Big Oil Companies not interested in drilling in ANWAR? Tests kept secret??

Big Oil Steps Aside in Battle Over Arctic
By JEFF GERTH

Correction Appended

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 - George W. Bush first proposed drilling for oil in a small part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska in 2000, after oil industry experts helped his presidential campaign develop an energy plan. Five years later, he is pushing the proposal again, saying the nation urgently needs to increase domestic production. But if Mr. Bush's drilling plan passes in Congress after what is expected to be a fierce fight, it may prove to be a triumph of politics over geology.

Once allied, the administration and the oil industry are now far apart on the issue. The major oil companies are largely uninterested in drilling in the refuge, skeptical about the potential there. Even the plan's most optimistic backers agree that any oil from the refuge would meet only a tiny fraction of America's needs.

--snip--

Wayne Kelley, who worked in Alaska as a petroleum engineer for Halliburton, the oil services corporation, and is now managing director of RSK, an oil consulting company, said the refuge's potential could "only be determined by drilling."

"The enthusiasm of government officials about ANWR exceeds that of industry because oil companies are driven by market forces, investing resources in direct proportion to the economic potential, and the evidence so far about ANWR is not promising," Mr. Kelley said.

--snip--

Ken Bird, a geological survey official who worked on the study, said the federal geologists did not have access to test data from the only exploratory well drilled on the refuge, by Chevron Texaco and BP in the 1980's. An official with one of the companies, speaking anonymously because of the confidentiality of the test, said that if the results had been encouraging the company would be more engaged in the political effort to open the refuge.

There has not been much discussion about the refuge between the companies and the Bush administration, according to industry and government officials.

more...


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/politics/21refuge.html?ei=5088&en=011827559528ad9f&ex=1266728400&partner=rssnyt&pagewanted=print&position=


This is about so much more than trying to get a few barrels of oil. The republicans have been denied this for so long and when Clinton vetoed this, it became a vendetta--that and so many other issues are driving this ridiculous fight to drill. Rather than spend the money for a year or two's worth of oil they should be working towards more renewable energy--oh, damn, but this is the Bush administration we are talking about... x(

It will be some second-tier company who doesn't have the kind of experience necesarry.

test that have been done on how much oil could be there are being kept secretive. That's real encouraging:eyes:

like Bu$hie's oil companys and oh the subsidies they will get!

Governmental subsidies, flowing like the Porcupine River, will fatten the bottom line of a select few companies, the environment will be despoiled, and by the time anyone thinks to hold these rapists accountable, the likes of Gale Norton will have long since shuffled off the world stage, and deny that they had anything to do with the ruination of the Wildlife Refuge.

Hell yawns widely for these shrivelled souls.

a hell that yawns widely for these shrivelled souls.
But the time it takes hell to take them, the damage will have been done.
:cry:

Not surprised. Just like when they got someone unexpereienced at making protection vests for our soliders. That guy didn't know what in the world he was doing either. Oy! :argh:

When in fact he has done nothing, except kill some Iraqis.

If they can despoil our most pristine wilderness, then THEY CAN GO ANYWHERE, ANYTIME and DO ANYTHING to our natural resources--like log the rest of the old growth Sequoias even though no one else needs redwood anymore.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050317/ap_on_re_us/arctic_drilling_alaska_5

"Reaction to the Senate vote by the state's political leaders was enthusiastic. For decades, Alaskan politicians have urged Congress to open the refuge to drilling. Those calls grew louder with the decline of oil moving through the trans-Alaska pipeline in recent years"


"Democratic state Sen. Donald Olson, whose district and includes Kaktovik, is a longtime supporter of opening the refuge.

"I'm glad that it passed," he said. "I just want to make sure that the concerns and issues of the local people and Mayor Lon Sonsalla are on the front of our radar screen so they are not overrun by industry." "

Just like his little SS tour. I was listening to someone talking last night (I think Bernie Ward) talking about this and how they're just trying to make him be busy and people are supporting him.

