Here we go again!

[John Olexa]

The Bush administrtion and pro-industry lawmakers are once again threatening to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil companies eager to mount drilling operations.Yes we need a way to lower oil prices, but drilling in the ANWR won't help! Heres why.

A recent Energy Information Administration study, requested by drilling proponents, indicates that even if the Arctic Refuge were opened to drilling today, our nation would still be importing more than 60 percent of our oil, only 3 percent less than if the Refuge remained protected. The same EIA study states that OPEC would likely countermand any potential price impact of oil from the Arctic Refuge by reducing its exports an equal amount.

It's also important to note that, while America consumes 25 percent of the world’s oil, only 3 percent of it can be found under US soil, meaning we are never going to be able to drill our way to energy independence.

Moreover, the US Geological Survey has determined that the Arctic Refuge would produce only six months worth of oil, which oil executives themselves admit wouldn’t even reach market for another ten years.!!

If you don't want to see this happen contact your Senators & representatives

All the Bush administration is attempting to do is use the price surge at the pumps as an excuse to tear down key environmental protections and hand over more of our nations public lands to there friends in the oil and gas industries.

[Kalisandra]

As an Alaskan born and raised individual I have a greater say in this controversy than the average person. Whenever somebody brings up the limited benefits of ANWR drilling I listen with an open mind. But when they go on to tell me that it won't have any negative affect on wildlife, I always have a ready question:

What happens to the animals in the environment when there is another oil spill?
In 1989, when the last major oil spill occured, I was only a girl of eight, but I was on the boat my father ran, and I heard the horror stories first hand: Thousands of birds, seals, otters, and other wildlife died covered in oil. I remember how my heart broke when I came to realize: Most of the time they were just too damn late! So many creatures died then from man's greediness, and mistakes then, what will happen next the time?

And now Americans want more oil! This will be yet another chance for to contaminate [& kill] more wildlife. It's demented! :mad: :mad: I can't do enough to prevent ANWR from opening up.

Many people tell me I'm being unpatriotic to say such things against my nation, but living in a democracy allows me the right to my own opionion: ANWR should be off limits to human greed!

[JustJo]

I HAVE to say it. Politically I am middle of the road but Mr. Bush is going to go down in history as the WORST environmental president ever. Thanks for the input John and Kalisandra and I have been following his environmental escapades since day one. Horrors!! :mad:

[Magnum]

I received a letter from the State Senate today, and they said they are looking at 2,000 acres of ANWR property for drilling, leaving 18,998,000 of ANWR untouched. Is this a true figure, or just a number being thrown at me?

[John Olexa]

I received a letter from the State Senate today, and they said they are looking at 2,000 acres of ANWR property for drilling, leaving 18,998,000 of ANWR untouched. Is this a true figure, or just a number being thrown at me?

I haven't heard that, but even if its true...
did they say what happens if they don't fine any or a lot of oil on those 2000 acres ? Then what? 2000 more :rolleyes:


See thats the problem.. once there in thats going to be all she wrote!

[Magnum]

Ya, that is what I am wondering too John. You know the ol' saying, "Give them an inch and they take a mile"? Well, that was my first thought when I read the letter. I gave it to hubby and he is even more skeptical than I am... ;)

[John Olexa]

1. New York Times Exposes Truth About Drilling in Arctic Refuge

A major story in the New York Times has confirmed what many of us in the battle to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge have known for some time: that the major oil companies are skeptical about the potential oil to be found in the Refuge and that the push for drilling is really intended to clear the way for expanding drilling in other more politically challenging areas such as off California's coast and in the Gulf of Mexico. The story quotes a Bush adviser saying "If the government gave [oil companies] the leases for free they wouldn't take them. No oil company really cares about [the Arctic refuge]." Another oil industry official says that "evidence so far about [the refuge] is not promising." Others who advised President Bush on his energy plan stated outright that the push to drilling in the refuge is a "political maneuver to open the door" to drilling off the coasts of California and in the Gulf.
The 19-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska brings to mind images of polar bears and other wildlife living in wilderness undisturbed by man. West of the refuge is Prudhoe Bay, whose image brings to mind all of the ugliness, however necessary, associated with pumping oil -- pipelines, wells, roads, airports, air and noise pollution, housing, gravel mines, production plants, power plants and frequent spills.

President Bush, however, is immune to the images of ANWR wilderness. He sees only dollar signs. In his fiscal 2006 budget, Bush projects immediate revenue of $2.4 billion from leasing fees paid by oil companies. The drilling would take place within a 1.5-million-acre section of the refuge along the coast of the Arctic Ocean, an area designated by Congress in 1980 as appropriate for oil exploration.

In 25 years, however, reason has prevailed in protecting the refuge. But Bush, with a Republican majority in Congress, now sees an opportunity to cash in. And that's all it would be, as there is not enough oil there to make a dent in our dependence on foreign supplies. Additionally, any leasing revenue would not make a dent in Bush's record budget deficit.

This month, 1,000 American and Canadian scientists jointly implored Bush to "protect the biological diversity and wilderness character" of the refuge. The president has a history of ignoring scientists. But he
listens to big oil -- except in this case. The major companies say they are not interested in the ANWR because the potential for significant discoveries there is nil. Even BP and Chevron, which in 1986 drilled the only exploratory well there, are disinterested, according to a story this week in The New York Times.

Bush will likely be too stubborn to admit there are no valid reasons to
risk destroying the refuge by drilling there. It will be up to Congress
to bring sanity to this issue.

2. Take Action to Save the Arctic Refuge

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is under attack as never before. As early as next week, lawmakers in Washington could vote on legislation in both the House and the Senate that could include provisions to open the refuge to oil drilling. On Saturday, March 12, Americans from across the country will rally to protect the refuge by participating in Arctic Action Day. Defenders of Wildlife is organizing viewings of the documentary "Being Caribou" in honor of Arctic Action Day.



Defenders of Wildlife
1130 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036

Copyright Defenders of Wildlife 2005