ANWR News

Bodman: ANWR drilling to be stripped from energy bill

2005-06-15T08:44:00.000-07:00

Not really a big news flash, but Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman told the Rocky Mountain News yesterday that oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is certain to be stripped from any energy bill eventually presented to President Bush. The controversial measure would almost certainly doom the bill.

The drilling measure was widely expected to be missing from the Senate's version of the energy bill. But in a surprise, the bill's author, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) included it in the bill after all. In April the House passed its version of the bill, which also includes ANWR drilling.

"I think (drilling in the ANWR) will be removed from the energy bill and be dealt with separately," Bodman told the News, which treated this as a major news event. "The big problem is getting the bill passed."

None of this really matters, of course, because the plot all along has been to bury the ANWR drilling provision in the massive federal budget bill, where it will be immune to fillibuster. A first version of the budget has already passed Congress that could pave the way for drilling. But a final version still has to pass, and that's not likely to happen until late fall, reports KTUU-TV in Anchorage (which has been following this more closely than most of the print media).

“The committees are expected to report legislation in September with final legislation reaching the president's desk in October,” budget analyst Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation told KTUU.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Survey wars: Yale poll shows little drilling support

2005-06-11T09:05:00.000-07:00

Courtesy of Green Car Congress comes another new survey that addresses ANWR drilling. This one is a June 2005 public opinion poll by the Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy on American Attitudes on the Environment.

While the poll obviously addresses broader environmental issues, one question targets the ANWR drilling debate by asking if opening the refuge to oil drilling is an effective strategy to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil. Only 36 percent of those polled said this was a "good" or "very good" idea, while 56 percent said this is a "bad" or "very bad" idea.

The people polled in this survey clearly understand that ANWR drilling is not a long-term energy strategy. But I'm not sure how to reconcile these results with those of the previous Washington Post-ABC poll discussed earlier. It could come down to the way the question was asked, or the makeup of the respondents. But even if you average the results of the two questions, the results indicate clear public resistance to ANWR drilling.

The annual survey of 1000 adults found that more than nine out of ten Americans worry about dependence on foreign oil, and even greater numbers want government to develop new clean energy technologies, and to require the auto industry to produce cars and trucks with higher gas mileage. This finding holds across all regions of the country and demographic groups. All agree it is time for Washington to step up to the challenges of the country’s energy future. The poll also revealed broad support for cleaning up air and water and a desire for more government involvement in environmental protection.

The survey was conducted by Global Strategy Group from May 15 to 22, 2005, using professional phone interviewers. The survey has an overall margin of error of 3 percent.

As Green Car Congress notes, the survey reveals that 93 percent of Americans favor requiring the auto industry to make cars that get better gas mileage. Just 6 percent say this is a bad idea. This sentiment varies little by political leaning, with 96 percent of Democrats and Independents and 86 percent of Republicans supporting the call for more fuel-efficient vehicles. Politicians on both sides of the aisle, meanwhile, have been protecting the auto industry from regulations that would increase fuel efficiency.

“This poll suggests that Washington is out of touch with the American people,” said Dan Esty, director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.

Now that's a news flash.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

New poll: Slim opposition to ANWR drilling

2005-06-08T09:52:00.000-07:00

A Washington Post-ABC News public opinion poll released today shows that 49 percent of those polled oppose drillling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, while 48 percent support drilling. Four percent in the poll had no opinion.

The survey randomly polled 1,002 Americans and mainly covers national security and political popularity issues. Just one question addresses ANWR, but these are the latest polling results on the subject nevertheless. The full poll results (.pdf file) include results of the same question asked in five previous Post-ABC polls. This comparison shows that the latest results produce the highest support yet for drilling, despite ongoing slim opposition. (The poll has a margin of error of 3 points).

To me, the declining opposition to drilling is a result of public unease over gas prices, and the masterful job that drilling supporters and politicians have done in convincing the public that ANWR oil will reduce prices and have little impact on the refuge (both fallacies). It also suggests that drilling opponents' campaign to save ANWR is not having a major impact on the public and needs to be stepped up significantly. In other words, the oil industry is still winning this battle.

As mentioned, the poll spends most of its time on more generic political issues, and it's worth reading for those results alone. The overall poll shows a striking loss of faith in Bush administration policies on many fronts, and in the Republican agenda overall.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Drilling foes set June 11 as 'Arctic Action Day'

2005-06-03T09:16:00.000-07:00

Environmental groups and others opposed to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge have targeted June 11 as "Arctic Action Day." Coordinated by the Alaska Wilderness League, they have set up a new toll-free hotline to help people contact their elected officials to voice opposition to ANWR drilling. By calling 1-888-8-WILDAK (1-888-894-5325), activists will be seamlessly routed to the office of their local representative in Congress.

The coalition has also created free "Arctic Action Kits" that people can use to host local events to stir up opposition to drilling. The kits include copies of short documentary films that can be presented at small "house parties" to raise awareness about the threats posed by ANWR drilling. Participants can also obtain free copies of the documentary "Being Caribou" that we just posted about in the previous entry on this blog.

The Wilderness Society had this to say about Arctic Action Day in a recent email alert:

"This summer will be a pivotal time for the battle to save the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. House and Senate committees
will be laboring to write legislative language opening the
Refuge to oil drilling to be included in a 'reconciliation' bill
that will be considered by both chambers in September. Our goal
between now and then will be to mobilize an unprecedented show
of public opposition to drilling across the country. It all
starts with Arctic Action Day, June 11."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

New documentary traces ANWR caribou

2005-06-03T08:54:00.000-07:00

The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. last night premiered part one of a new documentary called "Being Caribou." The film chronicles the five-month journey of newlyweds Leanne Allison and Karsten Heuer as they track the herd of 120,000 porcupine caribou from central Yukon to their annual calving grounds on the coast of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The second half of the documentary, produced by the National Film Board of Canada, runs next Thursday, June 9.

The couple followed the herd on foot for 1,500 kilometers.

"They let the caribou guide them through a wild and remote landscape, from the central Yukon to coastal Alaska and back. During the five-month journey, they ski and hike across mountains, swim icy rivers, brave Arctic weather and endure hordes of mosquitoes. They survive an encounter with a hungry grizzly bear that forces them to reconcile what it means to be a part of true wilderness. Hunger, fatigue and pain become routine, but the sacrifice is worth it when they witness the miracle of birth just metres from their tent."

It's clearly a unique attempt to portray the migratory life of this herd, which is so integral to ANWR's fate. Sounds like it's worth watching.

Not sure how most of us in the U.S. will do that, but perhaps those with satellite TV service can tune in to the CBC. Copies of the documentary can also be ordered from the NFB's online store or by calling (800) 542-2164. "Being Caribou" is also showing at the Seattle International Film Festival through June 12.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, wildlife]

Prof: ANWR oil "too small to notice"

2005-06-02T08:08:00.000-07:00

Writing in today's San Jose Mercury News, UC Berkeley professor Severin Borenstein says the volume of oil estimated in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge might reduce U.S. gas prices at the pump by 4 cents, "but will almost certainly do no more than that."

"How can it be that producing a million additional U.S. barrels of oil a day can have so little benefit for U.S. consumers?" Borestein asks in his column. "Simple. The oil doesn't belong to U.S. consumers. ... The new supplies become just drops in the worldwide oil bucket."

Borenstein, a business and public policy professor, is also director of the UC Energy Institute. He goes on to say, in words that stick, that we will never achieve "energy independence" as long as oil is our primary fuel. And the average American consumer's belief that they are entitled to cheap oil is a falacy that has been reinforced by political myth-makers who know it has traction with voters.

Politicians, he says, have knowingly let the nation become more and more dependent on a resource that is increasingly held in fewer hands. They have repeatedly failed to show the courage required to tell Americans the truth, which is that we all must sacrifice to reduce our dependence on a limited resource held by oppressive foreign governments.

"The current powers in Washington are not the first invertebrates to fail that challenge," Borenstein writes. "They are just the most successful in promoting the myth that drilling in Alaska is an alternative strategy for curbing oil prices."

In less than 700 words, Borenstein presents this truth more memorably than any commentator in recent years.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

BP may restart Badami wells near ANWR

2005-06-01T09:20:00.000-07:00

High oil prices may lure British Petroleum to restart operations at its Badami oilfield, the easternmost field on Alaska's North Slope, located about halfway between Prudhoe Bay and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

"We want to try new technology and hopefully change Badami's fortune," BP spokesman Daren Beaudo told the Anchorage Daily News.

Badami became a major bust for BP soon after it went into production in 1998, producing only 1,400 barrels per day out of a total North Slope production of around 1 million barrels per day. Production was halted in 2003. The seven wells at Badami cost more than $300 million to develop and have produced a little more 4 million barrels of oil so far. Which means the project probably never got even halfway toward breaking even. All of Badami's seven wells operate from a single gravel pad, representing an example of how the industry and politicians say oilfields in ANWR will operate.

Will Nebesky of Alaska's Division of Oil and Gas said BP's announcement indicates that $50-per-barrel oil will continue for some time. "They think in terms of sustainable price," he said. "That's encouraging that Badami would be getting attention again."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

ExxonMobil: Living in the past

2005-05-27T15:38:00.000-07:00

A group of ExxonMobil shareholders Wednesday failed to get the oil giant to adopt a resolution that would have mandated a study on the environmental risks of oil drilling in sensitive locations, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The company is expected to be a leading player in the search for oil if ANWR is opened to exploration.

The resolution, calling for a "biodiversity impact report," can be found here. It was brought forward by the US Public Interest Research Group, and socially responsible investing firms Green Century Capital Management and Clean Yield Asset Management. It received "yes" votes from only 8.1 percent of ExxonMobil shareholers.

Getting stronger support, but still not passing, was another shareholder resolution asking ExxonMobil to disclose its plans for complying with greenhouse gas reduction targets in countries participating in the Kyoto Protocol. This resolution received 28 percent support from shareholders.

ExxonMobil shares the Bush administration's fringe position that the science on climate change is "inconclusive." Yet another shareholder resolution called on ExxonMobil to document its sources for this claim, but received only 10.3 percent support (though that was an increase from last year).

Said Pat Daly, executive director of the Tri-State Coalition for Responsible Investing: “Our primary concern is that, unlike other oil and gas companies, ExxonMobil has no plans to transform the company so it can live in a carbon-constrained world.”

All this contrasts harshly with glossy ads ExxonMobil is running in major magazines lately, including recent issues of The New Yorker that, ironically, contained an eye-opening three-part series on global warming. "We're all for reducing emissions," the ads read. "ExxonMobil refineries capture steam that would otherwise be wasted and use it in the refining process. Recent energy-savinng initiatives like this have had a dramatic effect on emissions: the equivalent of taking well over a million cars off the road, every year."

They don't mention that this is old technology that has been used in other refineries and industrial facilities for many years as a cost-saving measure.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

All about caribou

2005-05-22T12:18:00.000-07:00

I just stumbled across the Caribou News blog, which looks like a useful place to keep track of all things caribou. Recent posts, for example, include news article citations from around the globe and references to government documents.

The blog, which came on the scene in February, is the work of Project Caribou, an educator's guide to the wild caribou of North America. This, in turn, is managed by Remy Rodden, conservation education coordinator for the Yukon (Canada) Department of Environment.

The blog appears to be updated about once a week with the latest caribou news. Its parent site looks like a wonderful resource on caribou in general, not just for educators, but for anyone interested in the signature roaming ungulates of ANWR.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, wildlife]

Globe names ANWR top birding spot

2005-05-22T11:06:00.000-07:00

The Boston Globe, in a travel story published today, puts the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge at the top of its list of ultimate American birding spots.

Says writer Mark Wilson:

"Few would would argue it is the crown jewel of the national wildlife refuge system. ... It is an area of heartbreaking beauty."

Wilson goes on to say that visiting remote and rugged ANWR is difficult and not for the fainthearted. But he says this is part of its appeal, and calls it "the trip of a lifetime."

We haven't heard anything about ANWR's value as bird habitat during the ongoing debate over whether the refuge should be opened to oil drilling. Wilson's writeup reminds us that the refuge has value beyond it's oil -- even beyond its caribou and muskoxen.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil, wildlife]

New report calls for mpg boost, not ANWR drilling

2005-05-18T14:59:00.000-07:00

A new report by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group urges President Bush to support a 40 mpg fuel economy standard for new automobiles instead of ANWR drilling. It notes that:

• Had Bush imposed a 40 mpg standard in 2001, American consumers today would be saving $5 billion at the gas pumps or about $300 per car.

• A 40 mpg standard would save four times more gasoline than ANWR drilling is expected to produce at its peak.

• A 40 mpg standard would save 350,000 barrels of oil per day, or about half of what we now import from Iraq.

• The National Academy of Sciences has already shown that the technology exists to produce safe vehicles that get 40 mpg.

• The Bush administration's own Energy Information Administration has reported that the energy plan recently adopted by the House would actually increase U.S. imports of foreign oil by 85 percent by 2025, and that it will do nothing to reduce gas prices.

"Last month, President Bush wished he had a magic wand to lower gas prices, but with the stroke of an ordinary pen, he could require cars to go farther on a gallon of gas," said Anna Aurilio, Legislative Director for U.S. PIRG. "Instead President Bush continues to push for an energy bill that won't save oil or protect consumers."

This report seems to be mostly a compilation of previously reported facts. But bringing them all together has value, if only to turn up the heat a little on those who have repeatedly voted against common-sense efficiency improvements.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Alaska citizens subsidize ANWR drilling roads

2005-05-18T13:19:00.000-07:00

The state Senate in Alaska on Tuesday approved $2.4 billion in funding for construction and road projects. It includes authorization for Gov. Frank Murkowski's so-called "Roads to Resources" project, which will build and improve roads to access the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in anticipation of oil exploration there.

Roads to Resources includes $37 million of spending for roads, and for a new natural gas pipeline that Murkowski has been trying to get built in the state for years. The Senate's action Tuesday ensures that some of this expense will be covered by "permanent fund" monies, or royalties from oil extraction paid to the state and meant to be disbursed as annual checks to state residents as their share of the royalties.

Not everyone supports this use of the money, including Rep. Harry Crawford, D-Anchorage. In effect, it means that Alaska residents are paying to help oil companies access ANWR, when the oil companies should be bearing that expense. I'm sure most residents could find a better use for this money.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Oil in Alaska: Two more flashpoints

2005-05-16T11:06:00.000-07:00

Beaver Creek, Yukon Flats NWR (Source: USFWS)
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

The Christian Science Monitor, which is doing some of the best environmental reporting in the "mainstream" press lately, offers up this story today on two more oil-rich areas in Alaska. Both have serious environmental concerns but have been somewhat overshadowed by the ANWR debate.

One is Teshekpuk Lake in National Petroleum Reserve Alaska, located west of ANWR (we looked at it briefly here.) The other is Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, located between the Brooks Range and White Mountains, which probably nobody outside of Alaska has even heard of. (The Monitor story includes a map of the areas.)

