Letter to the Editor
No drilling
Published Saturday, October 11, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Oct. 8, 2008
To the editor:
As an Alaskan born and raised, making a living off the land, I’ve always been darn proud to stand with the Gwich’in Athabascans in saying “No!” to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The caribou will feed local Alaskans forever, just like the salmon do. However, the oil industry lines Lower 48 pocketbooks, while Alaskans pay the highest gas prices in America. The renewable resources of the land (the Great Land) have, and will continue to sustain us for centuries — if we take care of them. Oil, like mining, is here today, gone tomorrow, and leaves the mess for future generations.
The oil production curve for Alaska peaked back in 1988, and has been in decline ever since (see: www.oilempire.us/alaska.html). The United States’ oil production capabilities peaked back in the ’70s. If we open ANWR today, that new oil will be inhaled by a gluttonous global economy (1.3 billion Chinese now “need” cars) and gone by the time our grandchildren “need jobs” (see: www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY). The only way we are going to break our addiction to foreign oil is to break our addition to oil, period.
Now, we hear the rationalization that drilling in ANWR will “technically” only create a “2,000-acre footprint.” This is a hoax. If we were to apply the standards they are using to calculate this “2,000-acre footprint” to the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, only the space where each of those rusty red footings actually touch the ground would be counted. Obviously this is not even close to the actual footprint of the pipeline. In reality, development would sprawl across the Arctic refuge, having an impact many thousands of times greater than 2,000 acres.
Former Republican Rep. Sherwood Boehlert of New York said it best in 2003: “It is only a few thousand acres, they say. That is like saying, do not worry, the tumor is only in your lungs.”
If we buy the myth, we’ll once again end up getting shortchanged by the likes of Exxon and Shell, corporations that have no real respect for our land or our people.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
As for me I wouldn't mind there being drilling in ANWR...if the environmentalists can set and enforce the standards required for any disturbance in the refuge.
And yes, pumping oil and gas when the price is low is foolish when by waiting we will get a much higher price and have better ability to avoid damaging the environment.
Maybe that's why the representative noted is a 'former' representative...
AKpatriot- Maybe if we wait until all the lights go out and the cars run out of fuel we won't need to drill at all. Then the caribou will continue to wander right through Arctic Village so there will be no need to go out to hunt them. And Glenn won't have to complain about the high cost of fuel on one hand and be proud of apposing drilling on the other.
Well said, lakloey1 -- reading eye-witness accounts of life in the "good ol' days", before the internal combustion motor came to interior and northern Alaska is to open your eyes to mass starvation and depradation.
Challenge to Mr. Helkenn: what is stopping you from breaking your addiction to oil? I invite you to do this, today.
Have you ever let your lawn go uncut for an entire summer and then spend the whole next year just trying to get it back? One thing I do know is that as soon as the trampling stops, no matter how short of a growing season, the overgrowth will come back. Doubt it? Go find a picture of Fox from the 1930's, how many birch trees do you see in the picture? How many are actually on the side of the hills today? Huh, go figure.
Glenn, you are out of touch with many Gwich'in about drilling in ANWR. True, many do oppose it, but if one were to go to Ft. Yukon, you will find many that are FOR DRILLING!! Our State Constitution demands it. We are going to have to get used to the idea that it is going to happen, we just have to make sure it is done environmentally sound.
The villagers of Kaktovik are not opposed to all oil drilling in ANWR. And they live there, the only people who live there, unlike the Gwich'in.
Said it before, and I'll say it again, communities that stand in the way of drilling should have their dividends revoked, along with 85% of state monies...of which 85% come from taxes levied on oil producers. You don't believe in oil/exploration? fine. Reap none of the benefits.
Since the gwich'in don,t support such activities in other man,s land like the democrats in nation,than a full scale oil and gas exploration needs to be done in your land by the Doyon oil rigs so it can benefit the corporation and the shareholders and put more Money into our Permanent fund that you depend on,since it lost 5 billion over the past months,or in other words stay away from Other man's land issues and respect the outcome.
how good are you at hunting those caribou on foot armed with a sharp stick? it's a nobrainer to know that those snowmachines and atv's are run on oil based fuel. but also realize that those bullets for those rifles come to you because of oil to make it and transport it to your local store. and if we run low on oil but not totally out, who do you think is going to be the first ones to go without? it won't be the folks in new york city.
wow, i think most of you are missing the point of glenn's letter. it seems to me that he's saying that opening the refuge to drilling will create a temporary solution for a more permanent problem. the amount of oil we get out of there will not be enough to solve our energy crisis. so why put in jeopardy such a valuable natural resource like caribou on account of oil that will run out sooner or later? drill somewhere else or find alternative energy. there has to be a better solution than just ANWR
Glenn...I want your 4-wheeler, your snow-go, your car, you boat, your plane if you have one and your house (it uses electricity). You my brother can go back to your traditional way of life. Maybe then I will agree with your letter.
majast2211 is on the money. Drill in the backyards of the areas using the oil and let them deal with the consequences. Maybe they will then change their lifestyle and move to another source of energy. Rememder folks, the sun is one source of energy on the earth, not an alternative energy source. Every 69 minutes the sun strikes the earth with more energy than what all humans use in a year. Oil will never keep up with demand, unlike the sun, and when it nolonger shines game over!
