Dems Kill ANWR

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://www.adn.com/2012/03/13/2368427/senate-rejects-drilling-in-arctic.html

Senate rejects drilling for oil in Arctic refuge

Begich breaks with other members of his party to vote in favor of measure.

By SEAN COCKERHAM

Anchorage Daily News

Published: March 13th, 2012 11:02 PM

Last Modified: March 13th, 2012 11:02 PM

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Senate on Tuesday resoundingly rejected a sweeping measure to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other protected areas to drilling as well as approve construction of the Keystone pipeline project.

The vote was the first time in four years the Senate has voted on a measure including ANWR drilling, and it failed miserably. The proposal needed 60 votes to pass and avoid a filibuster. It received only 41 votes in favor, with 57 senators against.

Kansas Republican Sen. Pat Roberts pushed the measure as an amendment to the bill that funds transportation projects across the nation. His amendment was packed with so many controversial items it was bound to fail in the Democratic-controlled Senate. It was as much a jab at President Obama by Republican leaders during a time of high gas prices and election politics as anything else.

Alaska Democratic Sen. Mark Begich still broke with others in his party and voted for the amendment, saying he did it to back ANWR drilling.

But he complained the bill was "junked" full of other provisions and was put forth to score political points.

"If we want to get serious about an energy plan that includes ANWR and other Alaska oil and gas resources, let's get to it. But an amendment to an important transportation bill that is put forward simply to divide the body is not a good way to conduct public policy," Begich said.

Including Begich, three Democrats voted for the measure: Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Seven Republicans voted against it: Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine; Scott Brown of Massachusetts; Bob Corker of Tennessee; Jim DeMint of South Carolina; Marco Rubio of Florida; and Mike Lee of Utah.

The 78-page amendment is similar to legislation passed by the Republican-controlled House passed last month. It would require the Interior Department to lease huge areas in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to drilling as well as approve the controversial Keystone XL pipeline project from the Canadian oil sands in Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico.

Adrian Herrera, who is paid by the state of Alaska to lobby Congress to open ANWR, has called the proposal a "hail Mary" measure that includes lots of things for senators to find fault with.

There was less than 10 minutes of debate on the measure. Kansas Republican Roberts said it would address the "number one issue facing every American of all walks of life ... which is the rising cost of gasoline."

Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow spoke against the measure. "It includes dangerous requirements for drilling in the Arctic and offshore locations without any safeguards," she said.

Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young said the Senate is "the black hole for job creating legislation passed by the House."

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Seems they had a good bit of help from Republicans defeating the measure - including DeMint and sunny boy Rubio. Are Republicans going to hold this NO vote against their likely VP candidate in November?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

bah...

DRILL BABY DRILL!!!!!

[luckytxn 2,264]

Who saw this coming?

[X Factor 1,112]

bah...

DRILL BABY DRILL!!!!!

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Dems don't want Keystone Pipeline, they don't want drilling in ANWR but they want to subsidize bs energy programs. They are helping to kill this country.

[^_^ 5,021]

Dems don't want Keystone Pipeline, they don't want drilling in ANWR but they want to subsidize bs energy programs. They are helping to kill this country.

KILL BABY KILL

[Leatherneck 693]

Dems don't want Keystone Pipeline, they don't want drilling in ANWR but they want to subsidize bs energy programs. They are helping to kill this country.

Shocking -- say it ain't so!

[natty bumppo 297]

Dems don't want Keystone Pipeline, they don't want drilling in ANWR but they want to subsidize bs energy programs. They are helping to kill this country.

every watch MMax beyond thunderdome?

it might be time to invest in a biological renewable resource that will keep the neighbors at a distance (especially the down wind ones) ...

[^_^ 5,021]

Seems they had a good bit of help from Republicans defeating the measure - including DeMint and sunny boy Rubio. Are Republicans going to hold this NO vote against their likely VP candidate in November?

could you speak up? i can't hear you over all the groaning in the conservative circle jerk currently in progress

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Obama is just trying to keep his promises of $5/gallon gas.

His promises are almost treasonous at the end of the day.... Intentional harm to the American economy...

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

KILL BABY KILL

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gas Prices: Myths vs. Facts

Myth: We have enough domestic supply to drill our way to energy independence

• Fact: We have less than 2 percent of the world's known reserves, yet use 25 percent of its oil. Without dramatically reducing our demand for oil, the U.S. will never have the ability to meet our own petroleum needs.