The two areas are believed to hold about 1.6 billion barrels of oil, or about one-sixth the estimated reserves of ANWR. Most of it is under Teshekpuk Lake, and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management wants to open it to oil leasing. The mayor of the native North Slope Borough has taken a surprisingly firm stand against oil drilling at Teshekpuk Lake, a fragile area considered sacred for caribou hunting. (See his March 2005 newsletter, a .pdf file available at this site.)

At Yukon Flats, Doyon Ltd., an Athabascan Indian-owned corporation based in Fairbanks, is seeking to trade about 150,000 acres of low-lying wetlands for 110,000 upland acres in the refuge with oil and gas potential. State and federal officials appear to support the swap, but not all Doyon shareholders do.

"I think it's going to hurt the people up here for many years to come," said Ed Alexander, who proposed a resolution opposing drilling that was adopted by the tribal council of Fort Yukon, a village near the proposed drilling. A similar but nonbinding resolution was approved by voice vote at Doyon's annual shareholder meeting in March.

All this has me thinking, again, that the only solution to continued oil conflicts, and the inevitable environmental cost, is conservation and massive investment in alternatives. I know that's not rocket science, but it's not the path we're following now.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Whistleblower's website back online

2005-05-13T10:48:00.000-07:00

The website set up several years ago by Chuck Hamel, a former North Slope oil industry employee turned whistleblower, appears to be back online after quite a long period of dormancy.

The site ANWRnews.com (no relation to this blog), contains hundreds of links to Hamel's whistleblowing activities in the 2001 to 2002 period, in which he revealed numerous worker-safety and environmental violations. But it does not appear to be updated with his more recent activity, some of which we reported recently. It does not even reflect the fact that Alaska now has a new governor.

Even so, it's good to see more signs that Hamel and his supporters are getting active again. He has proven to be adept at getting the mainstream media (and, thus, the public) to pay attention to the realities of arctic oil drilling. I have put in a request to interview Hamel in hopes of learning more about what he's up to.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Off-topic: Replicating robots

2005-05-12T11:37:00.000-07:00

This has nothing to do with ANWR. I just thought it was too scary to resist:

U.S. scientists create self-replicating robot

LONDON (Reuters) - Scientists at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York have created small robots that can build copies of themselves.

Each robot consists of several 10-cm (4 inch) cubes which have identical machinery, electromagnets to attach and detach to each other and a computer program for replication. The robots can bend and pick up and stack the cubes.

"Although the machines we have created are still simple compared with biological self-reproduction, they demonstrate that mechanical self-reproduction is possible and not unique to biology," Hod Lipson said in a report in the science journal Nature on Wednesday.

He and his team believe the design principle could be used to make long term, self-repairing robots that could mend themselves and be used in hazardous situations and on space flights.

The experimental robots, which don't do anything else except make copies of themselves, are powered through contacts on the surface of the table and transfer data through their faces. They self-replicate by using additional modules placed in special "feeding locations."

The machines duplicate themselves by bending over and putting their top cube on the table. Then they bend again, pick up another cube, put it on top of the first and repeat the entire process. As the new robot begins to take shape it helps to build itself.

"The four-module robot was able to construct a replica in 2.5 minutes by lifting and assembling cubes from the feeding locations," said Lipson.

It's amazing to me how real life continues to be stranger than fiction.

USGS reports new oil source on North Slope

2005-05-11T20:23:00.000-07:00

In a new assessment announced today, the U.S. Geological Survey reported a "significant undiscovered" source of oil and natural gas on Alaska's North slope, located between National Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA) and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The assessment estimates there are 4.0 billion barrels of oil, 37.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 478 million barrels of natural gas liquids that are undiscovered and technically recoverable. (Technically recoverable resources are the amount of petroleum that may be recovered using current technology.)

By comparison, USGS estimates undiscovered oil of 10.6 billion barrels in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska and 10.4 billion barrels in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 1002 area.

The natural gas estimate of 37 trillion cubic feet is said to be found mostly in the southern half of the assessment area in the foothills of the Brooks Range. This is about half of what has been estimated to occur in NPRA and significantly more than has been estimated to occur in ANWR 1002 area.

The region covered by the assessment lies between NPRA and ANWR, and extends from the Brooks Range north to the State-Federal offshore boundary. The assessment area consists mostly of State and Native lands, covering about 23,000 square miles. The population in the area is limited to Prudhoe Bay and other oil-production facilities.

USGS says the assessment is based on a "comprehensive review" of all available geological, geophysical, and geochemical evidence; including hydrocarbon source rocks, reservoir rocks, and traps.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

GoNorth! sets dogsled trip, online classroom for '06

2005-05-10T05:14:00.000-07:00

A team of educators and scientists based at the University of Minnesota is planning a dogsled journey to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge starting in February 2006. The goal is to create a live classroom experience on refuge conditions that will be available free to K-12 teachers.

Calling itself GoNorth!, the team will head north from Circle, Alaska, on a two-month, 700-mile journey through ANWR, concluding at Prudhoe Bay. The expedition will explore the environment of ANWR and oil drilling on the North Slope, collect data on weather conditions and climate change, and share their findings live on the internet for teachers and students.

The team includes Dr. Aaron Doering, education director and University of Minnnesota professor; Paul Pregont, expedition leader and research director; and Amy Vargason, a fifth-grade teacher from H.A. Snyder Elementary School in Sayre, Penn., selected to join the trip to provide a grade-school teacher's perspective.

"We will explore the realities of climate change and traditional ecological knowledge, while inviting the public and K-12 classrooms around the world to debate the controversy of oil exploration and the realities of looking for renewable resources," GoNorth! reports on its website, which already includes a variety of interesting classroom materials.

The site also includes lots of chilling photos of the sled-dogging adventurers huddled behind piles of gear on training trips, seeking shelter from bitter winds and blowing snow. So it isn't all fun and games.

Sponsors of the expedition include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Best Buy, Cargill, NASA, the National Science Foundation, National Geographic, and the Alaska Coalition.

The expedition will also spend time in several native communities along the way, including Arctic Village and Kaktovik, with the goal of sharing traditional environmental knowledge with students around the world.

"Elders of the communities will share with teachers, students and scientists how the environment has changed around them and how these changes threaten their culture. A powerful learning experience is derived when scientific environmental data is combined with a living, breathing human element."

Sounds like a noble effort. GoNorth! is seeking donations (tax deductible) to support the trip, if you are so inclined.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Both sides agree: ANWR oil won't change prices

2005-05-09T11:22:00.000-07:00

It's funny how these factoids just trickle out over time. Why didn't these questions get asked weeks or months ago?

In any case, this UPI story published in the conservative Washington Times bothers to ask both sides in the debate whether oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will lower gasoline prices for American consumers. Surprisingly, both drilling advocates and foes agree that it won't have any effect.

Because of the way the world's oil market works, experts said the international price effects of drilling in ANWR will be difficult -- maybe even impossible -- to pinpoint. "There's no way drilling in the Arctic is going to change that price," said Kelly Hill Scanlon of the Northern Alaska Environmental Center in Fairbanks.

The piece then quotes Kevin Hand, executive director of drilling lobbyist Arctic power:

"We see a lot of positive economic benefits to drilling," said Hand, including job creation, oil royalties for the state and federal government, and direct payments to Alaska residents. Yet, like Scanlon, when it comes to a direct link between Arctic drilling and gasoline prices at the pump, Hand said "those are a bit more difficult to directly attribute."

Hand later adds that drilling only "allows us some flexibility" should the United States feel the need to increase its oil output.

And yet politicians keep saying that ANWR oil will reduce gas prices, because that's what they think the public wants to hear. But people need to recognize that $2 gasoline isn't going away, not if we drill ANWR, and not if we drill every oil patch left on the planet. The only way to reduce that sting at the pump is to visit the pump less often.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Murkowski's man: 'Perfect storm' for drilling

2005-05-09T09:18:00.000-07:00

Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski's representative in D.C., John Katz, says there is a "perfect storm" of factors combining to open ANWR to oil drilling.

Interviewed by Alaska's KTUU television, Katz said that now is the best chance ever to open the refuge to drilling. Katz, director of Murkowski's D.C. office, said there are still significant hurdles because permission for ANWR drilling is contained in the federal budget bill. That bill faces trouble over a number of unrelated issues, including Medicaid funding, tax cuts and concern over the growing federal deficit.

There is also the conflict over the so-called "nuclear option," in which Democrats could shut down the Senate if Republicans try to force through the president's conservative judicial nominees.

Still, said Katz: “I’d have to say that this is our best chance. There's a perfect storm in a sense of the world geopolitical situation, high gas prices, a growing recognition of how important domestic oil production is.”

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

'Treasure America' seeks a new path

2005-05-06T17:52:00.000-07:00

Triplepundit today announces a new initiative called Treasure America aimed at helping native Alaskans find a more sustainable future that is not dependent on oil revenues. And obviously, the timing couldn't be better. We can only hope it's not too late.

"It may or may not be too late to head off the current legislation, but, project leaders still think there's plenty of room for education and with a little luck, the possibility of making a big difference," Triplepundit's Nick Aster writes.

Just who are those project leaders?

Andrew F. Smith, executive director, business strategy consultant.
Emily Leary, educator, fundraising coordinator and education specialist
Nick Aster, media coordinator, MBA candidate and Triplepundit founder

This is a serious effort with an actual budget, and they're looking to take on volunteers and hire staff. The goal is an "intensive, one-month initiative to promote sound economic policy in the United States and the preservation of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, along with the economic benefits it provides in its current, natural state."

A bi-partisan team of business people will travel the country analyzing ways that the American public can profit from protecting the Refuge in its pristine state. They intend to convince the public that America’s economic future does not depend on extracting resources from the ground but on business innovation, resource efficiency and human capital. They also plan to show that "there are far faster, cheaper, cleaner, less corrupt and more profitable methods to address America’s energy needs than oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge."

The team will produce a short documentary film as a consensus building tool for politicians, native Alaskans, oil industry companies and unions promoting oil drilling in the Refuge.

The endeavor also has a key partner in Hunter Lovins, co-founder and co-CEO of the Rocky Mountain Institute. She will be providing "insitutional guidance" to Treasure America.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

It's not about the oil. It's about the future.

2005-05-06T10:01:00.000-07:00

Pat O'Donnell, president and CEO of the Aspen Skiing Co., makes a surprising and yet welcome argument against ANWR drilling in this column originally published by High Country News.

Why should the snow skiing industry care about ANWR drilling? That's exactly the point of O'Donnell's piece. The straight answer is that his business and even his entire industry will disappear if an energy policy built around ANWR drilling is allowed to proceed. That policy ignores the pressing truths of global warming, which threatens to turn hundreds of ski hills into and billions of dollars in skiing revenue into clouds of dust.

"By deciding to drill in the Arctic Refuge," O'Donnell writes, "we're saying we're unwilling to take any additional steps, no matter how modest, to reduce our dependence on oil, steps that would coincidentally address the greenhouse warming problem and improve national security."

Drilling for oil in ANWR, he writes, perpetuates our old, oil-dependent ways when we should be developing alternatives. And much more is at stake than just the joy of skiing. Also likely are water shortages, more wildfires, more heat-related deaths, a variety of ecological disruptions, and all the economic fallout that goes along with these.

"So this isn't just about the caribou. It's about how we're selling out our children by ruining their chance for the kind of prosperity we enjoyed. It's about how we're selling out our industry and all the other aspects of the West's ski tourism economy ... because we're too lazy or arrogant to make any sacrifice at all, even the relatively painless ones."

When business leaders like O'Donnell begin to stake out positions like this, it's a sure sign the political winds are shifting.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Wisconsin students hit the road for ANWR

2005-05-04T13:33:00.000-07:00

A group of college students from Wisconsin plans to hit the road this month to visit the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in response to recent Congressional actions to allow oil drilling in the refuge. The eight students from Northland College in Ashland will drive to the refuge to "observe conditions" and meet with scientists, teachers and other students.

"A bunch of us decided that we needed to give our bodily presence to this issue and also help our own communities become more aware of what was actually going on up there," said student Leah Olm.

The group intends to return with a report that includes scientific material and artistic representations to raise local awareness. Art Major Emily Pimm, one of the travelers, said she is saddened by how oil drilling might affect the lands and indigenous peoples. "To think of that as being gone or taken away because someone wants to drive their cars with more gas, it seems ridiculous to me," she said.

OK, but aren't you driving up there?

Oh well. The students will receive academic credit for the project, and will present their findings to the community when they return in June.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Arctic Power fires two in Anchorage

2005-05-04T08:57:00.000-07:00

Arctic Power, the leading group lobbying for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, on Monday fired its executive director and a project manager in its Anchorage office, the Anchorage Daily News reports today (signup required).

The move comes after unusual criticism of the group's spending when the state Legislature recently approved $1.3 million in additional taxpayer support, on top of a total of $10 million taxpayers have given to Arctic Power over the past 13 years. This, in fact, represents the lion's share of all funding Arctic Power has received.

The lobby's executive committee met Monday and trimmed the Anchorage office's monthly overhead from $31,500 to $7,500, said Al Adams, a former state senator who chairs Arctic Power's board. The jobs of Arctic Power's executive director Kevin Hand and project manager Adrian Herrera were cut during a session closed to the public. The only person remaining in the Anchorage office is Elaine Royal, who handles membership and finance.

A handful of lawmakers recently questioned Arctic Power's spending habits and whether the Anchorage office was necessary, given that most of the persuading that needs to happen takes place in D.C. This prompted some intervention by the office of Gov. Frank Murkowski.

"We have urged them to find every way to cut their costs and focus their efforts on D.C.," said Becky Hultberg, Murkowski's spokeswoman.

Rep. Bruce Weyhrauch, R-Juneau, said Arctic Power has "gotten habituated to a lot of cash" but operates without much accountability. He said Hand was virtually inaccessible and rarely responded to his calls or letters. Hand was paid a healthy $7,500 a month.

The lobby's board also formed a new oversight committee to provide better control of spending. "Even they recognize this was an organization that may be fairly inefficient, given the incredible amount of money they received," said another critic, Rep. Carl Gatto, R-Palmer. "If they can do it all now with a third of the staff and they're dismissing people, I wish they had done this a long time ago."

The timing is certainly interesting, especially considering the new state funding for Arctic Power was still approved by an overwhelming margin.

There is nothing about the changes on Arctic Power's websites. Instead, the latest news at anwr.com is this unusual advice to save money on gas: Get a new credit card and use it just for fuel. Hmm... I guess they really have become addicted to the state's largesse.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Grist features Millikin of Green Car Congress

2005-05-03T09:10:00.000-07:00

The online environmental magazine Grist.org features a Q & A with Mike Millikin of the Green Car Congress blog in its "Interactivist" column today. Readers can also submit questions that Millikin will answer on Friday.

If you're not familiar with Green Car Congress, I urge you to make it a regular stop. It's one of the most useful blogs going, and one of the most timely. As the world slowly runs out of oil, what could be more important than helping people come to terms with their transportation choices? That's what GCC does.

As Millikin says in the Grist exchange:

"Given our increasing understanding of climate change and peak oil, we (global we, not just us) need to make the broadest-scale, most rapid transition of behavior, technologies, and markets ever conceived. We don't have all the answers, but we need urgently to figure it out. This must be done from a broad basis of knowledge and understanding, not fear and reaction. My goal is to help that process."