It's amazing how many "all or nothing" people are out there. Glenn appears to be one of the "nothings". Others chant to take it all and use it all.
I don't believe either stance to be fully appropriate.
We have an economy and country that is heavily based upon the use of fossil fuels for almost every aspect of our lives, which I do not believe is a good thing. However, we can't simply stop using them right now, and that necessarily means continuing to explore and drill for those resources.
At the same time we must cut our dependence on foreign energy supplies (read: supplies originating from areas other than North America). Between the oil and gas supplies available in Canada and the U.S. alone, we have significant energy supplies to reduce our reliance on foreign resources and sustain our needs as we transition to being more heavily dependant upon renewable energy resources, namely wind and solar, which are proven technologies.
Part of the problem is the Federal Government and the energy companies. Neither of them are responding as quickly to the needed changes as is necessary. The other part of the problem, simply, is us. Most of us are selfish, greedy and "want it now". Many of us will not learn to conserve until doing so benefits our pocketbooks and our lifestyles. And when I say "us", I'm including myself.
If we want change, we first have to start with ourselves. Reduce your own carbon footprint, even if it's just a little bit. Ride your biycle a bit more in the summer. Change out your lightbulbs for the more energy efficient style. Use less water/hot water where possible. Also, get involved in demanding the Federal Government be proactive.
On a recent trip to Homer I was remembering all of the discussion there has been over the years of building a bridge over the Knik to link Anchorage and the Kenai Penninsula. I had mentioned to my father at how many hours driving that would save when traveling between the two. The first words out of his mouth were: And build tidal generators along the entire bridge.
Neither of us are environmentalists or liberals, but we recognize the impact the price of energy has on our lives as well as the impact it's having on our nation, and we know some things absolutely have to change.
The opportunity to switch to renewable energy resources is incredible. How about instead of spending $700 Billion to bail out the banking and finance industries, who then spend money on retreats for Execs, we instead spend $700 Billion to put people that are out of work back to work so they can pay their mortgages. We create a national works project in which they can start building the infrastructure we'll need in order to switch over to using renewable resources for energy production.
Looking for an organized plan? Try reading this (http://www.pickensplan.com) and see if it's something you feel you can support.
Drill baby drill!
I guess when we run out of oil and gas we can ride the caribou if they dont shoot them all first and yes you have to bring a bag and clean up after your caribou. Giddy up.
Just a thought...how about the oil companies drill on the all the land they already hold leases to before we let them drill in ANWR? I'm not against drilling ANWR though, in fact a few oil rigs would make great landmarks to help navigate. I've been up there and believe me it is one desolate piece of real estate. Gotta say though, the wildlife is beautiful.
Hi, this is Glenn. It does appear that majast2211 is one of the few who gets what my letter is about. My point is simple. Oil is a non-renewable resource. That means someday it's going to be gone. Before it's gone, it's going to get scarce. As it gets scarce, it'll get very, very expensive. That time is rapidly approaching. Any species dependent for it's survival on a non-renewable resource is ultimately destined for extinction -- that species would eventually have to change it's ways or die. Once oil gets scarce, that "species" is those of us too poor to afford it. Once oil is gone that species is all of us.
Oil production peaked in the US in 1970 and has been in decline ever since. Oil production peaked in Alaska in 1988 and has been in decline ever since. There's a simple reason we're dependent on foreign oil, and it's because we're dependent on oil. There just isn't anywhere near enough oil left in N. America to sustain our need for it. Evidence points to the likelihood that global oil production peaked in 2004. That's the engine behind both our current gas prices and this huge global financial crisis.
Times are changing, and the days of fourwheelers, snowmachines, and outboards are numbered. People can argue about this all they want, yet it's happening and it's ultimately unavoidable. Pointing this out is not meant to create defensiveness or get into any personal ego contests with folks here over my letter or my lifestyle.