Myth: Increasing the number of oil permits will decrease the price of oil

• Fact: According to a report by the House Natural Resources Committee: Between 1999 and 2007, the number of drilling permits on public lands has increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices continued to skyrocket. Increased leases have not reduced the price of gas.

Myth: Congress has blocked efforts to expand refinery capacity.

• Fact: Refining capacity has been expanding since 2001 and this expansion has increased oil production by a million barrels per day.
• Fact: Oil companies have only applied to build one refinery in the last four years and a new refinery has not been built in the United States since 1976.
• Fact: Congress passed legislation in 2005 to streamline refinery permitting that refiners have never used. The 2005 Energy Bill authorized the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to enter into refinery permitting cooperative agreements with states. However the EPA testified that no state on behalf of any refiner has ever used these provisions.
• Fact: Our refineries are already so stretched that last year, the United States had to import almost 150 million barrels of gasoline. The Wall Street Journal reported oil companies are not building new refineries because it would be bad for their bottom line. "Building a new refinery from scratch, Exxon believes, would be bad for long-term business."

Myth: Increased demand has led to the increase in oil prices.

• Fact: Among a number of issues, including instability in the Middle East, increased demand from China and India, the weakening of the dollar in the global market, and the lasting impact of Hurricane Katrina on the oil energy market; speculation has had a devastating effect on oil prices. The large purchases of crude oil future contracts by speculators have artificially inflated the demand for and therefore the price of oil. We are putting a price on oil that has yet to be pumped out of the ground. According to a top official at the EIA, speculation has inflated prices by at least 10 percent and based upon the above factors energy should be at $90 a barrel, not $143.

Myth: Drilling in the Arctic National Wilderness Refuse (ANWR) will reduce the price of oil domestically.

• Fact: If we started drilling in ANWR today we would not see an additional drop of oil for about a decade. The peak estimated oil production in ANWR is 780 thousand barrels a day. If consumption continues at current levels of 20.7 million barrels per day ANWR would provide less than 4 percent of daily consumption. Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United States. Production in ANWR would lower gas prices by 1.8 cents per gallon in 2030.
• Fact: The amount of oil and gas that could be produced from already leased but unused oil reserves is over 10 times what is available in ANWR.

Myth: The federal government has not opened up enough land for drilling for oil and gas

• Fact: 81 percent of estimated oil and gas resources on both federal lands and the Outer Continental Shelf are available for oil and gas drilling or will be accessible pending the completion of land use planning and environmental reserves.
• Fact: The amount of oil available in these reserves is equal to 107 billion barrels of oil and 658 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
• Fact: There are 68 million acres onshore and offshore in the U.S. that are leased by oil companies—open to drilling and actually under lease—but not developed.
• Fact: If oil companies tapped the 68 million federal acres of leased land it might generate an estimated 4.8 million barrels of oil a day – six times what ANWR would produce at its peak.

Myth: Opening up the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) would lead to decreased prices.

• Fact: According the Energy Information Administration, it would take five years for oil production to begin at any new site on the OCS. EIA predicted that there would be no significant effect on oil production or price until nearly two decades after leasing begins.
• Fact: Oil companies do not need new leases along the OCS. According to the US Minerals Management Service only 20 percent of the 38.5 million acres of existing leases along the OCS are being used for production. The vast majority of oil and gas deposits along the OCS are already open to drilling, 82% of the gas in the OCS and 79% of the oil in the OCS is available for leasing.
• Fact: The average oil field size in the OCS is smaller than the average in the Gulf of Mexico, which is already being developed As a result, much of the oil in the OCS would be expensive to extract, and is only becoming attractive now as a result of high oil prices.
• Fact: Offshore drilling in sensitive areas would increase domestic oil production by 7 percent by 2030, according to the EIA. But "because oil prices are determined on the international market…any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."
• Fact: Due to the high price of oil, existing drilling ships are "booked solid for the next five years," and demand for deepwater rigs has driven up the price of such ships. Oil companies just do not have the resources to explore oil fields in the OCS.
• Fact: Oil companies find it financially advantageous to keep the leased land on their books even if they are not producing or exploring.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Mister Fancypants

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Fact: Why would anyone be against drilling in ANWR? Explain that one. Or is it because it's private $$$$$ that is used for oil and not US tax payer $$$$ ?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Fact: Why would anyone be against drilling in ANWR? Explain that one. Or is it because it's private $$$ that is used for oil and not US tax payer $$ ?

Because there would be no real benefit. Maybe it's time to change careers? Our country and our world is transitioning away from fossil fuels whether you're on board or not. You could become a solar panel installer, windmill technician, or even work in geothermal energy technology.