And he helps indeed. Millikin is amazing at dredging up sustainable transportation news from all over the globe. It's a great one-stop shop for those interested in modern mobility.

[Technorati tags: Cars, Oil]

Our energy problem: We've stopped evolving

2005-05-02T08:30:00.000-07:00

I had an interesting experience yesterday that got me thinking about our energy predicament in America. I was enjoying a cheap meal out at a local restaurant, and my table afforded a view of the street.

Outside, a massive car show formed in a parking lot across the street. It looked impromptu and chaotic, and featured mostly young people showing off dozens of 1970s-era American coupes and sedans. More arrived throughout my meal, until the street was literally jammed with cars and the sound of their stereos and engines. It was an entertaining scene and the cars were beautiful.

But when I paid my bill and walked outside, my nose knocked my brain in gear. The unfiltered exhaust from these vintage cars was palpable. A two-block section of four-lane street was being gassed to death by these cars, vaporizing a precious resource in the name of noise and shine.

I'm not saying it wasn't fun. But I don't think you can call it good, clean fun. Not anymore. Not in 2005, after 30 years of evolution in the internal-combustion engine.

But it got me thinking: Have we evolved?

There is food for thought in the news. The New York Times reported Sunday that demand for oil in America has increased by 38 percent since the last major gasoline crisis in this country in 1973. In contrast, European nations have reduced their oil consumption over the same time period, or at least kept it in check.

After the oil crisis in 1973 (when many of those car-show rides were new) this nation took major strides to increase energy efficiency, and our oil consumption declined. We required automakers to increase the average miles-per-gallon of the cars they produce. This nearly doubled the national vehicle efficiency to 27.5 mpg in 1987 from 14 in 1972. We also imposed a 55 mph speed limit nationwide.

As a result, gasoline consumption remained below the 1978 peak for 15 years, until the SUV came along. Since then, our gas consumption has been on a steep incline, and national fuel efficiency has slipped to 24 mpg. (Because SUVs are classified as trucks, they don't have to achieve the same average mpg as cars, even though people use them like cars.)

In passing the nation's new 2005 energy bill last week, Congress embraced drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and rejected an amendment that would have required automakers to increase fleet-average mpg. Even Michigan Democrats rejected the amendment, repeating the lie that higher mpg standards would make vehicles less safe.

Even the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, newspaper for one of the most oil-lathered communities in America, saw the falacy in this decision in an editorial published Sunday:

"...the Star-Telegram Editorial Board believes that Congress should support drilling for oil in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, because it is among the premier petroleum prospects in the United States. But drilling should be permitted there only if Congress also adopts significantly higher vehicle mileage standards.

"Eventually, the "end-of-oil" scenario looms -- the day when there aren't enough petroleum deposits left in the world to meet global demand. Those nations that have failed to diversify their energy supplies away from fossil fuels could experience alarming declines in their economies and living standards."

Or as Steven Nadel of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy put it so well in the Times: "We are in a boxing match, and the president keeps one hand tied to his back. We're punching with supplies and not using demand. We're at a disadvantage."

Which brings me back to the car show. The internal-combustion engine has evolved. Today's cars burn fuel much more cleanly than they did in 1970. Put a similar number of modern cars together and you probably wouldn't be able to smell them.

But a generation later, they still don't use fuel much more efficiently. We've saddled ourselves to old technology out of nostalgia and ignorance, when better choices are within reach. It would be like opting to watch streaming video over a dialup connection on a Mac Classic because we just aren't willing to learn how to use a Power Mac G5 and a cable modem.

Even logging companies, when they clearcut a forest, plant seedlings so they'll have more wood to cut 80 years hence. Today we are throwbacks, blindly hammering at the Earth for another tank of gas without even considering that it may be our last.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

Congress OKs budget -- with ANWR funding

2005-04-29T10:43:00.000-07:00

The House and Senate both passed a new federal budget late Thursday that includes a provision to find an additional $2.4 billion in revenue. The unspoken subtext is that this money will come from drilling leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Critics called the strategy a "scam" crafted to divert the public's attention from the controversial drilling plan.

Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife, had this to say:

“In the end, the most telling thing is that the Republican leadership, with their backroom budget scam, didn’t have the guts to come out and say they were opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil. They know that broad majorities of the American public disagree with them and their oil industry allies on plans to open the biological heart of the Arctic Refuge to oil drills.

“Make no mistake about it; a vote for this budget is a vote to open the Arctic Refuge to oil drilling... This budget includes open-ended instructions that allow the Republican leadership to fast-track Arctic Refuge drilling, avoiding the normal legislative checks and balances. ”

The Senate voted 52-47 to approve the budget. The House voted 214-211. These surprisingly slim margins suggest there was a lot more controversy in the $2.6 trilling federal spending plan. One of the biggest bones of contention was Medicaid spending.

The close votes also mean drilling supporters will have to proceed cautiously to keep ANWR drilling alive. The budget bill is not the final word on drilling. Congress must still approve specific legislation to legalize drilling in the refuge, which would then become part of a budget reconciliation bill to be approved later.

That's why Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, a standard-bearer on ANWR drilling, is urging her Republican colleagues not to change Congressional rules to prevent Democrats from filibustering the president's judicial nominees. The so-called "nuclear option" to get conservative judges appointed would prompt Democrats to shut down Congress through other procedural moves, which would kill ANWR drilling.

"This is one of the reasons I have urged caution on the judicial nominees," Murkowski told the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. "Any time you have an opportunity for a vote, it's another potential bump in the road."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Budget bill said to be missing ANWR language

2005-04-28T17:06:00.001-07:00

The Associated Press reports this afternoon that the federal budget bill agreed to by a House and Senate conference committee does not include specific language relating to ANWR drilling. However, it does include a $2.4 billion chunk of revenue that matches expected revenue from the initial round of drilling leases in the refuge.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he will include revenues from oil lease sales in the refuge to help meet the budget requirements. Such a move essentially would authorize drilling there.

But it is not certain the House will follow the Senate's lead. A spokesman for Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., chair of the House Resources Committee, said Pombo has not decided whether to turn to the refuge to meet budget obligations.

House leaders apparently want to limit the number of times the issue comes up for a vote. They are fearful of losing support among moderate Republicans -- perhaps an indication of faltering support overall for drilling in the refuge.

The AP reports the House may wait until negotiations with the Senate on a final budget reconciliation plan - probably in the fall - before agreeing to include the drilling proposal. This would require only one House floor vote about the refuge as part of the budget process.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

More on Inupiat indecision...

2005-04-28T11:02:00.000-07:00

We previously discussed signs that native Inupiat villagers in Kaktovik are having second thoughts about supporting oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge surrounding their town. Link.

Now comes another story from Reuters that adds fuel to the fire.

The piece quotes Robert Thompson, a local tour operator who organized the recent petition drive opposing refuge development. That petition drew 57 signatures in a town of 284 people. Thompson also notes that in the last local election on the ANWR drilling issue, only 98 people voted, "so presumably if there were an election, 57 people could conceivably be a majority," Thompson said.

Support is wavering because Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski advocates of offshore drilling. Residents have long opposed offshore drilling because it could interfere with traditional whale hunting.

Murkowski ended some no-leasing restrictions on Beaufort Sea sites in state waters considered important to Inupiat whalers. He also celebrated a March 30 federal lease sale in which Shell Oil acquired drilling rights in the Beaufort Sea directly offshore of Kaktovik.

Kaktovik leaders have said they would only support drilling as long as it did not threaten their livelihood.

"We can support development of the (coastal plain), provided it is done with certain conditions met, conditions that assure we are empowered by law to protect our interests, including our access to those lands and waters on which we depend," the mayor and city council said in an April 19 letter to Alaska's Congressional delegation.

[Technorati tags: ANWR]

World waits for news on budget bill

2005-04-28T10:36:00.000-07:00

House and Senate leaders are debating a federal budget bill this week that will decide ANWR's fate. A conference committee meeting yesterday produced little news about the refuge, but did indicate that the two houses of Congress are getting close to deciding a budget both can agree on.

Republican Sen Pete Dominici (N.M.) said he was "confident that there will be no significant change in the instruction to the energy committee -- the allowance, the order, the mandate, whatever you call it -- for us to produce an ANWR proposal that will become law.” If that makes any sense. Link.

Senate Republicans put ANWR drilling in the budget bill to protect it from filibuster by Democrats. The bill's language calls for the government to collect about $2.5 billion from ANWR oil lease sales through 2010. The Senate would still have to approve specific legislation later to open
ANWR to drilling, but having that language in the budget bill could ease procedural obstacles for that second step.

The House, meanwhile, approved an energy bill that includes ANWR drilling, but has yet to adopt a budget bill containing that goal. But drilling supporters say that's just because Republicans in the House were waiting to see if senators could make the language stick in their bill, according to the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

A final budget bill could pass both houses of Congress by the end of this week.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Rebel shareholders pressure ChevronTexaco

2005-04-27T15:08:00.000-07:00

A group of shareholders pressured ChevronTexaco at its annual meeting today to produce an honest accounting of potential environmental damages should ANWR be opened to oil drilling.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that activist shareholders presented two resolutions at the meeting in San Ramon, Calif.: One asking the company to spend more time and money cleaning up a corner of the Ecuadoran Amazon where Texaco once pumped oil, the other seeking a written report on the environmental damage that could be caused by drilling in sensitive areas, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The company's board, not surprisingly, asked shareholders to reject both requests. And when it came time for the vote, 80 percent towed the company line and rejected the ANWR-related resolution (the Amazon resolution was also rejected). Yet supporters nonetheless took it as a hopeful sign that 7.7 percent of shareholders supported the ANWR resolution.

“No issue has animated our members more than protecting the fragile Arctic Refuge,” said Larry Fahn, president of the Sierra Club, which filed the ANWR-related resolution. The activists had powerful allies on their side, including the immense state pension funds of California and New York. “I am pleased that so many ChevronTexaco shareholders recognize that good environmental decisions make good economic sense."

ChevronTexaco and BP drilled an exploratory well in ANWR 20 years ago and would likely be first at the table to begin tapping oil in the refuge if drilling is approved in Congress.

For supporters, the resolutions are a way to focus the company's attention on environmental concerns they believe have been swept aside in the search for oil.

"It just raises the urgency of the issue inside the corporation," Shelley Alpern, vice president of Trillium Asset Management, told the Chronicle. The firm, one of many specializing in socially conscious investing, submitted the resolution on Ecuador.

Here's a link to the full text of the ANWR resolution: Link.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Maine senators targeted in budget vote

2005-04-27T14:58:00.000-07:00

Maine's two Republican senators are said to be the target of intense lobbying efforts ahead of a vote expected this week on the Senate budget bill that includes ANWR drilling.

The Portland (Me.) Press Herald reports that both Sen. Olympia Snowe and Sen. Susan Collins are on the fence. Snowe previously voted against the preliminary budget bill, while Collins supported it. Both oppose ANWR drilling, but it's unclear if they will oppose the entire budget package as a result. Collins, for instance, is quoted as saying that she supports the budget because it includes tuition grants for college students in her state.

"I'd have to look at the budget as a whole," Collins said. "I'm going to continue my efforts to defeat drilling. It would not help our energy problems and it's one of the last unspoiled wilderness areas that we have."

Collins told the paper she is still trying to persuade Republican leaders to remove the drilling issue from the final budget.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Whistleblower returns with a warning

2005-04-25T11:06:00.000-07:00

Chuck Hamel has been flying under the radar for a while. A former British Petroleum employee and longtime whistleblower on Alaskan oil companies, he has revealed a number of safety and pollution problems on the North Slope that the drillers have tried to keep quiet.

Well, apparently he's back in action now and warning that if drilling is allowed in ANWR, the refuge could be in for a devastating oil spill on par with the Exxon Valdez accident unless state and federal officials get a lot more rigorous in patrolling the drillers. Counterpunch.org checks in with this story on Hamel's latest crusade, which includes an April 15 letter to Sen. Pete Dominici, R-N.M., chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and an ardent ANWR drilling supporter.

Hamel's letter claims there have been three oil spills on the North Slope between March and early April.

"You obviously are unaware of the cheating by some producers and drilling companies," Hamel said in the letter. "Your official Senate tour (of Alaska in March) was masked by the orchestrated 'dog and pony show' provided you at the new Alpine Field, away from the real world of the Slope's dangerously unregulated operations."

Writer Jason Leopold reports that Hamel successfully uncovered major spills of oil-laced "drilling mud" on the North Slope by BP and Nabors Alaska Drilling as recently as December 2004. One of these involved the intentional injection of 2,000 gallons of drilling fluids beneath the ice to avoid the cost of proper disposal. Another was a "gusher" of fluids that shot 85 feet into the air and sprayed across the tundra.

The companies failed to report these spills, itself a violation of the law. Even worse, in most of these cases, state and federal officials let the oil companies off the hook with a slap on the wrist.

“I am going to throw a hiccup into the ANWR legislation,” Hamel said. “Until these oil companies clean up their act they can’t drill in ANWR because they are spilling oil in the North Slope.”

(NOTE: Hamel formerly ran the website http://anwrnews.com, which appears to be defunct now and has no relation to this blog.)

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Poll: U.S. environmental conditions worsening

2005-04-25T09:01:00.000-07:00

A new Gallup poll finds that more Americans rate the nation's environmental conditions as only "fair" or worse,
and 63 percent now say conditions are worsening, an increase of 6 percent compared to a similar poll in 2001.

The poll, cited here, was conducted in collaboration with CNN and USA Today. It involved phone interviews with 1,004 American adults between Mar. 7 and Mar. 10, 2005. Margin of error is 3 percent.

Results showed that only 37 percent now rate U.S. environmental conditions as "good," 48 percent say conditions are "fair" and 10 percent selected "poor." These are all increases from 41 percent, 47 percent and 6 percent, respectively, compared to the 2001 poll.

[Technorati tags: environment]

Grizzlies confront polar bears on Beaufort coast

2005-04-24T13:53:00.000-07:00

Grizzlies/USFWS
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

The Anchorage Daily News reports today on new research that shows polar bears and grizzlies are interacting more on the Beaufort Sea coast of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. And the more aggressive grizzlies often come out the winner.

The upshot is another threat to polar bears, the scarcer of the two bruin species. They've already been forced ashore more often due to early melting sea ice, likely caused by global warming. Now they must confront grizzlies who have left their usual inland hunting areas to feed on whale carcasses left behind by native hunters from the village of Kaktovik. Another threat to polar bears is oil development on manmade gravel islands built at Prudhoe Bay.

Bear experts have recently spent hundreds of hours documenting these bear interactions. During the encounters, grizzlies usually succeed in driving polar bears off the whale carcasses. The accompanying photo shows a female grizzly and her two cubs feeding on a whale carcass on Barter Island near Kaktovik in 2003.

Polar bears normally feed mostly on seals that they hunt from floating sea ice.

"There are more bears on the shore for longer periods of time in the fall," said federal wildlife biologist Susi Miller. "It looks like the use of the coastal habitat is increasing, and it may be linked to climate change."