Oil drilled in Alaska gets shipped out of state. The global economy is gobbling up oil at an exponentially increasing rate (especially with the modernization of China and India). We can bet that as oil gets more scarce it won't be rich folks in L.A. or Seattle who do without. And we can bet that those Alaskans who can't live without getting paid by those rich folks will be moving to the lower 48 once gas prices get high enough...no matter what they say now, they just won't have a choice.
Let's make sure they don't leave a drilled and mined out mess of Alaska before they have to go.
For myself, I'm getting into “recovery” for my addiction to oil...especially when it comes to survival needs. I figure recovery will be a multi-generational process, but I'm starting now -- for the sake of my local community's future and my family's children. People may see me and others like me as oddballs for doing this, but all evidence points to the likelihood that future generations will be thankful to those of us who start the process now.
Folks are welcome to join in or not, but either way drilling in the ANWR isn't going to change our energy future one way or another -- not for global markets and not for gas prices in Alaska. And if we do drill, we better make darn sure we don't damage our State's renewable natural resources (caribou, salmon, moose, fresh water, etc.,) in the process. It's time to be clear about our priorities and honest about the long-term consequences of our actions.
Much better letter than the first, Glenn. Wondering how you're going to get the word out without coal-fired, internet energization? I get your point and 20 years ago, that's how I felt. I went for ten years riding a bike, skiing or walking everywhere. It was very good exercise, but frankly, I just got poorer and poorer. I borrowed some money and bought a vehicle, which increased my capacity to earn more money by five times; I was able to start paying for health insurance, get married, and buy a house. Then I began to understand that the only way that we (the planet's peoples) will ever get to the "promised land" of alternative energy sources is to burn an awful lot of oil and coal and mine a heck of lot rock just so that we can fund the research and build the necessary infrastructure to replace oil and coal. You should know that the oil companies are the largest source of investment in alternative energy. Big Oil will eventually transmogrify into Big Green..... and we'll hate them, too.
Interesting thoughts Prospector, thanks. I'd say you were ahead of your time. It seems a lot of folks responded thoughtfully and responsibly to the peak in US oil production back in president Carter's time (the whole 70's back to the land movement, for instance), but the powers that be went the other way -- maintaining & expanding US global dominance via imported oil. Now with the global peak there's no new horizons (at least when it comes to the ever increasing energy returns necessary for a growth-based economy). Since the energy return on investment (EROI or EROEI) for alternatives is way lower than for oil, Big Green is at least going to be a lot smaller than Big Oil, and places where modern life requires a lot more energy than usual (i.e. Alaska) are going to see larger changes sooner than most, in my opinion.
Perhaps domestic oil production's decline coincided with the rise of the environmental movement. It seems like it really got going in the Carter years. I'm sure you remember and liked him Glenn. The president who locked up so many millions of acres of Alaska.
no worries, tombo, we have 5 billion years of sun left. and, glenn, i enjoyed your longer post. eloquently said. and for what its worth, i think it would be funny to drill for oil outside of houston and see how they like it
majast2211 -- they do drill near Houston. Go to Galveston and see all the offshore rigs. Houston is also home to some of the largest refinery capacity in the nation. Houston likes it; they are economically, quite well off, otherwise the millions of residents would not live there.
For the report that the Democrat Majority will not address or hold hearings on, see:
http://republicans.resourcescommittee.ho...
Hey Lakloey1,
Actually I was a raging conservative back when Carter was president, so I didn't much like him at the time. Loved Reagan and joined the army to fight the commies instead. Looking back however, I now see Carter was wiser than we give him credit for. It's just that he was preaching sobriety to a bunch of oil addicts at a time when other countries still had plenty of oil for us to feed our addiction. If you hate our dependence on foreign oil, complain to Reagan's ghost...Carter was intent on ending it way back then, before the American people chose otherwise.
And yeah, the 1970s did see the rise of the environmental movement just as we are seeing a resurgence of that movement now. It's because as oil gets scarce, people start moving toward conservation and efficiency. But if you're implying that we would have plenty of oil if it weren't for that darn "environmentalist conspiracy", well, the evidence just doesn't bear that out. The return on U.S. oil exploration efforts peaked back before the 50's which is how Hubbert was able to predict the peak of U.S. extraction would come in the 70's. Some folks just realize that it's not necessarilly wise to tear up every last piece of earth extracting a resource that makes us increasingly dependent before it goes away and leaves us more or less stranded. That's where oil is taking us / has taken us.
Thankfully people have lived well since way back before we ever knew oil existed.
good point, prospector. i was thinking more right in the middle of the city but i guess since anwr isn't in the middle of any cities it isn't quite the same. i'm not sure that anwr would yeild the same kind of economic prosperity that the oil wells in galveston have, however. i just think some people don't understand that drilling in anwr would not be nearly as profitable as they think.