostage to runaway global oil prices," - Republican Pete Domenici of New Mexico, who CHAIRS the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Oh gawd... that's a joke, right?!?!?!?
Conservation and alternative energy sources will do infinitely more than ANWR's oil to reduce our energy dependence. I might accept the above line of reasoning as not being B.S. if it appeared that they were willing to make a token effort at other means of reducing energy dependence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
phatcat
Nov 4, 2005, 4:43 AM
Post #8 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 30, 2004
Posts: 598
|
In reply to: "This vote today sends a signal to OPEC and the rest of the world that America is serious about meeting more of its own energy needs. America will not let our consumers or our economy be held hostage to runaway global oil prices," said Republican Pete Domenici
none of this oil will be used in america, it is all being exported to china/japan.
americans have nothing to gain from this at all (unless the own an oil company of course :wink: )
|
|
|
|
|
mistymountainhop
Nov 4, 2005, 5:17 AM
Post #10 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 410
|
I want to hear the republican opinions on this one!!!
Or anyone who is for drilling, I want to hear their point of view!!
|
|
|
|
|
coopershawk
Nov 4, 2005, 5:18 AM
Post #11 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 210
|
yeah, time for a little more "gunboat diplomacy." America, as usual, protecting the rights of its fat-assed, over-privledged consumers. Am I the only one that doesn't have a problem with expensive gas? I mean, shit, we held out longer than Europe or even Canada in terms of affordable petroleum. I'd rather breathe clean air than fill my tank. Climbing is cool and all, but I imagine it would be pretty hard to do sucking on a respirator or lugging an oxygen tent up some sandstone. Is fucking up an area like ANWR worth it so that the douchebags I see driving their H2's can keep filling up to compensate for their little penises or flapping meat curtains? What will be really fucking amusing is to see how little drilling in ANWR affects what we pay at the pumps in, like, ten years. Useless gesture from a useless administration. Oh yes, for those that deny that this oil will be going overseas, please present facts to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
slavetogravity
Nov 4, 2005, 5:26 AM
Post #12 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 1114
|
What amazes me most about this issue is that even the most hardened right wing American capitalis should realised that buy opening up drilling in northern Alaska, they are effectively opening the nation LAST domestic oil reserve. After this the USA’s got nothing. Nadda’. Zip. Zilch. Zero oil left.
Not having to rely on foreign energy is key in maintaining the sovereignty of your country. No one can argue that this is important.
But what I can’t understand is the short sightedness of this issue. The oil in the northern Alaska reserve is finite, it will run out. So what you’ve got here is, ultimately, a short term quick fix. So if your country’s leaders are serious about maintaining your country’s sovereignty they should be doing everything in their power to curb the rate of oil consumption in the US to a level that your domestic production can match.
|
|
|
|
|
shortfatoldguy
Nov 4, 2005, 5:36 AM
Post #13 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 1694
|
And Exxon Mobil just declared last-quarter profits of 9.9 billion dollars. That's profit. And billion. In one quarter.
That's a world-historical corporate record.
|
|
|
|
|
slavetogravity
Nov 4, 2005, 5:42 AM
Post #14 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 1114
|
In reply to: I mean, s---, we held out longer than Europe or even Canada in terms of affordable petroleum.
The reason the US held out longer then Canada in terms of affordable gas is that we- unlike the US- match our oil prices with world prices. The US doesn't do this and effectively subsidies gas costs.
It kills me when ever I drive down in the states. SUV's and full sized trucks as far as the eye can see. Not to say that we don't have our fare share of supper sized vehicles in Canada but nothing compares to the US when it comes to fuelling up at the pump. And why wouldn’t you drive those land yachts when your fuel prices are so cheap. Here in Canada we've got so much fricken' oil that the money we make from selling it to you gas-guzzling Americans gives us all a higher standard of living, cheap universities, and universal health care. In Alberta every man women and child is going to receive a 400.00 dollar check in the mail from the surpluses the government has made from recent high fuel costs. So in the end, Americans get screwed and foreigner profit from your suffering.
|
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Nov 4, 2005, 6:27 AM
Post #15 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
Everybody should check and see how their senators voted on the Amendment. Both of mine voted yes, so nobody's getting an angry letter, and I am even going to send both of them a thank you letter, urging them to continue to do more to combat this problem. I wish that there was more being done in Washington to research renewable energy, rather than just another short term fix. The oil in ANWR adds up to just about nothing in comparison to our national market alone, not to mention the global one. Has anybody else herd about Bush's plan to develop a zero emission coal power plant. I cant believe that they are throwing money at another dead end trick. Why not hydrogen? Why not wind or solar? To everybody who owns an SUV that has never even been off road, thank you. Please people, write your senators, that will be far more helpful than posting on a site that nobody outside of climbers cares about. Screw this, I'm buying a Prius. I hope American oil prices continue to rise, I really do. And can somebody please explain this suburban trend that makes soccer moms feel that they are justified in owning an Excursion to pick up groceries. God, I hope that they have to start paying $10 a gallon, if that's what it takes to knock some sense into them. I also don't understand how these people can't make the connection that owning an SUV without need is bad for their children's health. SUV's = bad air = respiratory illness. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Ok, I need to calm down. I should just be planing a trip to see ANWR before there is a giant pipeline running across it, with an Airstrip in the middle.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Nov 4, 2005, 7:44 AM
Post #16 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: http://news.yahoo.com/...y_congress_alaska_dc Just think bout it guys, The entire US has only 3 percent of the known oil reserves in the world, and we consume 25 percent. How do we drill our way out of this problem. Today, we will sacrifice a wildlife refuge. Whats for tomorrow ? Here's a humble average joe/jane idea, How about leadership and vision for an energy policy that reduces dependencies on foreign oil with responsible environmental production, conservation techniques, energy efficiency, renewable and sustainable fuels ?