The situation hasn't been helped by native subsistence hunters creating large "whale dumps" along the coast where bones and other waste are left to rot. In effect, they're creating garbage bears just like those that became a problem years ago at garbage dumps in Yellowstone National Park.

In February, the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect Alaskan polar bears under the Endangered Species Act.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, wildlife]

Thinking twice in Kaktovik

2005-04-23T13:54:00.000-07:00

This is a big deal.

The Washington Post in a story today explores a "small but significant" shift in opinion in the Arctic town of Kaktovik. Long a stalwart supporter of ANWR drilling for the money and jobs it would bring, the town within the Arctic Refuge has shown signs lately of an opinion shift.

A number of local protesters greeted touring politicians at the airstrip last month by chanting slogans and waving signs and banners urging protection for the refuge. That, apparently, has never happened before. Also, a recent petition against drilling drew the signatures of 57 of Kaktovik's 188 adults. Kaktovik Mayor Lon Sonsalla told the Post he is no longer certain where the majority stands.

Driving the change is concern that ANWR drilling would lead to offshore drilling, which could compromise the traditional whale hunts that are a vital tradition to the Inupiak people of Kaktovik. These fears have been fanned by comments from Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski, who wants to offer drilling leases in state waters alongside ANWR but said those leases won't be attractive without the ability to attach to onshore facilities.

Locals have also become concerned about the impact on caribou, which they also hunt.

"I've never really taken a stand before -- I've always supported the community position," said grocery store owner Carla Sims Kayotuk. "But I changed by mind this year. ... They want to do the drilling where my family goes to hunt."

Sheldon Brower also changed his opinion after pondering what drilling could do to the refuge. He said hunting and roaming in the refuge is "like going to church for me." Drilling in the refuge, he said, will "destroy our culture completely. ... Just the thought of it makes me sick to my stomach."

Kaktovik locals have no official say in the drilling decision, but their approval has been a central motivating force for drilling proponents. It appears this leg of support may be turning to sawdust beneath them.

[Technorati tags: ANWR]

Ben & Jerry's delivers 'Baked Alaska' in protest

2005-04-23T13:41:00.000-07:00

To protest the House energy bill and its provision to open ANWR to oil drilling, activist ice cream makers Ben & Jerry's delivered an 1,100 pound Baked Alaska desert to the U.S. Capitol on Friday. Made from 3,600 scoops of ice cream, it was apparently meant to symbolize the folly of the drilling decision.

Naturally, not everyone was amused. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, noted that it must have taken a lot of energy to make the massive desert.

"This stunt goes to show that Ben and Jerry's does not have a firm appreciation for our county's energy crisis - or the very significant role oil plays in our daily lives," Stevens said. "I suggest that they use a horse and treadmill to run their ice cream machines if they are really concerned about decreasing our nation's dependence on fossil fuels."

Further calling into questions its motives, Ben & Jerry's also is selling a special "Baked Alaska Sundae" at select stores through the Earth Day weekend.

I'm sure Ben & Jerry's stunts have nice symbolic value. But I don't think it helps anybody to make a joke out of a very serious policy decision. Why does everything always have to be a joke?

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Kiss your lifestyle goodbye

2005-04-22T09:34:00.000-07:00

By now we all know that the House approved the Republican energy bill yesterday, including a provision to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. I will not waste your time repeating or attempting to analyze these events, which are being picked over extensively in the media as we speak.

The House bill, in any case, is so loaded with gratuitous prizes for the oil industry that it is unlikely to proceed intact through the Senate. It's inclusion of ANWR drilling alone is enough to ensure that.

Instead, I offer food for thought on the big picture, thanks to this timely article in the UK's Guardian newspaper.

The piece discusses a meeting last week that "ultra-conservative Swiss financiers" requested with retired petroleum geologist Colin Campbell, who helped found the London-based Oil Depletion Analysis Centre. An industry man, he saw problems on the horizon with the world's dependence on fossil fuels and launched the organization to draw attention to the issue. Campbell has unique insight on global petroleum reserves, having seen the situation in detail from the inside.

In short, he said, the phenomenon of "Peak Oil" is about to befall us, bringing shortages, economic chaos, and other unspeakable hardships.

"The first half of the oil age now closes," says Campbell. "The second half now dawns, and will be marked by the decline of oil and all that depends on it, including financial capital."

Campbell goes on to confess that while working for industry, he "never once told the truth" about an oil discovery, because his employer was always competing for money and wanted the world to believe it held the biggest piece of the pie.

Adds Bill Powers, editor of Canadian Energy Viewpoint: "The US government does not want to admit the reality of the situation. Dr Campbell's thesis, and those of others like him, are becoming the mainstream."

Indeed, the House energy bill gives only a token glance at the future while throwing billions in subsidies at the oil industry -- during a time when the industry is posting record profits thanks to high prices at the pump.

"We should be worried. Time is short and we are not even at the point where we admit we have a problem," said Chris Skrebowski, editor of Petroleum Review, published by the Energy Institute in London.

The Guardian piece is full of truth-telling gems like this and is worth reading in its entirety. If you can stomach it.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

The ANWR amendment: How they voted

2005-04-21T12:14:00.000-07:00

A total of 29 Republicans and one Independent joined Democrats in the failed vote on the amendment to strip ANWR from the energy bill yesterday (known as Amendment #3). Those 30 are:

Bartlett (Md.), Bass (N.H.), Boehlert (N.Y.), Bradley (N.H.), Castle (Del.), Davis (Va.), Ehlers (Mich.), Ferguson (N.J.), Fitzpatrick (Penn.), Freylinghuysen (N.J.), Gerlach (Penn.), Gilchrest (Md.), Inglis (S.C.), Johnson (Conn.), Johnson (Ill.), Kennedy (Minn.), Kirk (R.I.), Leach (Iowa), LoBiondo (N.J.), Petri (Wisc.,) Ramstad (Minn.), Reichert (Wash.), Sanders (I-Vt.), Saxton (N.J.), Schwarz (Mich.), Sensenbrenner (Wisc.), Shays (Conn.), Simmons (Conn.), Smith (N.J.), Walsh (N.Y.).

Meanwhile, 30 Democrats defected and voted with Republicans against the amendment (thus voting to keep ANWR drilling in the bill):

Baca (Calif.), Berry (Ark.), Bishop (Ga.), Boren (Okla.), Boyd (Fla.), Brady (Penn.), Cardoza (Calif.), Costa (Calif.), Cramer (Ala.), Cuellar (Tex.), Davis (Ala.), Davis (Tenn.), Edwards (Tex.), Green (Ala.), Green (Tex.), Herseth (S.D.), Hinojosa (Tex.), Jefferson (La.), Kanjorski (Penn.), Melancon (Ala.), Mollohan (W.V.), Murhta (Penn.), Ortiz (Tex.), Peterson (Minn.), Reyes (Tex.), Ross (Ark.), Skelton (Mo.), Tanner (Tenn.), Taylor (Miss.) Towns (N.Y.).

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

House keeps ANWR drilling in energy bill

2005-04-21T10:00:00.000-07:00

The House of Representatives late Wednesday turned away an amendment to strip ANWR drilling from its version of the energy bill by a vote of 231-200.

(Ignore the headline in the cited Seattle Times story: The full energy bill had not been approved at that writing. A final vote is expected today.)

The amendment was offered by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who said ANWR drilling does nothing to reduce the nation's fuel consumption, which is, of course, the essence of the nation's energy problem.

The House also rejected an amendment to require automakers to increase fuel economy to a fleet average of 33 miles per gallon over the next decade. The vote on this was even more resoundingly negative: 254-177.

Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., who put forth the defeated fuel-economy amendment, called the energy bill "a farce." He said it will "increase the deficit, weaken our economy, compromise our national security and endanger our environment."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

Editorial overview: Bashing the energy bill

2005-04-20T12:28:00.000-07:00

Here's a sampling of opinion from recent newspaper editorials on ANWR and the Republican energy bill:

Detroit Free Press
"The bill does little to help average Americans while it dishes up tax breaks, other subsidies and drilling privileges to current energy producers. It is protectionist pork at a time when every dollar and every tactic ought to be devoted to easing the country's dependence on foreign oil... This backward-thinking policy would position America poorly for years to come."

Toledo Blade
"Over in the Energy and Commerce Committee, GOP leaders pushed through an amendment to prohibit strict efficiency standards for ceiling fans that have been set or proposed in a dozen states. The measure was sponsored by Rep. Nathan Deal, Republican of Georgia, at the behest of Atlanta-based Home Depot, which sells … a whole lot of ceiling fans. ... Conspicuous by its absence is any provision to spur badly needed conservation by requiring better gas mileage on new cars and trucks."

N.Y. Times (subscription?)
"Step outside the White House and Congress, and one hears a chorus of voices begging for something far more robust and forward-looking than the trivialities of this energy bill. It is a strikingly bipartisan chorus, too, embracing environmentalists, foreign policy hawks and other unlikely allies."

All these editorials (and more) are opposed to ANWR drilling. I don't post this on the pretense that these opinions will make a difference. Indeed, I've heard it said that many politicians consider a newspaper's endorsement a "death knell" at the polls. That's not because newspapers are unable to pick a winner. It's because newspapers tend to speak for the people, and they tend to have future well-being in mind.

Politicians, on the other hand, tend to speak for whomever packs their wallets the fattest. I think the energy bill reflects that.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

In Focus: Polygonal ground

2005-04-20T09:44:00.000-07:00

PolygonalGround/USFWS
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

This photo shows an ANWR land feature called polygonal ground. It forms on the Coastal Plain in the freeze-and-thaw process, creating a natural depression that fills with meltwater, surrounded by a berm. Lush vegetation grows on these berms, creating protected cover and forage for snow geese, tundra swans and other waterfowl that flock to the refuge in summer.

In winter, this area looks a lot like those photos of barren, windswept ice that are spread with vigor by drilling advocates to suggest that ANWR is a "wasteland." But in summer, the area transforms into this vast network of fragile wetlands, teeming with life.

Areas like this could be laced with gravel drilling pads, roads and pipelines if drilling is allowed in the refuge.

Photo source: USFWS

House takes up energy bill today

2005-04-20T07:58:00.000-07:00

The full U.S. House of Representatives today begins debate on the energy bill, officially dubbed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, H.R. 6. The bill includes provisions to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, previously detailed here.

Democrats are expected to try to amend the bill in ways previously rejected by Republicans, including removing the ANWR drilling provisions and requiring automakers to improve fleet-average miles-per-gallon in the cars they produce. Another controversial provision is a Republican proposal to exempt oil companies from liability for cleaning up soil and water contamination from the gasoline additive MTBE, saving them billions of dollars.

The bill is filled with a long list of other bad policies. But even if the House does adopt it, which is likely, it shouldn't be viewed as a death blow for ANWR. The Senate version of the bill, to be considered in May, is not likely to include ANWR drilling because it would be subject to filibuster by Democrats. That's why the Senate voted March 16 to include ANWR drilling in the budget bill instead, where it is exempt from filibuster.

A vote by the full House on the energy bill is expected Thursday.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

C-Span goes live with Bartlett on 'Peak Oil'

2005-04-19T10:17:00.000-07:00

Just before the notorious March 16 Senate vote on ANWR, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., gave a lengthy and revealing speech before Congress on 'Peak Oil.' If you've been living in a cave for the past couple months, this is the concept that global oil extraction has reached its peak and will begin to decline. It may have happened already, but most analysts seem to think it will occur within the next two years.

Bartlett's talk raised eyebrows, not just because he's a Republican, but because he knows what he's talking about. He is an award-winning scientist who got into the business of building solar-powered homes. He drives a hybrid car. And he states on his website that he is opposed to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, saying it "should be preserved for future, wiser use."

Tonight, Barlett gives a second speech on the subject, this one focused on the need to rapidly develop alternative energy sources. C-Span plans to carry it live at 9 p.m. EST. You can watch a live webcast of it here: http://www.c-span.org/watch/.

Needless to say, I think this will be worth watching.

You can view a webcast of Bartlett's first speech on his website. For the full-text transcript, check out Energy Bulletin. For a summary, check out this post by Green Car Congress.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

ANWR oil could go to Asia

2005-04-19T09:49:00.000-07:00

The Seattle Times checks in with a timely story today on the history and potential of Alaskan oil exports. We've discussed this here before, but Times reporter Warren Cornwall provides some good research.

In short, there's no legal guarantee at this point that if the Arctic Refuge is drilled for oil, that oil will stay in the U.S. Virtually all Alaskan oil now goes to U.S. refineries on the West Coast. But Cornwall reports that those refineries may have to be expanded to handle the additional oil that ANWR could generate. That seems unlikely, since oil companies might be unwilling to make that investment with global output on the decline.

The result could be that oil companies would want to market that oil elsewhere. The likely customer would be Asian countries, including China.

"It is possible if they were to find a lot of oil in ANWR — and once they start drilling there they may move outside that little area — that the oil couldn't go to any place in the United States," said energy analyst Philip Verleger.

It "could happen," adds Courtney Schikora Boone, a spokeswoman for Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska. "But it would not be something we would push for because we consider domestic oil production in the United States to be a national-security issue. We believe our dependence on foreign oil makes us weaker in the world."

Nor did she say it is something they would forbid.

In 1995, Stevens led a successful effort to overturn a ban on exports from oil carried by the Trans-Alaska pipeline. This led to only modest foreign exports of U.S. crude, according to the Times article, totalling just under 100 million barrels over five years. At the time, Stevens called the ban on exports "unconstitutional and unjust."

Which gives you a pretty clear idea about where his thinking is at.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

Alaska to boost lobbyist support by $1.2 million

2005-04-19T09:12:00.000-07:00

In a debate that lasted a combined eight minutes in both houses of the state Legislature, Alaska politicians on two committees approved a new subsidy of $1.2 million for Arctic Power, the chief lobbying group behind oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

If approved by the full Legislature, the new amount would bring the total taxpayer subsidy for Arctic Power to about $10 million when "past years" are included, to use the vague language employed by the Anchorage Daily News. This funding makes up the majority of the lobby's operating revenue. The proposed new funding from the state is about five times greater than Arctic Power raised in donations "in recent years," according to more vague language in the News.

There were only token objections, and yet this was interesting. Rep. Bruce Weyhrauch, R-Juneau, complained about the $31,000 monthly that Arctic Power spends to maintain its Anchorage office. The lobby said this money pays for rent, the salaries of three staffers, mailings, tour coordination and web site maintenance. But if you pay attention to the group's websites, you will see they are updated infrequently (to put it mildly).

Weyhrauch also questioned whopping monthly payments of $9,350 and $7,500 to two Arctic Power contract workers in Washington and Anchorage. "I don't see much accountability for all this money we're dumping," he said.

I guess the state and taxpayers figure this is money well spent. Indeed, it is but a tiny fraction of the cash splashed out in annual "Permanent Fund" payments to state residents. Under the state's unusual oil-royalty distribution program, last year every resident of the state received a check for $920, totalling about $600 million.

