Murkowski to Senate: Drill the Arctic or my state gets it!

[wtmusic]

"Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has decided to hold the fate of her state, nation, and world hostage to drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as explained by guest blogger Daniel J. Weiss, CAPAF’s Director of Climate Strategy. Murkowski gave a long impassioned speech when she introduced her 'Dirty Air Act' – a Congressional Review Act resolution that would overturn EPA’s scientific finding that carbon pollution threatens public health and the environment."

<>

She told E&E Daily (subscription required) that she would oppose a global warming bill unless it included oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska: Murkowski said yesterday she would not consider voting for the climate package without drilling in ANWR. “I’m still saying ANWR is one of the must-haves,” Murkowski said.

<>

"And Alaska is the first state damaged by unchecked emissions:

* Alaska’s temperature increased up to 4 degrees Fahrenheit – double the increase in the rest of the nation.
* Thirty one villages are imminently threatened with erosion, flooding, climate change. Twelve of these villages are already being relocated, at a cost of up to $2.4 billion.
* Oil production in the North Slope of Alaska requires ice roads to avoid damage to the tundra. The ice road season has been cut in half over the last thirty years due to warming."

http://theenergycollective.com/TheEnergyCollective/60318

[annabanana]

1. It would not be AMERICA'S oil, after all.

It would belong to whoever did the drilling. And they would sell it to whoever big highest... China? Saudis?

But by all means, let's despoil another big chunk of pristine wilderness...

[Statistical]

2. Why would the Saudis buy oil?

[annabanana]

4. the same reason that ALL traders purchase commodities.. . n/t

[Sebastian Doyle]

3. Lisa needs to keep somethiing in mind....

Alaska won't be quite so big when it melts. So she shouldn't be so willing to bring on global warming. :evilgrin:

[zbdent]

5. she also forgets that, yes, if global warming does raise Alaska's temps

(about the only people who WANT Global warming are RWers in Buffalo) ...

it also means that the permafrost will melt, and who really wants to pay outrageous prices to Alaskan landholders for extremely soggy land you can't build your beachside summer home on?