.
.
.

nuthin stopping them from siphoning off taxpayers $$$ to feed THEIR oil companies

right?

I mean,

It's ur tax $$$ at work in Iraq

It's not a big leap . . .

(sigh)

and start campaigning to sell all federal lands...see how quick the freeloaders go into shock. Those that are wanting to get rich off the federal lands would puke if they thought we were going to sell the land off.

It is not economical for them to drill ANWR, but as a PR victoy, it will "soften" up future campaigns to drill off the coasts of the lower 48.
This is from a reprint of that same NYTimes article published Feb. 21:

"....The major oil companies are largely uninterested in drilling in the refuge, skeptical about the potential there. Even the plan's most optimistic backers agree that any oil from the refuge would meet only a tiny fraction of America's needs....

...A Bush adviser said the major oil companies have a dimmer view of the refuge's prospects than the administration does.

"If the government gave them the leases for free, they wouldn't take them," said the adviser, who would speak only anonymously because of his position. "No oil company really cares about ANWR," the adviser said, referring to the refuge....

however, there is this ulterior motivation:

"...including the refuge was seen as a political maneuver to open the door to more geologically promising prospects off the coasts of California and Florida. Those areas, where tests have found oil, have been blocked for years by federal moratoriums because of political and environmental concerns."

"If you can't do ANWR, you'll never be able to drill in the promising areas," said Matthew Simmons, a Houston investment banker for the energy industry and a Bush adviser...

the bottom line on ANWR as far as the oil companies are concerned is this:

....An official with one of the companies, speaking anonymously because of the confidentiality of the (original 1980's drill) test, said that if the results had been encouraging, the company would be more engaged in the political effort to open the refuge."

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/living/science/11071355.htm

Here's my thread on this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3284276

nt

oil field services contracts.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're there (or someone from the company) by the end of this year or early next year. And by 2007 or early 2008 Halliburton is in Iraq.

people than about oil. He's going to push his agenda, help his oily friends, and fuck the American people because he can.

:kick:

We will drill if the Government subsidizes this venture for us so we don't have any losses. Government pays expenses while we reap the profits. Oh we will give all the Republicans a large kickback though. The governor of Alaska gave the oil industry (the wealthiest industry in the world) $100,000 dollars and then immediately cut $100,000 for seniors...

Sounds like bribes and kickbacks...

State spends more money on Arctic drilling
MARCH 13, 2001

http://64.62.196.98/News/archive.asp?ID=env/3132001-2&d...

The Alaska Senate Finance Committee on Monday approved a $1.85 million spending plan to address efforts to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling.

The House had previously approved a $1.5 million grant to Arctic Power, a pro-development group. The Senate approved the amount, added $250,000 for educational outreach, and $100,000 to go directly to the village of Kaktovik, whose residents have said they have been swamped by outside press descending upon the region in search of stories.

Get the Story:
Panel raises Arctic Power lobby funds (The Anchorage Daily News 3/13)

Relevant Links:
Arctic Power's ANWR Site - www.anwr.org

So you're right. Any commerical venture up there will be financed by public money for private profit. What a scam!

edited to change a word

you said it--it's a scam! To think everyone is up in arms about what they think Bush is doing to ANWAR, imagine the outrage to know this is all a scam...any history of the oil boom than went bust in the 80's will clue them in. Some just don't see the writing between the lines, so Bush is continuing to tout his scam.

When even other oil companies aren't for something that's shocking to me. It wouldn't be worth it. I was reading yesterday how the oil there would only last a few months, so why would you want to destroy a beautiful land by possibility of an oil pipe bust?

then there are some serious red flags waving...

there's a lot more where this came from if you look at the history of the oil boom to bust in the 80's. There's not enough there ...it's only for short profit to line the wallots of the fat cats. This time the big oil companies are not even on board:eyes:

when the issue was discussed in the Senate yesterday...it seems this is all a big diversion.