If the new $1.2 million in state funding is approved, Arctic Power plans to spend $600,000 on lobbying in Washington, $300,000 in other "key states," and $72,000 trying to win the hearts of labor unions.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Wilderness: A sanctuary of freedom

2005-04-18T10:17:00.000-07:00

I was moved by this commentary by Dale Allen Pfeiffer on wilderness. It may be the most relevant and valuable description of wilderness that we could ask for in these times.

Henry David Thoreau argued, in the spiritual sense, that "In wilderness is the preservation of the world." In more recent times, others describe wilderness as an essential seedbed of biological diversity that will prove valuable to science as we plunder everything else. Both are true.

Pfeiffer goes one step further in his "Ode to the Remaining Wilderness." He calls wilderness our "sanctuary of freedom." It is a haven we should return to in body and spirit to escape our current definition of freedom, which, he argues sadly, is the shallow freedom to consume. This has compromised the original definition, which was simply the freedom to do as we please.

"In the American lexicon, freedom has come to mean the freedom of corporations to generate profit and the freedom of the public to consume. Freedom is measured by the number of dollars you generate, and the number of dollars you spend. ... In reality, the amount of freedom you have is inverse to the number of possessions you own."

A geologist and science editor at fromthewilderness.com, Pfeiffer argues that the plan to tap oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other wild places is the ultimate expression of this freedom to consume. But he calls this a "gobbling of crumbs" that imperils our true values, long forgotten by our runaway retail economy.

"It is my contention here that the wilderness is the true sanctuary of freedom, and that this is its greatest value. In this respect, the wilderness could truly be called the soul of America, the soul which gave the native peoples their ways, the soul which called to the frontiersmen, the mountainmen and the explorers, the soul which ultimately gave birth to the declaration of independence ... So long as there remains some wilderness where people could potentially go (and some few do) to escape the ties that bind, then the whisper of freedom is still alive."

There's a lot more to Pfeiffer's essay, including a pretty good description of the fallacy of ANWR drilling. In truth, he could have used a firm editor, and he also uses the essay to plug his self-published books (hey, we all gotta put food on the table).

But still, I think his is the best description yet for why ANWR matters to those who work to preserve it, and why it should matter to us all.

[Technorati tags: ANWR]

12-year-old: Pump up your tires to save ANWR

2005-04-18T09:31:00.000-07:00

While the rest of us sit around jawing about ANWR, Savannah Rose Walters is doing something simple and profound. The dimpled 12-year-old has launched a campaign to get drivers to inflate their tires properly after learning this will save more fuel than drilling for oil in the Arctic Refuge could produce.

Her campaign, called "Pump 'em Up," even includes a website, where others can get involved by downloading a flier to stick under windshield wipers or hand out in parking lots.

"Even if you don't care about the Arctic, if you pump up your tires, you won't have to buy as much gas, and we'll all breathe cleaner air," she recently told the Tampa Tribune. The inspiration for her campaign was planted in a lesson on the Arctic environment in her second-grade class several years ago. If only we could all be so inspired at such a young age, the world would be a better place.

And Savannah is right, of course. Properly inflating your tires will save gas and money. Adding a little extra air will save you even more. Automakers set recommended tire pressures on the low end to ensure a comfortable ride. But most tires can easily handle extra pressure (the recommended maximum pressure is printed on every tire's sidewall). If you can handle a little more road feel, you could boost your mpg by a couple points simply by adding extra pressure.

As Savannah notes on her website, the U.S. Energy Department reported in 1995 that underinflated tires waste 4 million gallons of gasoline daily in the U.S. alone. That's way more fuel than even the most wildly optimistic estimates for production volume from ANWR.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

25,000+ sign boycott petition

2005-04-15T11:33:00.000-07:00

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and her "PAC for a Change" have begun a petition campaign to organize support for a consumer boycott of any companies that eventually drill for oil in the Arctic Refuge. She claims on the PAC's website that more than 25,000 people have signed the petition and agreed to participate in a future boycott.

I think that's a significant number. More than I expected, at least. And that's only since the petition drive was launched three weeks ago.

But part of me questions whether a boycott of this sort will really work. Or if people will really follow through. I mean, how many people are really ABLE to give up oil? It gets to the essence of our oil-addicted economy and culture.

There are two issues here, as I see it. First, any oil coming out of ANWR will probably get moved through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, where it will mingle with other oil drilled on the North Slope, outside ANWR. Even if we could track the ANWR oil in that pipeline, it may not be sold at the retail level by the company that drills for it.

So if, say, ChevronTexaco is the company that taps ANWR, they could sell the crude to BP, which then sells it as gasoline at its own stations and maybe also to independent retailers. So you go and you say, "I'm not buying gasoline from ChevronTexaco," and then you go and tank up at BP instead. You may be hurting ChevronTexaco a teeny bit, but you're still buying that ANWR oil. You're still part of that revenue stream, and ChevronTexaco is still getting some of your money.

Second, crude oil makes more than fuel. It goes into motor oil, plastics, clothing, household chemicals, and a hundred other things. You may boycott ChevronTexaco for drilling ANWR, but how are you going to change all those other buying habits to affect the ANWR-oil cash stream? There's really no way to know how to spend your dollars right in this situation.

Sure, boycotting ANWR drillers will still have some value -- perhaps mostly symbolic. But I think a more effective protest might be to take yourself out of the oil market as much as possible. Buy clothes made from natural fiber or recycled plastics. Use public transit more. Consider switching to a diesel car and running it on biodiesel.

I think Boxer's protest might be better served if it was honest with people in this way. In our supply-and-demand economy, if we collectively use less gas, that should bring the price down, which will mean less money in the petro-giants' pockets.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Higher mpg would snuff out ANWR oil -- twice

2005-04-15T09:43:00.000-07:00

Mike at Green Car Congress has a worthy post from yesterday comparing ANWR oil reserves with savings that could be achieved by increasing Corporate Averge Fuel Economy Standards. (Remember that on Wednesday, House committees approved ANWR drilling and also rejected an increase in the CAFE standard).

The short version is that ANWR might produce about 860,000 barrels of oil by 2024. Raising fuel economy standards by 36 percent, on the other hand, would save twice that much oil while also reducing air pollution.

The higher CAFE standard is estimated to increase the price of a car by $1,200. But I suspect most people would be willing to pay that to reduce their "pain at the pump" and also our dependence on imported oil. And maybe even to preserve ANWR as well.

The other thing to consider is that the mpg savings are a relatively permanent change, whereas ANWR oil will eventually run out.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Rep. Don Young's comments

2005-04-14T11:41:00.000-07:00

Alaska Rep. Don Young made some interesting comments after the Resources Committee vote yesterday. I think they are revealing, so I'll share.

Quoted by the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, he chastised Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., for speaking against oil development.
"I hope my good friend from Arizona thought about my state, thought about my people, my constituents and my Native people."

Quoted by KTUU-TV:
“Talking about my people, my constituents, and my Native people that support this -- AFN, the Inuits, they support this. You say, ‘Oh, it's because they're going to make some profit.’ Yes, they're going to lift themselves out of the ghettos, and put themselves in the right place as they should be in our society.”

Responding in the News-Miner story was Anna Davidson, a Yup'ik woman originally from Akiachak, who was visiting D.C. to protest the vote:
"I'm surely not his Native. The way he sounded was like he owned me."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

What the committee voted on...

2005-04-14T11:05:00.000-07:00

I don't have detail on how the vote shook out, but this is what the House Resources Committee voted on yesterday: H.R. 39, the Domestic Energy Security Act of 2005. I also don't know if the bill was amended, since the Congressional record hasn't been updated yet, but the link takes you to the original bill as proposed by Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska.

It appears to be a mirror image of H.R. 4, the ANWR drilling bill adopted by the House and rejected by the Senate in 2001. In short, it would open up the coastal plain ("1002 Area") to oil leasing, totalling some 1.5 million acres. Troubling highlights of H.R. 39, on first blush:

-- Allows drilling under a previous environmental impact statement from 1987. This is questionable, since if they also require the "best commercially available" drilling technology, shouldn't that new technology be considered in a new EIS?

-- Allow no more than 45,000 acres to be designated as "special areas" closed to drilling. In other words, if we later find that more land needs to be set aside to protect caribou or muskoxen or waterfowl ponds, the act forbids it.

-- Lease a minimum of 200,000 acres in the first sale. Much more could be leased later.

-- Limits exploration activities to the period between Nov. 1 and May 1 each year, when ice roads can be used. But the Secretary of Interior can make exceptions, so exploration can really occur at any time.

-- Strict limits on judicial review. In other words, to limit challenges by critics.

There's a lot more in there, but I'll leave you with that for now.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

House committee approves ANWR drilling

2005-04-13T17:07:00.000-07:00

By a vote of 30-13 today, the House Resources Committee today approved amendments to the federal energy bill that would permit drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The committee defeated a Democrat-sponsored amendment that would have banned drilling in the refuge. The panel's bill calls for the Interior Department to lease to oil companies at least 200,000 acres in the coastal plain within two years after the legislation is signed into law. (That's right, 200 THOUSAND acres. So much for the claim that drilling will only impact 2,000 acres of the refuge.)

The committee also overwhelmingly supported the Set America Free Act, meant to increase America's energy alliances with Canada and Mexico.

The committee's markup of the energy bill still must be matched up with that of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. On Wednesday, that committee voted against requiring U.S. automakers to ratchet up fuel efficiency to a fleet average of 33 miles per gallon by 2014 from the current 27.5 mpg for passenger cars. Democrats from Michigan, loyal to carmakers, led the assault on that provision, clinging to the falacy that higher fuel efficiency standards will make cars less safe.

"It's not what Americans want," Democrat Bart Stupak of Michigan said.

So, in a single day, American politicians voted to exploit one of the nation's last great wilderness areas for oil, to increase our dependence on other nations' oil, and to ensure that all the oil we can get our mitts on gets burned up as fast as possible.

"I am proud of our members who took a realistic and common-sense approach to our nation’s energy needs,” said Richard Pombo, R-Calif., chair of the Resources Committee.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Teshekpuk Lake: Is local trust eroding?

2005-04-13T11:45:00.000-07:00

Teshekpuk Lake
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

This photo shows seaplanes tied up on Teshekpuk Lake on Alaska's North Slope, with a camp set up on the shore. The photo isn't dated, but judging from the aircraft, it's probably from the late 1950s or early 1960s.

For North Slope native people, Teshekpuk Lake (which lies outside ANWR) is a vital subsistence hunting area. Now the U.S. Bureau of Land Management wants to sell oil drilling rights around the lake. For some lively debate about how this plan is eroding support for oil drilling among local residents of Alaska's North Slope Borough, read the comments to yesterday's post.

Photo: USFWS

Drilling could top 90,000 acres on native lands

2005-04-12T09:33:00.000-07:00

Seattle Times writer Hal Bernton reports today on a number of overlooked facts in the history of ANWR oil development.

Most interesting are details of a land swap between the federal government and Arctic Slope Regional Corp., a native-owned oil extraction company. We reported some of these details here, but Bernton adds a lot more important detail. Most importantly, the corporation actually holds title to 92,160 subsurface acres inside the refuge, and it is clamoring to drill there.

So the claimed 2,000-acre impact of ANWR drilling, so popular with politicians and their conservative spinmeisters, is an even grander fib than we already knew. Arctic Slope is not bound by this limit because of its private land holdings. Drilling could actually sprawl over the entirety of its 92,160 acres. On top of this there is the true impact of road- and pipeline-miles throughout the refuge, not included in the 2,000-acre claim.

Politicians have also been fond of proclaiming that all Alaskan natives will benefit from ANWR drilling. That's not necessarily true, as Arctic Slope Regional Corp. gets to keep 100 percent of the money generated on its lands, which could reach billions.

For these and other reasons, many native people on the North Slope are beginning to have a change of heart about ANWR drilling. Earlier this year, 57 of the more than 150 adults residents of Kaktovik signed a petition against refuge drilling.

"Inupiat subsistence hunters and their families are beginning to feel a sense of dread about oil development," George Ahmaogak, mayor of the North Slope Borough based in Barrow, wrote in a 2003 commentary that described a growing network of pipelines and roads onshore and expanding offshore leasing.

Funny how these details get overlooked in the rush for oil. Thanks to Hal Bernton for bringing them back to the table.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil]

House committee takes up ANWR rules Wednesday

2005-04-11T16:49:00.000-07:00

The House Resources Committee on Wednesday will begin marking up the proposed energy bill to include provisions for tapping oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

This is a crucial stage in the future of the refuge, where committee members will decide what rules will govern oil development there. They may draw heavily on HR 4, the failed 2001 ANWR drilling bill.

Ironically, the Republicans' energy bill has been named SAFE, the Set America Free Act, another classic example of conservative doublespeak because it will do nothing of the sort. Instead, it merely gives someone else a hold on our leash by making the U.S. more dependent on energy from Canada and Mexico. A truly "SAFE" bill would devote huge resources to alternative energy technology, and that's not in the cards.

In the latest issue of The New Yorker, Elizabeth Kolbert has this to say about the Republican energy policy: "Simply upgrading the standards for replacement tires so that they match those for tires on new cars would avert the need for seven billion barrels (of oil), which is roughly the same amount we could hope to get out of the Arctic Refuge."

Too bad nobody cares about simple stuff like that.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Senator: 'Nothing to keep ANWR oil in U.S.'

2005-04-11T14:22:00.000-07:00

Interviewed in the Rapid City Journal on Saturday, South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson (D) confirmed what has been reported here and elsewhere: There are currently no guarantees that oil extracted from the Arctic Refuge will go to American consumers.

The interview focused on Johnson's differences with his fellow S.D. senator, John Thune, a Republican. Among those differences: Johnson opposed the March 16 Senate vote to allow oil drilling in ANWR, while Thune supported it.

Johnson told the paper he opposed ANWR for two reasons. One is that he simply favors a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope to the Lower 48. The other is that "there's nothing to keep that (ANWR) oil in the United States," he said.

This supports the information previously gathered here, and also comments made elsewhere by drilling critics and oil industry analysts. There is no legal language right now that prevents ANWR oil from being exported.

This clearly contradicts the claim that ANWR will help the U.S. reduce its dependence on imported oil, a leading argument for opening the refuge to drilling.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

'Blood and Oil' author: ANWR is no answer

2005-04-11T11:15:00.000-07:00

Michael T. Clare, author of the book "Blood and Oil," writes in Sunday's Pittsburgh Tribune Review that America's energy policy is a "blueprint for bondage" because it increases our dependence on foreign oil.

He calls ANWR drilling a "sideshow" from the real issues being ignored by the administration. These are the need for much tougher fuel-effiencity standards for cars, and major commitments to alternative fuels.

ANWR's significance to the nation's oil supply is minimal now, he writes, and will become even more insignificant in the future because our thirst for oil is only expected go grow.

"The question we need to ask is not, 'Should we drill in ANWR?' but, 'What, besides drilling in ANWR, is the Bush administration doing to reduce our reliance on imported petroleum?' The answer, unfortunately, is virtually nothing."

