Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunz
I think you are probably right, that it wont get much place real quick this year unfortunately. As for the politicians up for re-election, 2 of 3 of our congressional delegation is up for re-election this year. Both are under heavy fire and are not only facing the toughest political opponents so far in thier careers, It is a real potential they could receive indictments.
As for it benefiting only Alaskans, that is bogus. There would be billions in royalties and taxes paid to the feds due to that. But also, it is more than just ANWR. The adjacent field outside of ANWR is called Point Thompson. It is going to be resold soon probably and coincide with an Alaska Natural Gasline"denali line" is what its being called. There is also 36TCF of natural gas there. Enough natural gas to heat the midwest for a generation apparently.
|
Oil's still the primary US energy problem. As to the potential fed tax revenue, the high production costs will provide cushion on that if still calculated on net revenue. Chump change. I personally don't see it benefiting, as I stated, anyone other than Alaskans and the oil industry, which is already benefiting from public subsidization.
Quote:
|
So the US can add more money to the treasuries of sketchy allies in the mid east. Or it can develop the energy infastructure that will make some difference at the same time as improving our domestic output and wealth. I wonder how many people who say no to ANWR also get thier panties in a wad over all that extra federal dollars that go to AK.
|
The numbers just aren't there to benefit the entire US public, unless you intend on nationalizing US natural resources, including oil, to isolate domestic production consumption from global market pricing pressures. Unless the experts are wrong, we have or are reaching peak oil. If the US had some volume potential, I say yes, get more. But it doesn't and all pumping every last barrel of pool oil is going to do is prolong the inevitable for what, a year, two years at current world consumption projections?
If I was an Alaskan resident semi-dependent on the royalty money (I know its not a fortune), a young person in a state with a single major tax revenue source and above normal cost of living or a native Alaskan concerned with here and now, I might feel differently. But I'm not. Alaska's needs don't really affect me, nor can its utilization of natural resources benefit me or a majority of the US public in any tangible manner.
I'm not trying to be abrasive, merely describe my sentiment and the reality of US oil production efforts. We need to bite the energy bullet now.