Alaskans get dividends from oil, to the tune of about $2,000 a year I think.

Geministorm on August 25, 2008 at 11:17 AM

First off you are wrong. Dividens are part of the Stock market and commodities base. There is a very interesting way of how Alaskans get our Perm Funds. This year we expect it to be over 2K, but that is DUE to interest off Stocks, Bonds and Commodities that is also from an interest account that is managed into the Stocks etc.

Please ask before hand, do not speculate on the Perm Fund and Alaskans.

I think that this idea is really not that big a deal, because it isn’t the land the environmentalists care about, its just the drilling *anywhere*.

BLM is very wary about drilling and only permit very little. Most of Alaska is Federal Land, then State land then Private. Sean (my Lt Gov) has a great idea. Only problem is what does the BLM want to trade for it? And will the BLM trade fairly with the State of Alaska. We may “get” the trade BUT that doesn’t mean we will get the area we want where we know oil and gas are.

Does anyone have any recent studies/figures on the suspected recoverable oil supply in ANWR? I think that the OCS is something like 90B barrels, but the only studies I could find on ANWR were from 1998 and looked like it would be anywhere from 4-14B barrels…doesn’t seem like as good as investment as OCS drilling if so.

I have refered this many times. Go to the USGS in your area and ask for ANWR information.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm

The link I have posted is a study of the 1950’s Study of ANWR. You can get a copy of it for yourself or order it. It is called the 305 publication. You will also have to ask for the whole series and they are expensive.

Environmentalists oppose drilling because they think any drilling would negatively impact the environment there. Throw in the hype that the radical groups spout and you have a lot of people that “care about the environment” thinking that this is just a big land grab that will result in massive environmental destruction and huge losses in animal population. My sister and I had a 3 hour discussion about this Sunday, and I got to hear first hand the kind of crap that radical environmental/animal rights groups try and scare people with.

Just as reference, ANWR is 19.8M (that’s Million) square acres, and the area 1002 (1.5M acres) was set aside specifically for the purpose of investigating oil resources for drilling. Of that area, only 2000 acres would be used. And, in case no one knew it, the largest oil field in North America, Prudhoe Bay, is just 100 miles west of ANWR. Prudhoe Bay says that their Porcupine/Artic Caribou population has grown seven-fold in the 25 years of its operation. If the area is going to be ruined by drilling, Prudhoe Bay would have already ruined it.

Does anyone have any recent studies/figures on the suspected recoverable oil supply in ANWR? I think that the OCS is something like 90B barrels, but the only studies I could find on ANWR were from 1998 and looked like it would be anywhere from 4-14B barrels…doesn’t seem like as good as investment as OCS drilling if so.

They have visions of a forest of derricks as was common in the first half of the 20th century. These days many wells can be driven in many different direction from one location. You can easily have a dozen wells from one central rig, each one going off in a different direction. We are probably talking less than 10% of the surface impact for the same amount of production was was the case in the 1950’s.

They don’t want a single rig with many wells (octopus like, but underground) and they do want wind farms. Wind farms have to be “a forest of wind turbines” and can NOT be utilized from a “many to one” relationship as described above.

Besides, wind turbines can kill migratory birds.

Where does the constitution give congress the power to lock up state lands? This is all I can find that even comes close.

Akzed on August 24, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Constitution, we don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution.

Where does the constitution give congress the power to lock up state lands? This is all I can find that even comes close.

- The Cat

P.S. I just wish someone would point out the staggering amount of Caribou in Canada.

How long has drilling been going on in neighboring Prudhoe Bay without a single environmental “disaster”? Also, people have an obsolete vision of oil production. They have visions of a forest of derricks as was common in the first half of the 20th century. These days many wells can be driven in many different direction from one location. You can easily have a dozen wells from one central rig, each one going off in a different direction. We are probably talking less than 10% of the surface impact for the same amount of production was was the case in the 1950’s. And when you have fewer rigs, you have less chance for accident. If one in a thousand rigs has a spill per year, if you have a thousand rigs, you have one spill per year. If you have 100 rigs, you have one spill every ten years.

And as for offshore … more oil seeps naturally off the coast of California’s Coal Oil Point in one month than was spilled from ALL North American offshore drilling over the entire decade of the 1990’s.

People have no idea of what they are afraid of, they are subjected to this constant drumbeat of misinformation that oil production is dirty and destroys the environment. It doesn’t. It is about the cleanest, most environmentally friendly mining activity there is on this planet.

I wish these solutions would stop popping up. This is best left as a wedge for the elections.

I doubt it. The people who are opposed to American energy independence are not sane to begin with.

Guardian on August 24, 2008 at 11:45 AM

That’s just it. The enviro left has become more interested in controlling our daily lives by controlling our energy use than anything to do with preserving the quality of our environment. To this end, the left has become committed to a no-growth energy policy. The only energy sources they’ll agree to develop are those remotest from economic feasibility, such as wind and solar (rather than nuclear, clean coal, natural gas, etc.).

But still this is an offer that should be pursued, as it will spotlight the fraud of the carbonazis when they refuse it.

Oil is the engine that make the country work and prosper, but the Democrat thought process thinks only of the next election by pandering to the left’s environmentalists and blogs for maintaining their cash flow.

The success of the country is the Democrat’s lowest priority.

How about we give then San Francisco for ANWR?

PattyJ on August 24, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Only if we wall it off first. We wouldn’t want the local ‘wildlife’ to escape out into the general population.

NorthernCross on August 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM

You miss my point… the STATE has emminent domain power in and of itself…

So does the Fed… BUT… it would be interesting to see the STATE try to use emminent to seize it from the FED, since it is not being used for its stated intention…

As Economics have been used in the past and the Supremes have said that it is a good enough reason for Emminent… its a win- win… either the STATE looses, and emminent takes a hit… or the State wins, and we drill.

Parnell may have a compromise that will allow everyone, perhaps even the environmentalists, to declare a victory on ANWR.

Which is why he should replace that disgrace Don Young for Rep.-at-large for Alaska.

Better idea…

Use the States Emminent Domain power, and SEIZE the land.

It was set aside for a specific purpose, as mandated by Congress, and it is NOT being used for that purpose… thus the Feds should LOOSE that land….

Romeo13 on August 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM

The government uses eminent domain only if the land is in private hands. Since ANWR is (I believe) government land, there’s no need to do that.

Frankly, I’ve never been fond of eminent domain, even if it’s concerning a private landowner refusing drill for the oil under his house. As a matter of policy, the government shouldn’t be going around forcing law-abiding landowners off their lands just to hand the lands over to big businesses. It just seems un-American to me.