Klare is director of the Five College Program in Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College and also a defense analyst for The Nation and NPR. His book "Blood and Oil" was published last year.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Industry gets immunity in polar bear, walrus deaths

2005-04-09T11:14:00.000-07:00

Politicians and lobbyists are filling the media these days with speeches about how benign oil drilling will be in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. We are constantly told that wildlife won't be harmed by drilling activities. New technology has such a low impact, we're told, that polar bears, caribou and musk oxen will, in fact, thrive around the small cities created by drilling operations.

If that's the case, then why did the oil industry seek immunity for walrus and polar bear deaths that occur as a result of their work at neighborhing Prudhoe Bay? Let's take a look.

The industry in 2000 applied for and obtained an "incidental take" permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see Federal Register, Nov. 28, 2003, page 66744). Incidental take, in federal parlance, means to kill. The permit allowed oil companies working along the edge of the Beaufort Sea to harrass and kill polar bear and walrus in the course of their extraction and exploration activities. This permit expired in March, 2003, then was renewed until March 28, 2005.

The filing clearly states the permit was not required. So, why get it at all?

Because the industry knows that oil drilling might kill walrus and polar bear, and they want immunity from fines and legal liability. It's a real enough possibility that they want to protect themselves. That's quite a different story than we've been hearing lately about ANWR.

The "incidental take" permit actually applies to all offshore waters from Barrow east to the Canadian border, which includes waters off of ANWR, but not ANWR itself. The permit was sought by the Alaska Oil and Gas Association on behalf of its members, a virtual who's-who of the global oil business. The group originally asked for the permit to run until 2008, but regulators extended it only until last month, citing the need for more data. So it's likely a renewal will be sought.

Walrus are not common in the area, but the polar bear population in the Southern Beaufort Sea was estimated at 2,273 in 2002. In 30 years of oil drilling on Alaska's North Slope, only two polar bears have been killed as a direct result of oil development. In winter 1968-1969, an industry employee shot and killed a polar bear. In 1990 a female polar bear was killed at a drill site on the west side of Camden Bay (we don't know how). But the list of harmful activities is much longer.

Noise, vibration and lights from oil extraction can disrupt feeding and denning habits. The biggest risk is to females with cubs, which den up for the winter. Oil development could cause them to leave their dens when cubs are vulnerable. Female polar bears are not especially prolific breeders (averaging two cubs every 3 to 4 years), so this sort of disruption could hurt the population.

Oil spills are another significant problem. Polar bears explosed to oil can suffer health problems, fur loss and death. Regulators estimated the likelihood of one or more spills greater than 1,000 barrels in size occurring in the marine environment at 1 to 5 percent during the period covered by the regulations. The probability of a spill causing death to one or more bears was 0.4-1.3 percent.

But these numbers are only a guess, because they are based on data gathered outside the Arctic. In other words, they do not take into account the extra risk of spills inherent in working around permafrost and sea ice. Officials called this "the greatest source of uncertaintly in our calculations." They admitted the likelihood of polar bear deaths could be double their estimates.

The point is that this is what's happening with the "new drilling technology". The industry is worried about killing polar bears and walruses with the new technology. And remember that the industry wanted this permit to run until 2008.

Some people still believe that oil drilling in a wildlife refuge won't harm wildlife. But the oil companies aren't among them.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, wildlife]

Ain't it a KIC? The story of ANWR's only well...

2005-04-08T13:47:00.000-07:00

kicwell
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

There has only ever been one oil well drilled in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It was an exploratory well drilled in 1985-86, and the results have been a closely-held secret ever since.

The attached photo shows what the drilling site looked like in 1990. Obviously, there was a fair amount of disturbance to the tundra.

As described here, the test well was made possible by an interesting land exchange. In 1983, the federal government transfered title to subsurface rights beneath Kaktovic Inupiat Corporation village lands (hence the "KIC" name) to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, a for-profit native Eskimo company. The corporation then leased the lands to Chevron and BP, which allowed them to drill the exploratory well in 1985.

Located about 13 miles southeast of Kaktovic, KIC-1 was drilled three miles down at a cost of $40 million.

"Only a handful of people know what's down the KIC well," BP spokesman Ronnie Chappell told the Associated Press in 2001. "They've never talked about it. I'm not even sure who they are."

One of them might be Oliver Leavitt, chairman of the board of the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. The company still owns the site of KIC-1, so it stands to make a bundle if the refuge is ever opened to drilling. Writing in Indian Country Today recently, Leavitt framed revenues from ANWR drilling as key to the education and well-being of Alaskan natives.

"I do not want any young Alaska Natives to be forced to choose between a high school education and practicing a subsistence culture among his or her people," he wrote.

Today KIC-1 is marked only by a rusty iron pole stabbed into the tundra. The native corporation and the oil companies won a lawsuit in 1991 allowing them to keep the drilling results a secret.

"Rarely has such a fundamental political battle been waged with so little information," AP reporter Joseph Verrengia noted insightfully in 2001.

While we keep drilling, UK is 'GoingGreen'

2005-04-07T18:52:00.000-07:00

G-Wiz
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

Here's a peek at what we're missing across the pond. While us Yanks are frantically searching for new places to stick our petroleum feeding tube, car buyers in Britain are snapping up the new G-Wiz, an electric microcar that sells for the equivalent of about $10,000.

Made by a company called GoinGreen, the G-Wiz is billed as "the car that doesn't cost the earth." It can reach up to 40 mph and runs for 40 miles on a single charge. Its batteries can achieve an 80 percent recharge in 2.5 hours -- just right for restoring power after that lunchtime dash to In-N-Out Burger.

The car's body panels are made of ABS plastic, which can be recycled. You can get the Wiz-mobile fully optioned with leather seats, CD player, and a trick prewarming feature that heats the interior up before you have to climb aboard on a winter day.

Is it ugly? Emphatically, yes. But not as bad as many of the electric car designs we saw at the dawn of this technology.

Is it practical? Certainly not for everyone. But it would work great as a commuter ride for somebody who lives in the suburbs and plants themselves in a downtown cubicle during the week. In other words, most of us.

Will we ever get them here in the U.S.? Doubtful. Instead, we are gleefully waiting 10 years for hydrogen fuel cell cars, and hoping desperately that we'll have somewhere to refuel them when that happens.

No guarantee ANWR oil will stay at home

2005-04-07T14:27:00.001-07:00

My earlier post about Sen. Wyden's request for information about ANWR oil generated quite a bit of discussion. One observer claimed that legislation forbids the export of ANWR oil. Turns out that isn't necessarily so.

The House of Representatives approved legislation, HR 4, in 2001 opening ANWR to oil exploration. But the Senate failed to adopt a similar law, so it went nowhere. But HR 4 specifically forbid the export of oil from ANWR, in Sec. 6506(a)8, "Lease Terms and Conditions."

That was four years ago. It's a different ballgame now.

No legislation has yet emerged to actually open ANWR to drilling. A draft could appear any day now from the House Resources Committee, to be incorporated into the Republicans' forthcoming energy bill, which is emerging from its slumber. But there's no reason to presume it will include the same ban on exports contained in HR 4. The budget resolution approved March 16, SCR 18, contained no such restriction.

As we reported here earlier, analysts say ANWR oil is likely to go into the "global marketplace" rather than remain within the U.S. market. In other words, that's what the industry would like. And what industry likes these days, industry seems to get.

So, short of some new language forbidding export of ANWR oil, it seems likely we will sacrifice irreplaceable wilderness so that some other country can burn up American oil. So much for the hyperbole that drilling ANWR will loosen the leash between us and OPEC.

To make matters worse, it will probably be an oil-hungry Asian nation upwind of us that gets ANWR's oil, a place where pollution controls are not as strict, which will send more smog into America's lungs. Studies show that smog produced in Asia travels on trade winds across the Pacific and contributes to pollution problems in North America.

In short, we'll get to watch as ANWR wilderness is destroyed for a few months' worth of oil. And then we'll also get to breathe an extra dose of smog when the exhaust from that oil drifts back home.

Give your representatives in Washington a big "thanks," won't you?

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Artist View: One more David Mollett

2005-04-07T14:27:00.000-07:00

'Rocky Shore' Â© David Mollett
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

Just wanted to offer up one more view of David Mollett's work before the week is out. This one has terrific depth and really captures the grandeur and diversity of the refuge.

Again, you can see more of Mollett's work here.

Offshore drilling revived by ANWR vote?

2005-04-07T10:47:00.000-07:00

The Associated Press reports today that oil companies are showing renewed interest in drilling for oil and gas off the nation's coasts, in response to the Senate's March 16 vote to pursue oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge.

Some energy producers now feel they have a unique opportunity to relax or eliminate offshore protections. "Part of the solution has to be opening more access," said Duane Radtke of Dominion Resources Inc., based in Virginia.

Former President George H. W. Bush in 1990 placed a 10-year drilling moratorium on most offshore U.S. acreage. Former President Bill Clinton in 1998 extended the moratorium until 2012.

Meanwhile, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., introduced legislation on Wednesday that would allow just that. It would give governors the power to override federal drilling bans in coastal waters along their states. It would also give them 50 percent of any revenue generated, a major carrot for many cash-strapped states.

In the House, Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., said he plans to introduce companion legislation modeled on Alexander's. Pombo chairs the House Resources Committee.

"We embrace this because it is very much thinking outside the box," said Dave Schryver of the American Public Gas Association.

How he came to that conclusion is anybody's guess. Sounds like the same old drill-and-drain energy policy to me.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Senator demands detail on U.S. oil exports

2005-04-06T09:16:00.000-07:00

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, is demanding that the Commerce Department release detailed reports on which companies are exporting U.S. oil, how much and where it went.

Last year the nation exported 268 million barrels of oil. Shockingly, according to Dept. of Energy figures, that's about equal to the amount of oil we imported from Iraq in 2001, the year before our latest war with that country began. It's also about equal to the most optimistic guesses about production volume from ANWR, if drilling is allowed there.

In other words, if we simply held onto our own oil, the United States would have no oil interest in Iraq at all. And it would also negate any perceived need to disturb an irreplaceable wildlife refuge in the search for oil.

But the Commerce Department refused to provide the detail Wyden wants, saying it could only be released to a Congressional committee, not an individual representative. The agency also claims federal law forbids disclosure unless a finding is made that withholding the information contradicts national interests. That sounds like hogwash to me.

Wyden's request is of significant interest for two more reasons. First, it is likely that if oil drilling is approved in ANWR, much of that oil will be exported to Asia rather than sold in the U.S. Secondly, the more obvious reason is that every motorist and politician who can warm a chair is concerned about the nation's growing dependence on imported oil. It would seem to contradict our economic and political interests to worsen this imbalance by selling off our own supplies.

In a letter sent Monday to Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Wyden demanded release of the information, calling it "directly relevant to the coming Congressional debate on how to address our nation's dependence on imports of oil and other petroleum products."

I'd call that an understatement. But Wyden faces an uphill battle to get a committee to demand the numbers. Though Wyden is a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, it and all other Congressional committees are controlled by Republicans. And as we've seen, Republicans these days aren't very interested in facts, especially if those facts contradict their agenda.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, oil, politics]

Artist View: David Mollett

2005-04-05T14:42:00.000-07:00

'Simpson Cove' Â© David Mollett
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

David Mollett's paintings of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge are ghostly. His broad brush strokes and rapid work habits produce paintings that read like next morning's flicker of a dream.

Mollett, an assistant professor of art at University of Alaska-Fairbanks, has been visiting and painting ANWR since 1988. "Within minutes of arriving ... on my first trip, I knew I'd found an incredible place to paint," he says.

His paintings are completed "in the field" using quick-drying alkyd paints on canvas. So the finished images you see are about as close to the mind's eye of a painter as the viewer is likely to get.

Mollett's subjects are entirely landscapes, but he doesn't shy from seemingly monotonous subjects like pack ice on Beaufort Sea, which becomes a rainbow of dreamy shapes on his canvas.

What's striking about all his ANWR work is the vastness of color. Detractors call the refuge a "desert" and a "wasteland." But Mollett, who also owns the Well St. Gallery in Fairbanks, makes clear there is all kinds of life that gives color to the refuge.

"Very few people have been to the refuge, and the public has almost no idea what the place looks like," he writes. "My goal has been to demonstrate that the high Arctic is not a barren wasteland, and to draw attention to and preserve the beauty of the Arctic Refuge."

He has certainly done that, at least on canvas.

You can see more of Mollett's work here.

Earth Day 'virtual march' to protect ANWR

2005-04-05T10:14:00.000-07:00

A coalition of environmental groups has launched an Earth Day Virtual March on April 22 to protest recent political moves to open the Arctic Refuge to oil drilling. The group's website will be the hub for an "avalanche of emails, phone calls and faxes" to persuade politicians to reconsider exploiting ANWR for oil.

"We wanted to give individuals the means to have their voices heard collectively by the politicians in Washington and see the impact of joining forces with activists across the country," said Randy Paynter, founder of Care2, one of the groups coordinating the "march." Defenders of Wildlife is the other leading sponsor.

Through the website, individuals will find easy ways to send their thoughts to virtually every federal politician, including Pres. Bush. The site also includes a novel tool that allows bloggers to create a "personal impact tracking map" to see where members of their blog have joined from. At this writing, nearly 10,000 people from every state have joined the march already.

This is the first such "virtual march" that I've heard of. It's a novel idea, but I wonder how effective it will be. Politicians must know already that they are ignoring poll results on ANWR, which lean strongly against drilling. I suppose events like this are meant to make those poll results harder to ignore.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

In Focus: polar bears

2005-04-04T15:56:00.000-07:00

PolarBears
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

This photo shows a mother polar bear and two cubs on the shore of the Beaufort Sea in the 1002 Area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS photo).

The U.S. Geological Survey is working on a study to develop a more accurate way to locate den sites in advance of oil exploration at ANWR. Maternal den sites are extremely difficult to locate, and very vulnerable to oil exploration.

Seismic exploration involves the movement of heavy "thumper trucks" and placement of receptors in a vast grid pattern across the frozen tundra. Maternal polar bears with newborn cubs can be chased out of winter dens by the
noise, vibration and human activities that go along with exploration. The result can be deadly both to the mother, which may be shot by alarmed oil workers, or to the cubs, which may be unprepared to endure winter conditions.

In 1985, during the only authorized oil exploration event in ANWR, a female polar bear abandoned her den in the coastal plain after seismic exploration vehicles tracked within 700 feet of it, even though regulations required a 0.8-kilometer buffer from known dens. This occurred despite the most extensive monitoring program ever for seismic exploration on the North Slope.

Claimed drilling footprint 'laughably devious'

2005-04-04T11:00:00.000-07:00

We've heard it ad nauseum already from politicians and ANWR drilling supporters: tapping refuge oil will only require a 2,000-acre footprint on the sensitive tundra, and new technologies will minimize the the impact of drilling.

Well, this excellent piece in Technology Review provides some worthwhile perspective. Author Bryant Urstadt reviews the claims and the technology, and finds that the alleged 2,000-acre impact is "the most laughably devious language" in any recent federal bill.

That's because it does not count the ground covered by all the pipelines that ANWR drilling will require, only the small footprint of each leg supporting the pipelines. That's like saying an SUV only covers 4 square feet of ground because you're only counting the tires' interface with the ground.