good idea... but it involves something called THINKING.
you know... bush... thinking... kinda like oil and water. just dont mix. :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
littlejames
Nov 4, 2005, 1:01 PM
Post #17 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2005
Posts: 54
|
In reply to: And Exxon Mobil just declared last-quarter profits of 9.9 billion dollars. That's profit. And billion. In one quarter. That's a world-historical corporate record.
Without stirring shit about US internal politics, it seems bizarre that practically no-one in the States (at least, that I've heard about) has made the connection between Exxon Mobil's massive profits and the amount they're skimming off the top of each gallon at the bowsers. I would have expected this, if nothing else, to bring out the howling masses.
But I agree with the general sentiment of the thread. High time your leaders stopped burying their heads in the sand (or the arctic, as the case may be) and actually tried to find a solution to the problem posed by peak oil.
For that matter, it'd be nice if my "leaders" would do something about it as well, instead of inventing terrorist threats in order to pass draconian legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Nov 4, 2005, 2:16 PM
Post #18 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
In reply to: I would have expected this, if nothing else, to bring out the howling masses.
You that kind of reminds me of 1984 ... the power is in the proles. But sadly I think big brother is right. As long as you keep the masses moderatly happy, they'll just go about their way no matter how hard they raped by the government or anyone else. Gas could be 5 dollars agallon and people still wouldn't do shit about it. Pretty sad world if you ask me ... our world that is ...
|
|
|
|
|
shortfatoldguy
Nov 4, 2005, 4:10 PM
Post #19 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 1694
|
Bread and circuses. It's an old formula.
|
|
|
|
|
slavetogravity
Nov 4, 2005, 6:40 PM
Post #20 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 1114
|
In reply to: In reply to: I would have expected this, if nothing else, to bring out the howling masses. Gas could be 5 dollars agallon and people still wouldn't do s--- about it. Pretty sad world if you ask me ... our world that is ...
I have to disagree. I think Americans are doing something about it. There not buying domestically made vehicles. GM reported something in along the lines of a 15% drop in full sized truck sales and a 20% drop in SUV sales this year. It's called the law of economic returns. Why do you think Europeans drive such small vehicles? It's because they ARE buying fuel at the equivalent of 5 dollars a litter, or more.
|
|
|
|
|
mistymountainhop
Nov 4, 2005, 6:55 PM
Post #21 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 410
|
As much as ive had my head into the whole energy debate hoping, and somewhat denying the fact that Americans are buying more fuel efficient cars its not to hard to realize that not everyone has the same idea or even cares about oil. Ive been seeing the same number of commercials advertising bigger and bigger pickup trucks for the rednecks that many times DONT need them.
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Nov 4, 2005, 6:56 PM
Post #22 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
What disgusting times we live in. I mean I really don't see why the conservatives are so bent on taking everything from from the people who need it and giving it all to those who don't. I mean I'd like to say I'm moderate and that I accept both sides but I just can't. I'm appalled by what the conservatives are doing to this country. I am also appalled by the 99.999% of dumbshits (who aren't multi-millionaires) but are in love the conservative agenda as if they will benefit from it in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
remi
Nov 4, 2005, 8:13 PM
Post #23 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2005
Posts: 424
|
Wouldn't it make more sesn to drain all the Saudi's fields first and then drill in ANWR? Why not save the last of the domestic supply for when ya really need it!
|
|
|
|
|
boadman
Nov 4, 2005, 8:18 PM
Post #24 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2003
Posts: 726
|
I hope that everyone who has posted in this thread so far carpools, rides their bike, and drives a reasonably efficient vehicle (35mpg+). If you don't meet those requirements, it's your dollars that are supporting the oil industry and paying for their stranglehold on American politics. Buck up and make some personal sacrifices, or shut the fuck up.
Here's what I'm doing:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=57707
This isn't a viable solution for the entire population, but people need to start thinking out of the box if they actually care about his issue. It's not the governments fault, it's ours. Don't buy oil, and they won't drill.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Nov 4, 2005, 8:25 PM
Post #25 of 68
(1769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
yup. i am selling my beloved truck and buying a hybrid, i don't commute, i moved into a smaller house, and i'm doing stuff like adding more insulation and replacing old exterior doors to make my house more energy efficient. thats a good start for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
