Much ado made about not much oil? ( the Anwr scam )

[cthrumatrix]

Much ado made about not much oil?

By Warren Cornwall

Seattle Times staff reporter

snip

Major oil companies have also expressed less interest in the refuge in recent years.

Since 2002, BP and ConocoPhillips, two companies with a large presence in Alaska, have pulled out of Arctic Power, a pro-drilling lobbying group financed largely by the state of Alaska. A number of oil companies have also been noncommittal about the refuge's importance.

While many drilling boosters are reluctant to lay claim to any broader agenda, environmentalists are eager to do it for them.

They point to comments reportedly made by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, in 2003. The D.C.-based publication Roll Call reported that DeLay, in a closed-door meeting with Republicans, said the drilling in the refuge was "about precedent" and the "symbolism of ANWR."

snip

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002210277_anwrside17m.html



It's not about the oil... excuse me?

[Az_lefty]

1. These fascists are real control freaks

where are they going to want to drill next, Yellowstone?
:shrug:

[saskatoon]

8. where drill next?

Haven't you heard, Lil Bro in Florida will let them drill off the coast north west of Tallahassee, it's been in the works for a couple of years. They have to grease a few palms first.

[retread]

12. Northwest of Tallahassee is Alabama? n/t

[Lorien]

2. As I've said several times in the past week

they said THEMSELVES that this was about the symbolic defeat of liberalism. 90 days of oil for California is not worth ten years of effort to get it out of the ground, but Halliburtan and other companies contracted to provide inferstructure will make out to the tune of $11 billion taxpayer dollars. It's a royal scam that has NOTHING to do with providing energy to anyone (raise fleet mileage by 2 MPG, and you save far more oil than ANWR could ever provide).

[brentspeak]

11. You hit the nail right on the head

The money is not in the oil (there's very little); it's in the multi-billion dollar government contracts that the Halliburtons and etc. are hoping to snag. That's why there won't be any drilling in ANWR if somehow Bush's budget proposals can be defeated. No taxpayer funds to drill means no drilling.

[glitch]

14. Yep - and believe you me we'll be watching to see who votes for it. nt

[burrowowl]

22. As I was about to say

Oil companies will get CORPORATE WELFARE, otherwise known as SUBSIDIES, big time. for little oil and the ruination of ANWR.
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK! NOT THEIR's ...

:puke: :mad:

[HereSince1628]

3. Its a symbolic win and its a precedent to start pushing

drilling near other refuge areas.

I suspect Gulf of Mexico exploration is more important to them than
ANWR, and also the oil off California.

[MaineYooper]

6. expect them to go after CA first-

It already goes pretty heavily dem, and they're not going to piss of Jeb right now, since they need to keep hold of FLA for a while.

bastards, all of them.

[Coastie for Truth]

7. If they want to drill off of California----

100% full and complete, absolute, total compliance with the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 plus domestic partner benefits and affirmative action for hitherto excluded and under represented populations.

[HereSince1628]

9. I'm not sure but I think I read CA has 4 time the oil as ANWR

sitting off-shore...but I also remember I visited a website about CA oil reserves and there were a lot of leases that were abandoned. So I don't know if this is setting up a new oil-rights grab or if the companies don't think there is anything there worth pursuing

[magellan]

20. Don't know either but...

...you couldn't pay me enough to work on an oil rig off the CA coast. The entire area is criss-crossed with major fault lines, and these are just the ones we know about:

[sonicx]

So DeLay admits it's just about destroying the environment?

[havocmom]

10. Just a pissing contest

and setting the stage for fouling California coast big time.

[DainBramaged]

4. 6-16 billion bbl. estimate, not available till 2012

Some victory. I doubt any drilling will ever happen. If the Senate returns to us in 2006, you can kiss that bill goodbye. And just for shits and giggles, we use 23,000,000 bbl. a day. How long would the ANWR reserve last at it's maximum? And does anyone seriously think a drop of that oil will ever reach the US mainland? My bet is it is headed for Japan, plain and simple.

Worry not, there is still time to stop it.

[jpak]

16. ChimpCo's DOE estimates peak ANWR production of 700k barrels per day

way less than 3% of CURRENT consumption...

What a sick joke this is...

[DRoseDARs]

5. So... it was about wasting taxpayers' money and congressional time? n/t

:wtf:

[retread]

13. Does this oil even have to go to the states? n/t

[Gregorian]

15. It's going to China, or so I've heard.

I don't know what their source was, but that is what someone told me today. China.

[gate of the sun]

17. I've heard it's going to Japan

N/T

[Coastie for Truth]

21. It gets "swapped" for Indonesian crude.

Too much sulfur for our Pacific Coast refineries. It's cheaper to do the swap for Indonesian crude.

I will not attempt the "Dazzle With Brilliance and Baffle With Bull Shit Routine" -- but it gets down to fine points of the exact "chemistry" of the crude --- all crudes are not created equal.

[natrat]

18. idiots probably like the symbolism of a major oil spill in pristine areas

[seafan]

19. It is ALL about precedent. Nothing else.

...DeLay, in a closed-door meeting with Republicans, said the drilling in the refuge was "about precedent" and the "symbolism of ANWR."


Yes, it is about precedent; liberals and progressives have traditionally cared deeply for the environment, because we understand that as it goes, so do we.

It matters not one whit to the Party of Greed that there is relatively little oil under that pristine wilderness. To claim that it will sustain a large population for an extended period of time is lunacy. It will not.

It is about the wanton destruction of a thing, anything or anyone that is dear to liberals/progressives/greens. The intent is to conquer and rape this gentle, pure and life-sustaining land in a way that symbolizes the conquer and rape of the people of America, who do not identify with the republicans' malignant greed and rutting lust for power.

It is little different than the brutal assault of a young girl in front of her parents at gunpoint in a war in a distant land.

I can't say that I have ever hated anyone. But I can no longer make that statement.

[DeepModem Mom]

23. kick