Letter: Arctic drilling

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 2, 2013 4:58 p.m.

    ANWR is a great possibility. But you are going to be able to proceed in that plat so fast. And the problem is environmental… not the tree hugging type…. but that the land there is very fragile - physically. You can not use the heaviest of equipment in some of the locations because in the summer months, the ground thaws and will not support the weight.

    The window to get the equipment into place, and do your exploration is very tight. Exxon tried to get a rig into place last year, but missed the window and had to yank it back out before any damage was done to equipment or land.

    It can be done…. and likely will be done…. but don't expect anything to move fast… or be enough to impact prices in the short term. There are far easier and more accessible reserves in the lower 48 that are simply protected right now. Both coast have huge untapped potential - but Deep Sea Horizon set those prospects back years.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 12:12 p.m.

    The lies and distortions in this article and by several posters are numerous. If you want to convince Americans to open ANWR you'll need to start to use facts and honesty.

  • caribousteaks Kaktovik, AK
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:52 a.m.

    Oil from Alaska cannot be exported without permission from Congress. Only once has this been granted from 1996-2000 when Congress allowed a maximum of 5% to be exported to alleviate oil gluts in California refineries. Flow rates are so low now through TAPS that the issue is mute. 59 out of 60 Alaska State Legislators support exploration in the 10-02. Every Governor, Senator, Representative we have had has supported development. Every Mayor of Kaktovik and every Mayor of the North Slope Borough has supported development. Partisanship simply doesn't play a part in this debate in Alaska. You cannot produce nor consume all the oil from one place all at once. TAPS can only deliver a maximum of 2.1mbpd and at that rate USGS 10-02 predictions would last 50 plus years. Why argue about Keystone when we could be producing it ourselves and keeping the money too! Indeed our pipeline ALREADY EXISTS!

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:50 a.m.

    I'm going to go ahead and say UtahBlueDevil is a lot more accurate than anything being claimed by "sensible scientist". SS's claims don't sound very sensible or scientific.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:40 a.m.

    @Sensible Scientist - where did you come up with those numbers.... " create 750,000 jobs in all 50 states"?

    ANWR... is going to create jobs in North Carolina? In Utah? Care to elaborate? Currently there are only about 130,000 people total working field jobs in E&P. Where are there 750K coming from?

    On your fourth point - I completely disagree. Preserving our own resources is far more strategic, not depleting them. Other Alaska production is already on the decline. The more of our own reserves we burn, the more we become dependent on foreign capacity long term. On the other hand, if we deplete global reserves while preserving our own... in the long term we are far better off.

    "There is NO ALTERNATIVE to oil and gas, and all the wishing in the world won't change that." Now that is just a silly statement. Oil and gas are the most economical right now, but claiming they are our only option...that is pure fiction.

  • Sensible Scientist Rexburg, ID
    Dec. 1, 2013 8:11 p.m.

    The only lies, talking points, and misconceptions here are from the anti-drilling crowd. First, the impossible "statistic" that 10 billion barrels is not much oil. The fact is, ANWR's daily production of 1.5 to 2 million barrels per day would be more than we import from any Middle Eastern country.

    Second, about "feeding the addiction." It's more accurate to say "feeding the need." We've needed ANWR's oil and its economic benefits for decades (as the letter pointed out), and because of Bill Clinton's veto in the 90's we don't have it today. There is NO ALTERNATIVE to oil and gas, and all the wishing in the world won't change that.

    Third, ANWR is projected to create 750,000 jobs in all 50 states. No other measure we could take could generate so many good-paying jobs. It's not about millionaires. Check your 401K to see which oil companies YOU own.

    Fourth, ANWR is not about world consumption or world prices at all. That's a straw man. It's about American security and economy, and the benefits there are undeniable.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Dec. 1, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    We cannot produce enough petroleum domestically to modify world prices.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 1, 2013 7:58 a.m.

    Domestic oil production has increased steadily except in talking points.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Dec. 1, 2013 7:34 a.m.

    I understand the point of this letter, but the world has changed in the last couple of years. The game has changed with shale oil. Light sweet crude is becoming abundant. US domestic production has increased by one million barrels a day in the last year. It will continue to increase. Someone pointed out that 40% of our oil is imported. A few years back it was more like 60%.

    I guess you could open up the ANWR but then the people who might drill and develop the infrastructure would be wanting to invest in putting a pipeline from North Dakota to Houston.

    I like the Keystone Pipeline. We should invest in the infrastructure, or else we'll end up like . . . Pakistan. Given that a Canadian company is doing it for us, we are dumb to turn it away. The heavy crude will be used in US refineries to balance out all the light stuff that will be coming in. Then the rest of it will be sold to foreign refineries to balance all the light stuff that is going to be available when light sweet crude from Nigeria stops coming to the US because of our own light sweet crude.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 7:22 p.m.

