111th Congress: H.R. 39 and S.231
The purpose: of “Udall-Eisenhower Arctic Wilderness Act” is to reallocate the arctic coastal plain (approximately 1.5 million acres) as part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska as wilderness. This act amends the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 to designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System under the Wilderness Act.
Some History: In December 1980, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). ANILCA designated most of the original Arctic National Wildlife Range as Wilderness except for approximately 1.5 million acres on the Refuge's coastal plain. Section 1002 of this act required study assessments of fish and wildlife, as well as the potential petroleum resources to be reported to Congress.
This bill has been re-introduced in the Senate in the 102nd Congress (1991) to the current 111th Congress.
The Assessment: The revised and recent assessment of petroleum in the 1002 area (1.5 million acres) establishes probable estimates of 7.7 billion barrels of crude oil over significant time.
Based on the United States current usage of approximately 21 million barrels a day, the most we can anticipate is one year of oil consumption on the destruction of the arctic coastal plain.
· http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas
· http://arctic.fws.gov/1002man.htm
· http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/
· http://science.howstuffworks.com/us-gas-addiction.htm
The purpose: of “Udall-Eisenhower Arctic Wilderness Act” is to reallocate the arctic coastal plain (approximately 1.5 million acres) as part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska as wilderness. This act amends the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 to designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System under the Wilderness Act.
Some History: In December 1980, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). ANILCA designated most of the original Arctic National Wildlife Range as Wilderness except for approximately 1.5 million acres on the Refuge's coastal plain. Section 1002 of this act required study assessments of fish and wildlife, as well as the potential petroleum resources to be reported to Congress.
This bill has been re-introduced in the Senate in the 102nd Congress (1991) to the current 111th Congress.
The Assessment: The revised and recent assessment of petroleum in the 1002 area (1.5 million acres) establishes probable estimates of 7.7 billion barrels of crude oil over significant time.
Based on the United States current usage of approximately 21 million barrels a day, the most we can anticipate is one year of oil consumption on the destruction of the arctic coastal plain.
· http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas
· http://arctic.fws.gov/1002man.htm
· http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/
· http://science.howstuffworks.com/us-gas-addiction.htm
I've read that the petroleum reserves from ANWR were even less than 7.7 billion barrels, and might only be able to supply the market for 3-4 months.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of all of the arguments for driiling, I see no constructive benefits except to those in the oil industry.
I feel that the state of energy in the world would not change.
This is interesting to me because in all the news and press I've seen about the potential for drilling in Alaska, they have never mentioned the limited supply. I would love to see the cost benefit analysis for this proposal, because I am sure that gaining a one year oil supply would not outweigh the environmental risks/costs created by drilling for oil in a wildlife refuge. I look forward to hearing more about who re-introduced the bill and what has been done regarding the issue since 1991. Thanks, Nikki
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad you brought this topic up. I have read many times that the oil in Alaska was very limited, and the amount of time it would take to even get to it would take no less than ten years. There was so much media attention given to drilling in Alaska, and how it would solve all of our oil problems, but it seems the truth does not agree with that. Great topic.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read all the studies yet, but the official study used for this bill does mention the very limited supply and the excessive time it would take to extract it, and the poor quality. In response to Rick's comment, the 7.7 billion barrels, I believe is an optimistic estimate used in the study. It is very intriguing why we are so interested in a very limited oil supply in the US.
ReplyDelete