Urstadt goes on in reviewing a report by the Congressional Research Service on ANWR drilling, which he calls the industry's "best case" scenario. Yes, he finds, technology does exist to minimize drilling's impact, but it's unlikely to be employed because it costs oil companies more money and federal regulators won't require it.

"Industry is not a moral being but an economic creature responding only to economic stimuli," Urstadt writes. "As such, given the current balance of power in Washington, there is good reason to conclude that big oil probably could drill clean, but probably won't."

One need only look at fuel economy standards for proof of this theory. We all know technology exists to increase fuel economy in all American vehicles -- more than enough to stave off ANWR drilling and a good chunk of our oil imports, in fact. But manufacturers moan that it costs too much, and politicians swoon and never require it.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Bill Day: A unique perspective

2005-04-03T18:44:00.000-07:00

Bill Day is business editor of the San Antonio(Texas) Express News, and he offers an interesting commentary on the ANWR debate in today's paper. He's a business guy, obviously, and spends a lot of his time thinking about money and economics to bring his readers the best business news.

Taking his inspiration from a paper by Univ. of Colorado economics professor Phillip Graves, Day notes it is hard for economists to fully value public goods such as clean air and beautiful scenery because they can't charge for them. They're available to everyone for the taking.

He also explains why a lot of environmentalists act the way they do. Most people are prone to act only on their own self-interest, but environmentalists act in the interest of the environment. Therefore, unlike most consumers, they don't always buy things (land, water, oil) just because they can. In effect, these things become "priceless."

Concludes Day: "Cost-benefit analyses are important, but only if the right values are used."

So, what are the right values? That's the question we face today concerning ANWR.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, sustainability]

Do Republicans only care about oil?

2005-04-03T17:56:00.000-07:00

I'm happy to report that the answer is clearly "no." Most polls about ANWR show that a majority of people, even Republicans, oppose oil drilling in the refuge. The trouble is that you rarely hear this expressed outside of a poll.

Well, here's one expression worth reading. It's from Jim DiPeso, policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection. The group has taken a firm stand against ANWR drilling, and on its website there are many ways to explore its well-reasoned position, and take action of your own.

But I want to point your attention to DiPeso's own blog, in which he makes one of the most clearly stated arguments I've seen anywhere for why ANWR drilling is suicidal policy.

"Absent a serious policy to improve fuel efficiency and to aggressively commercialize non-petroleum fuels," DiPeso writes, "domestic oil demand will outrun domestic supply, and ever larger quantities of oil imports will be needed... By 2025, Department of Energy projections estimate that U.S. oil demand will be 8 million barrels per day higher than it is today. There is no prospect, none whatsoever, that the Arctic Refuge would come close to supplying the increased demand.

"In short," he continues, "as long as the U.S. is dependent on oil, the U.S. will be dependent on foreign oil. We will be vulnerable to economically damaging price spikes. We will keep sending money to dysfunctional regimes, the kleptocrats and autocrats sitting on the world's largest remaining oil reserves. We will sow the seeds of future conflict with China in a potentially deadly competition to grab the last pots of black gold."

Wow. This from a Republican? It restores my hope in the future.

Republicans for Environmental Protection has been around for quite a while. Unfortunately its message is usually smothered by the idealogues who dominate the Right today. If you're a Republican who believes that "conservative" includes "conservation," I urge you to help this group get its message out.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

It's deep-breath time

2005-04-03T15:50:00.000-07:00

Congress returns from its two-week spring vacation tomorrow, with the daunting task of reconciling two very different federal budget bills coming out of the House and Senate. The break was a chance for everyone to think rationally about this, and a lot of real doubt exists about whether the two houses can agree.

This is significant, because if they can't agree, the ANWR oil drilling provision in the Senate's version of the budget will die on the vine. And there's a real possibility of that happening, because there are many other contentious differences between the House and Senate budgets.

This Sunday piece by Richard Mauer in the Anchorage Daily News lays it all out pretty well. There is disagreement over Medicaid cuts sought by Pres. Bush and the additional tax cuts he wanted (which, by the way, are unfunded and will further deepen the budget deficit).

"It's not a slam-dunk that a budget resolution will be passed," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the nonpartisan Concord Coalition.

The House version of the budget does not contain an ANWR drilling provision. A group of moderate House Republicans has urged their budget committee chairman, Jim Nussle (R-Iowa), to keep it that way. Said Nussle recently: "I hate to be a naysayer about this at all, but I'm not sure how we get a conference with the Senate with where they're at."

Even if ANWR does stay in the finished budget bill, drilling is not a done deal. The House and Senate must still write legislation to "enable" the specifics in the budget. In the case of ANWR, this would fall to the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee and House Resources Committee. The committees have until June to return legislation, which would then be combined in a reconciliation package that must be approved again by both chambers and signed by the president.

With Republicans controlling every step of the process, it would be a huge embarrassment if they can't agree on a budget. As David Broder of the Washington Post said so succintly, "The heat is on."

[Technorati tags: ANWR, politics]

A blogger who's been there...

2005-04-01T15:51:00.000-08:00

I recently came across this blog by Mark York, a fisheries biologist who has worked in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He has a number of interesting posts about his experiences working there and the issues surrounding the refuge. Worth checking out.

Among other things, he has this to say: "Water is scarce in the arctic coastal plain. Essentially it's a desert, so there's not enough water available for ice roads hence the inevitability of gravel permanant roads going every which way all across the calving grounds."

Most of us haven't been to ANWR, and most of us (thank goodness) will never go. But it's nice to see someone weighing in who knows the ground.

[Technorati tags: ANWR]

In Focus: 1002 Area

2005-04-01T12:52:00.000-08:00

Phalarope
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

This red-necked phalarope was photographed in the so-called "1002 Area" of coastal ANWR. This is the area slated for oil leasing as proposed by Republicans in Congress.
Source: USFWS

A plot to build highways?

2005-04-01T09:24:00.001-08:00

Thanks to the Pombo Watch website (which seems dormant, for now), I came across an interesting letter that suggests oil drilling in ANWR is part of a plan to pay for construction of new highways.

It's a letter dated Feb. 3, 2004, from House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) to Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), chairman of the Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure. In the letter, Pombo offers up ANWR oil revenues as a way to fund transportation projects in a massive transportation bill overseen by Young.

Pombo claims, somewhat haphazardly, that federal royalties and corporate taxes derived from ANWR drilling could generate some $400 billion for the treasury. And while he confesses that "it would be difficult to specifically capture the taxes generated on this new wealth" for transportation, it would nevertheless pump up the federal budget in general.

The transportation bill is H.R. 3, also known as "TEA-LU" or Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. It is a renewal of one of the most important federal transportation bills that funds thousands of vital projects, from public transit to bike lanes and highway widenings. Essentially, it keeps America moving.

But the bill was taken over by a handful of powerful politicians and loaded with $12 billion in porkbarrel projects, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit watchdog group. Many of these projects have nothing to do with keeping America moving, including horse trails, museums and interpretive centers.

In Pombo's case, it includes millions of dollars to fund two very controversial new highways in his home district.

"The transportation bill is a pork laden budget buster that needs a serious overhaul," Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense said in a statement. "Instead of cutting spending in a fiscally responsible manner, lawmakers are committing highway robbery on taxpayers to pay for parochial pork."

But is it also committing refuge robbery? Are these politicians counting on ANWR revenue to fund their pet projects, which they know cannot be funded otherwise because of wasteful spending elsewhere in the budget (Iraq war, tax cuts, etc.).

Young has been described as Pombo's mentor. Indeed, he helped Pombo, a relative youngster, get the Resources Committee chairmanship over a number of much more senior politicians. Is Pombo using ANWR to return a favor?

Here's a link to the letter. Warning: It's a .pdf file.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Politics]

Patagonia Co. urges action on ANWR

2005-04-01T08:56:00.000-08:00

Progressive outdoor clothing retailer Patagonia today urges its customers and others to take action to protect ANWR, saying the refuge is "under attack from the oil industry and their allies in Congress and the administration."

The company's website includes easy links to learn how your senator voted on the recent budget amendment dealing with ANWR, an easy way to write your senator a note, and links to environmental groups working on the issue.

Patagonia, founded by pioneering climber Yvon Chouinard, has stuck its neck out for years on environmental issues. Among its initiatives is 1% for the Planet, a program urging private companies to donate 1 percent of their profits to protect the environment.

[Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil]

Oil continues runup, record climb predicted

2005-04-01T08:17:00.000-08:00

The price of oil reached $55 a barrel again today after falling slightly in recent days. The climb was driven partly by continued predictions for huge demand in Asia.

More worrisome are reports that, for the past month, even U.S. gasoline demand has climbed. We used 2 percent more gas than the same time a year ago, despite record pump prices.

But what really rocked the markets was a disturbing report from leading analyst Goldman Sachs. The firm said we are entering a "super spike" period that could drive prices to $105 a barrel.

The report was alternately praised and criticized. One observer responded by saying "there's going to be tremendous demand growth in the late third and the fourth quarter of this year." Another said: "There's no doubt we're in a new bull market for crude oil."

All this could mean big happenings in the political landscape, no doubt strengthening cries to open ANWR to oil drilling. I hope it will finally convince people to call for broad vehicle efficiency improvements. How high do prices have to go before habits really start changing?

Technorati tags: ANWR, Oil

Shell wins bid for ANWR offshore drilling leases

2005-03-31T17:16:00.000-08:00

The Royal Dutch/Shell Group successfully bid $44 million for oil drilling leases off the coast of ANWR Wednesday. The tracts were among several in the Beaufort Sea were offered by the U.S. Minerals Management Service, attracting a total of $47 million in bids.

The tracts that got the most attention from Shell stretched from waters off the yet-undeveloped Point Thomson unit west of the refuge to areas northeast of Kaktovik, an Inupiat Eskimo village on the eastern edge of the refuge.

A Shell spokeswoman said the company's interest was not driven by recent Senate actions to open the Arctic refuge to drilling. But a reasonable person might conclude otherwise. Shell's offshore leases might be strategic for the company in terms of operational efficiencies if ANWR drilling does get approved. It is noteworthy that Shell has not been active in oil extraction in Alaska since the 1980s.

“This is just an indication that in the current political climate, they are trying to lease every single acre in the arctic, regardless of the concerns of the North Slope community for subsistence,” Eleanor Huffines of The Wilderness Society’s Alaska office told the Reuters news agency.

Murkowski: Washington state needs ANWR oil

2005-03-31T13:28:00.000-08:00

Frank Murkowski, governor of Alaska, writes a column in today's Seattle Times in which he tries to convince Washington state residents that their economy depends on ANWR oil.

In my opinion, it rings hollow, employs limp rhetoric, and relies on the familiar stretching of the numbers that we've come to expect from drilling supporters (of course, both sides are guilty of this). Murkowski even stumbles and delivers what many Washington residents will perceive, I suspect, as an insult:

"Washington alone consumes 18 million gallons of petroleum daily. Apparently, not everyone is traveling to their destinations on bicycles."

In saying this, he seems to be suggesting two things: 1) That Washington residents are not as environmentally minded as they are perceived to be; and 2) Traveling by bicycle is silly.

He then tries to argue that we should drill for oil in ANWR because environmental protections will be more rigorous than if we drilled in foreign countries. This is like saying we should let graffiti artists loose in the Sistine Chapel because, well, downtown alleys are already covered in graffiti. It just doesn't make sense as a logical argument. If drilling regulations aren't tough enough in Saudi Arabian or Venezuelan oilfields, the solution is not to start over in an unspoiled place. No, the solution is to tighten drilling regulations wherever we drill.

He goes on to threaten that, without ANWR oil, Washington will become a haven for "foreign ships with foreign crews, built in foreign shipyards." Mr. Murkowski, obviously, knows nothing about the shipping business. Virtually all cargo ships are already foreign in every respect, because their owners (including their American owners) want to avoid paying American taxes and American wages, and heeding American safety regulations.

I'm parotting Murkowski's rhetoric here. He uses the word "America" or "American" no few than 10 times in his essay.

L.A. woman quits job for ANWR film project

2005-03-31T10:55:00.000-08:00

Heather Dunkin has a successful career in human resources with The Jim Henson Company (of Muppet fame) in Los Angeles. But the U.S. Senate's recent actions to pursue oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic refuge prompted her to give all that up. She has given two months' notice to her employer, and plans to travel to ANWR for a digital film project to document the natural wonders of the refuge.

In a recent exchange with ANWR News, Dunkin described what drove her to do this.

"My main motivation is to film digitally and show this footage and pictures of the flourishing life in this section (ANWR)," she said. "My passion is to truthfully inform people of what we will lose if we continue raping the Earth and her inhabitants for short-term gratification. I plan to bring with me another filmmaker or photographer and anyone else who will caravan. Aside from this, I will continue to do research and look for potential sponsors in order to give the area the best possible coverage."

Dunkin said she initially planned merely a two-week vacation from her job to film in ANWR. Beginning her research, she found a "disappointing amount of posts" from people on the Internet in support of ANWR drilling. This prompted her to quit her job and commit herself to ANWR. She posted a notice on Craiglist.org seeking likeminded artists and others to join her, and received "overwhelming" support.

"I received no e-mails to the contrary. People either sent me their resumes or responded that they couldn't come, but were supportive of my quest," she said.

Here is Heather's Craiglist posting.

Anyone interested in joining Heather or offering words of support may contact her at funnychix@comcast.net

I commend Heather for following her dreams, and for making an effort to further the debate about ANWR with moving pictures. Hopefully we'll hear more from her both during and after her journey.

ANWR - The Band

2005-03-30T16:31:00.000-08:00

Yes, it's true. I recently discovered there's a rock band called ANWR. They're based in Anchorage, and they appear to be drilling supporters. Arctic Power, the oil industry lobbying group, is described as being among the inspirations for the group's formation. And the band lists both Arctic Power and Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski among their "friends."

On the band's website, you can listen to an .mp3 sample of their song "Drilling -- Yes or No." Despite the group's affiliation, the lyrics are somewhat ambiguous. Here's a sample:

Drilling issues we’ve gotta face
We’re divided in the race
From this point where does it go
Is it Drilling - Yes or No

Now the facts are all in
We’ll all lose or win
Hear the voice
Of the people call
Let’s decide to break down the wall
Cause united we stand - divided we fall

Our world resource is running dry
America’s future looks to you and I
To make the choice - To Drill The Land
Again united we must stand

Dunno if this group is still around. They claimed to have a new album ready for release last summer, tentatively titled, yes, "Drill", but their website looks like it hasn't been udpated in some time.

Yukon residents protest ANWR drilling

2005-03-30T15:47:00.000-08:00

Some 250 protesters showed up on the steps of the Yukon provincial capital today to let their government know they don't want more drilling in the arctic or harm to caribou.

The protest was intended to coincide with a visit by Alaskan state officials with province leaders. That meeting, in part, was to discuss joint interests, including the proposed Alaska Highway gas pipeline and a proposed railway.