    We need to consume all the oil as rapidly as possible to prevent future generations from having any.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    There is more coal in the world than oil. The United States has more coal than any other nation.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 1:50 p.m.


    Opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will not do anything to alleviate the problems of the American people with the supply and price of oil products.

    It will allow the mega oil corporations to solidify their hold on the oil resources of the world. It will make a few dozen more millionaires and enrich the wealth of hundreds more.

    If drilling in ANWR costs more than oil from other sources, it will be allowed to sit idle. If drilling ANWR costs less that other sources it will be exported to the world market. This is true for any oil drilling in America.

    The only way for Americans to benefit from oil drilling in America is if we stop allowing the export of oil and break the strangle hold that the energy corporation have on our economy.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 1:40 p.m.

    Another letter filled with misrepresentations, outright fibs, and just plain nonsense.

    Straight from the talking points of conservative hate radio.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 12:56 p.m.

    As of 2011, the oil and gas industry have over 6000 permits to drill on public lands that it has yet to use, according to Bureau of Land Management data.

    I wonder how many have lived near a refinery or drilling sites. They are a blight and a hazard wherever they are located. A neighborhood in Arkansas is still suffering from the effects of a disastrous oil spill. The U.S. still has much it can do in the way of conservation.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 10:24 a.m.

    Where are you getting your facts?

    The United States imports only 40 percent of its oil (not 60 percent). Our greatest trading partners are Canada and Mexico, not the Middle-East. Trading with our neighbors helps all of our economies.

    Besides, what happens if we drill in Alaska? What is to stop that oil from being traded to China?

    Unless Kelsey supports nationalizing our oil, then there's no guarantee that new oil drilled will even stay here in the United States.

    Lastly, oil is traded as a commodity. Meaning, supply and demand doesn't necessarily even apply here. Remember in 07 when gas prices doubled? Supply had actually doubled and demand had deceased. So why did gas prices double? Speculation.

    The high gas prices we see today isn't the result of low supply and high demand, but increased greed by those in charge. Why only charge $2 per gallon when you can charge $4?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 30, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    Mountain.... see.... that is the problem. There is a pipeline NOW that does what Keystone XL promises. This is all part of the story telling that is going on. People talk about honesty, but if you simply look at the existing pipelines - this connection is available and alive today.

    All Keystone does is creates a shortcut. That is all. It is not providing any routes that doesn't exist today. Stop believing the hype, do a little research, and see what really is at stake here. This is about Enbridge and Transcan... has nothing to do with Obama.

    This is about pipelines trying to get a competitive advantage over rail, or existing pipelines. This is not about adding any new capability.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Nov. 30, 2013 7:39 a.m.

    As long as Obama is in the White House, no intelligent decision on energy will ever be made. He would rather buy oil from our enemies and ship it across oceans than buy it from our neighbor via he Keystone pipeline or drill for it on our public lands. He prefers Solyndra and algae to real solutions. After billions of taxpayer dollars squandered on loan guarantees and tax subsidies to promote electric cars and batteries, Obama's goal of one million electric cars is not even close to being achieved.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Nov. 30, 2013 7:34 a.m.

    Drilling ANWR would be a disgrace; it would just continue to feed the addiction. Our national addiction to cheap gas is keeping us from developing mass transit, which would make us independent of foreign energy sources and save our air quality at the same time.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 30, 2013 7:29 a.m.

    The US should do all it can to make sure other nations don't have leverage over our economy. We have seen the impact of that before. But statements hoping ANWR drilling will impact the price of oil in any significant way at the pump, unfortunately are benefits you will never see.

    Even with the most generous estimates, ANWR will impact global supply in around One percent. That is not enough to move the dial when it comes to consumer prices. If that is your end goal, ANWR just doesn't provide enough impact.

    We should be being creative in was to leverage our resources. We should be exploring all out options - including coastal drilling. Demand growth though, left unchecked, will out strip our ability to produce - it is a loosing battle - and will be reflected in cost at the pump. Curbing the demand curve is the only way to meaningfully impact price, if that is your motivating factor - and that can only be achieved through efficiency and alternatives.

    It is far more economically viable to impact demand or improve efficiency by 1 percent than it is to increase supply the same.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 30, 2013 6:52 a.m.

    Lets look at ANWR with facts.

    The mean estimates of reserves in ANWR are about 10 billion of recoverable oil.

    Sounds like a huge amount. However, we use about 18.5 million barrels per day. The world uses about 90 million barrels per day.

    So, if we look at ANWR in relation to US and world consumption....
    ANWR contains about 500 days of US consumption and about 110 days of world consumption.

    Yes, every little bit helps, but to think that ANWR will solve all (or even much) of our energy needs is naive.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Nov. 30, 2013 6:25 a.m.

    Alaska, their people receive money for the oil. So what is our good leaders doing with the money with ours from public land. Then to think about the hazardous wast that gets dumped on public land. Why are we paying for education or even have taxes.