Alaska Sen. Fred Dyson, on hand for the talks, had threatening words about the demonstration. He told the CBC that "the disagreement on ANWR" will be used to "keep Yukon from getting the benefit of a multi-billion-dollar project going through the Yukon."

Study: Earth in failure mode

2005-03-30T15:11:00.000-08:00

The so-called Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, released today, looks at 24 "services" the Earth provides to its people, and finds 15 in trouble. A product of 1,360 scientists in 95 countries, the far-reaching study constitutes a "stark warning" that "the ability of the planet's ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted," according to the study's 45-member board.

A sample of the findings:
-- There are already more than 50 "dead zones" in oceans around the world, caused by an abundance of nutrient-rich runoff, usually from agriculture.
-- More than one-quarter of the world's wild fish stocks are overharvested.
-- Most species' populations are dropping.
-- By 2050, the world won't be able to feed everyone living.

According to the Philly Inquirer, what makes this study unique is that it is based on evidence that scientists generally agree on.

All is not lost. The authors recommend removing agricultural subsidies that harm the planet, protecting a lot more land, especially in and near the oceans (relevant content: ANWR's 1002 drilling area is coastal) , and use free-market incentives to reduce farm pollution and global warming gases.

Look for a lot more analysis on this report in the days ahead.

Link: Millenium Ecosystem Assessment

Artist: Enviro responsibility 'has left the building'

2005-03-30T10:13:00.000-08:00

Alaskan photographer Douglas Yates expresses his passion for preserving ANWR in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. He also expresses no small amount of disgust for the politics at play.

"The cliff ahead indicates more than a technology gap," he writes. "While automobile efficiency legislation and most strategies to reduce oil dependence go begging, the Bush regime prefers foreign wars and domestic rape to meet growing consumption. The arrogance of power is blind."

Yates believes ANWR is a seminal issue, one that will define the path forward. That's why I created this blog, and it's why I hope you'll pay attention, regardless of your position.

He concludes: "The American way of life will be redrawn by our response to increasing pollution and climate change. While most Republicans shrug responsibility to the future, we must not. Preserving the integrity of the Arctic refuge sets an ideal that aspires Americans to think beyond themselves."

Where are the bumper stickers?

2005-03-30T08:59:00.000-08:00

I can't help noticing that ANWR's fate is now being decided without the aid of bumper stickers. How is this possible? What may be the most important resource battle of our times in America is occurring without the aid of this most American of propganda tools.

Even the folks at ArcticRibbon.org, which advocates using green ribbons to protest ANWR drilling, fail to offer supporters any ACTUAL green ribbons. It seems obvious to me that they ought to come up with a green version of those magnetized ribbons we see all over the place now supporting our troops in Iraq and patriotism in general.

A quick Google search revealed virtually zero ANWR-related bumper stickers. Over at cafepress.com, that haven of homegrown boosterism, I found a few things. The pro-drilling side has a nice simple sticker available. The anti-drilling forces have a whole mess of products available here, but their logo is really rather lame and there's not a single bumper sticker in the inventory. Quite a grave oversight. There also appears to be a vestigial campaign getting under way here, but their message is ambiguous.

Come on, people, this is disappointing.

ANWR has role in Bush approval slump

2005-03-29T15:52:00.000-08:00

The Christian Science Monitor reports on a new Pew public opinion survey that shows President Bush's approval rating slipping, and his support for oil drilling the Arctic refuge is one factor.

Nevertheless, ANWR drilling is not a leading factor in the decline. The poll shows the public almost evenly split on the issue, with 46 percent opposed to ANWR drilling, and 42 percent supportive.

The main factor in the decline, pundits say, is an overly ambitious second-term agenda -- including Social Security reform, the ongoing campaign for democracy in the Middle East, and his brief intervention in the Terry Schiavo death-watch case.

Writes the Monitor's Linda Feldman: "Ultimately, though, it may just be that successful second terms for American presidents are historically difficult to pull off. Bush is not running for reelection, but most of his Republican brethren on Capitol Hill are - and they know that the president's party often suffers its greatest defeats in the second-term midterm elections."

Support for drilling wanes among Inupiat

2005-03-29T12:50:00.000-08:00

Julian Borger of the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper reports today that the Inupiat people in Kaktovik, longtime supporters of ANWR drilling, seem to be changing their tune.

Borger visited Kaktovik and reports that, despite the need for jobs there, nearly half the village recently signed a petition against oil exploration. This is a result of a stunning 600 percent increase in respiratory problems, possible due to air pollution from oil production at Prudhoe Bay.

"When the wind blows from the west, a yellow-brown smog goes right across the horizon. In the summer, when I go fishing, it burns my eyes," said Bruce Inglangasak, a Kaktovik resident. "It's not just the air. Every time it rains our fish get it and our whales get it. You can feel the difference when you hold the fish now. The flesh is not as firm as it once was."

Another factor is Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski's proposal to offer offshore drilling leases off the coast of ANWR, in waters crucial to the Inupiat's traditional whale hunting.

"There's a lot of people changing their mind about this," said Robert Thompson, an Inupiat hunter and guide who is leading the backlash.

Major spill of drilling fluids on North Slope

2005-03-29T12:39:00.000-08:00

Ironically, given my last post, comes the news today that one of the largest spills of oil drilling fluids ever in Alaska occurred Saturday at the Kuparuk oil field run by ConocoPhillips.

As many as 80 people were working to contain the spill, estimated at nearly 112,000 gallons, the Anchorage Daily News reported. The spilled material is mostly water with only a trace of crude oil. But much of the water is seawater, and the salt can kill tundra plant life just as crude oil can. It would rank as the third-largest spill ever on the North Slope.

Conoco is majority owner of Kuparuk, with BP having a large minority interest. The other owners are Unocal, ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco.

BP allegedly fails to report spills at Prudhoe Bay

2005-03-29T10:20:00.001-08:00

The spills of drilling fluids allegedly occured at British Petroleum's Prudhoe Bay operation, about 100 miles west of ANWR, on Dec. 3, 2004, and July 31, 2003. State law requires oil companies to report any spills over 55 gallons. These did, and they were not reported.

BP officials said they didn't report the spills because those involved didn't believe they were required to do so, according to United Press International.

Investigators said the spills didn't pose an environmental hazard. But it's this kind of incident that critics seize on when they question the supposed "clean and modern" operation of arctic oil drilling.

MoJo suggests Florida Republican is key vote

2005-03-29T10:20:00.000-08:00

Mother Jones Magazine suggests in this recent article that Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., may be a crucial fence-sitter in ANWR's fate due to secret handshakes he has made with the Bush Administration over offshore drilling in Florida.

Martinez won election to his seat on a promise that he would not allow offshore oil drilling in Florida. According to MoJo, he agreed to support ANWR drilling in the notorious March 16 vote on the condition that the feds would extend a drilling ban off the Florida coast.

But critics at home say Martinez didn't go far enough, and they're pushing him to do more. That pressure may force Martinez to withdraw his support for ANWR drilling, which could be crucial if the issue remains part of the federal budget bill.

Are you unwittingly supporting ANWR drilling?

2005-03-28T16:49:00.000-08:00

The public face of support for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is Arctic Power, a consortium of oil companies and interest groups in Alaska. But a little-known group behind them is an affiliated nonprofit called the Energy Stewardship Alliance. Its members include a number of mainstream organizations that may represent YOU.

Does their support for ANWR represent your views?

Among these groups is the National Assocation of Counties, a trade association that includes two-thirds of all county governments in America and 80 percent of the nation's population. Since one of the most recent national opinion polls shows that only 38 percent of Americans support ANWR drilling, there seems to be a major disconnect here.

Another member is the American Farm Bureau Federation, which strongly supports renewable, farm-grown alternative fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel. President Bush and Republicans in Congress have given only token and reluctant support to such programs, while instead diverting the nation's attention and resources toward the limited oil under ANWR.

I could go on with examples like this. Other members are the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and senior citizens' organizations such as the 60 Plus Association and United Seniors Association.

The point is that Arctic Power and the Energy Stewardship Alliance are out there speaking for literally millions of Americans who simply do not share their views. If you belong to one of these groups, or your county does, you might want to let them know how you feel.

Canada: ANWR drilling a "big mistake"

2005-03-28T12:04:00.000-08:00

According to Petroleum News, the government of Canada had a "subdued" response to recent U.S. moves toward drilling for oil in ANWR. Our northern neighbor, which also shares a border with ANWR, continues to oppose oil development in the refuge because of its potential impact to caribou herds and native people.

Environment Minister Stéphane Dion said Canada would continue to pressure the U.S. to avoid drilling, which it considers a "big mistake." He said he would press for a meeting soon with U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton to sure the caribou are protected.

The Canadian embassy also indicated it would hold the U.S. to a 1987 treaty which requires each side to consult the other before undertaking any activities that would cause a “long term adverse impact” on the Porcupine caribou herd.

Who will get ANWR oil?

2005-03-28T11:03:00.000-08:00

Our politicians are fond of saying that ANWR should be drilled because it will reduce our dependence on imported crude oil. But will it?

As this article makes clear, it's very likely the precious crude from irreplaceable ANWR will go to fuel cars in China, Japan and other newly car-obsessed Asian nations. The piece quotes industry analyst Dave Pursell saying that ANWR oil will go first to the U.S. West Coast, and from there into the global marketplace. Writer Monica Perin says it is "considered likely by many experts" that ANWR oil will go to Asia.

Pundit No. 2, Michelle Michot Foss of the University of Houston, then adds: "anything that helps global supply-demand balance helps us."

I fail to see the logic in this, given that ANWR oil will be a tiny percentage of global output. But then I'm not an industry analyst. The point is this: Politicians shouldn't be claiming that ANWR offsets oil imports. If ANWR oil isn't staying at home, we'll still be importing an equivalent amount from elsewhere.

Shift to simple energy path urged

2005-03-28T08:08:00.000-08:00

Max Booth, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, suggests in a column published today in The Day newspaper of New London, Conn., that a shift to plug-in hybrid cars and alternative fuels is a better path for the nation than ANWR drilling. (Link may require subscription.)

Booth supports a proposal by Set America Free calling for an increase in gas taxes to fund a $12 billion shift in the transportation sector over the next four years. This would shift the auto industry and refueling infrastructure toward hybrid cars and renewable ethanol fuel.

There is much disagreement about the efficacy of ethanol, especially the fact that it may not be the most efficient or environmentally friendly fuel. It takes a lot of energy to produce ethanol, for instance, potentially resulting in a net increase in global warming gases.

But it's hard to argue with Booth's premise that this is a more sensible path than fuel-cell cars, which still lie in the distant future; and also more sensible than ANWR drilling, which will produce only a small gain in domestic oil production -- again at some distant point in the future.

I suspect most Americans would be willing to pay higher gas taxes if it meant getting out from under OPEC's thumb. I certainly would.

Booth says the only obstacle to this shift is political. He concludes: "Absent some political courage in both parties, we will continue to be at OPEC's mercy."

Noteworthy: Fossil Fools Day is April 1

2005-03-26T11:40:00.000-08:00

The ever-vigilant sustainablog turned me on to Fossil Fools Day, a protest that urges students and others to pledge to reduce their fuel consumption and suggest new protest actions.

The protest is organized by Energy Action, a youth-oriented campaign for clean energy. Some proposed actions are pretty clever, such as "adopting" a local Ford dealer to convince them to push their corporation to build more fuel-efficient vehicles. You can even download an "Adopt-a-Dealer Action Kit" that suggests meeting with a local Ford dealer to convince them to call for a boost in corporate mpg, followed by protest actions if they don't agree.

MSNBC offers ANWR poll

2005-03-26T11:27:00.000-08:00

The MSNBC network has created a poll on ANWR at itswebsite. It offers a simple question: "Should Congress authorize drilling in a small area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?"

I must say, the question itself may inject some bias into the poll, as there is argument about just how "small" of an area would be affected by drilling.

N.H. paper criticizes senator; He responds - weakly

2005-03-26T10:19:00.000-08:00

The Nashua Telegraph newspaper criticized Sen. Judd Gregg (R) for his support of the March 16 amendment of the federal budget bill to permit ANWR drilling. The paper's strongly worded March 19 editorial said: "he has more concern for oil companies than he does for the environment," adding that his reputation as an environmentalist has been "greatly diminished."

Gregg was in an important position for the crucial March 16 vote as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. The Telegraph noted that when asked why he supported the ANWR amendment, Gregg said: “the president asked for it and we’re trying to do what the president asked for.”

Gregg's response, published in the Telegraph today, is longer than the original editorial. Yet he couldn't find room to address ANWR or energy issues directly at all. Instead, it's a recitation of his prior record on environmental issues.

Somehow, this may be less than convincing to many of his New Hampshire constituents.

In Focus: Ice road

2005-03-25T12:37:00.000-08:00

ThawedRoad
Originally uploaded by BlogAdmin.

This photo shows the remnants of an ice road used for seismic testing at ANWR in 1984, still plainly visible in the tundra when this photo was taken the following year. (Source: U.S. Dept. of Interior)

Wilderness Society leads "green ribbon" campaign

2005-03-25T11:39:00.000-08:00

The Wilderness Society is leading a broad coalition of groups in a green ribbon campaign to spread awareness about the need to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Called ArcticRibbon.org, the campaign urges supporters to wear a green ribbon, tie them around trees, etc., and be prepared to respond when people ask. The website includes a one-page form that participants can download and hand out to inquirers. It also includes easy links to write members of Congress and local newspapers.

"ArcticRibbon.org is not intended to detract from any other projects that use a ribbon symbol," the site declares. "The green ribbon campaign is part of creating the buzz that Members of Congress will not be able to ignore."

The project is also affiliated with greenribbonpledge.com, which urges people to reduce their energy consumption for national security and to protect the environment.

Editorial: Detroit Free Press opposes drilling

2005-03-25T09:27:00.000-08:00

The paper urged Michigan's two senators, Democrats Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, to hold firm against ANWR drilling as the federal budget bill moves forward.

"At stake is also what this action says about us as Americans who'd rather run heavy equipment and pipelines through the most sensitive natural areas than invest in conservation measures or alternative sources of energy," the editorial states.

Oliver Sacks: Subsidize hybrids, not ANWR drilling

2005-03-25T08:41:00.000-08:00

Oliver Sacks, one of America's most original contemporary thinkers, writes in a
column for today's N.Y. Times about his "love" for his new Honda Accord hybrid, which he acquired by trading in his Lexus. (Link may require subscription.)

If half of U.S. vehicles were converted to such hybrids, he notes, the nation could save 50 billion gallons of gasoline annually -- equal to one-fifth of the "reasonable estimates" for ANWR's oil reserves.

He calls for the federal tax deduction for hybrid vehicle purchases to be continued and increased. At present, it drops from $2,000 to $500 next year, then goes away in 2007.

"There are many ways to save energy, but few are as easy as this," he writes. "We need to do a great deal more to encourage all kinds of conservation, but especially alternative-energy vehicles, which can contribute enormous oil savings and reduce pollution with no change in lifestyle."

Sacks is the author of numerous books, including "An Anthropologist on Mars," "Awakenings" and "The Island of the Colorblind." He is a clinical professor of neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine.