Guest OP:ED - Energy Cause and Effect

Cause and Effect

            Energy is on the minds of all the people right now. High Gas Prices seems to be the one topic that is hard to understand.  Some people blame the Oil companies for obsession profits.  The issue is actually very broad. Many factors affect the cost of Gas Prices.  The increase in Fuel prices affects many different parts of the economy.  So what are the real facts?

                Total Energy consumption in the US has increased over the past few years.  Currently Crude oil production in the US has dropped since 2004 by 320,000 Barrels per Day.  This means that increase needs of energy usage will have to be made up by foreign sources.  The good news between 2004 and 2007 we have lowered our use of Petroleum by 30,000 Barrels per day.   During this time frame the cost per barrel of Petroleum has doubled. Renewable energy has increased but has not kept pace with the increase in Energy Usage.  To see the numbers look at the link for Energy Consumption.

                Nuclear power to provide Electricity has some interesting problems. Nuclear Power in the USA  Talks about 21% of electricity was from Nuclear Power Back in 1996. Currently our energy needs have increased so the share of power from Nuclear power has dropped to 19.4%.  Extended reactor lifetimes from 40 years to 60 years Means we can still get power from our aging Nuclear Power Plants.  Increased Power Plant Utilization our capacity has been increasing not due to more plants but due to Capacity increased as systems are more efficient.  But we cannot continue to run these plants.  Replacements will eventually be needed.  104 Reactorsprovide ~20% of our electrical energy needs.

                As Demands for Energy Consumption increase we see two areas where supply from inside the USA have decreased or will decrease in the coming years.  Our Government regulations are affecting both of these declines. Congress has prevented any oil exploration in large areas known to have oil. Democrats keep blocking drilling off shore or ANWAR. So we will see decline in Oil production inside the Continental USA. The only bright side is North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana have commenced drilling there oil.   These lands are not controlled by the Federal Government.  Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., has introduced a bill in Congress that would prevent oil and gas drilling on 1.2 million acres in the Wyoming Range.   This is taking place when identifying a large area that has oil production range that goes from Canada into South Dakota.  Lots of drilling is taking place in Wyoming but preventing any explorations in over a Million acres does not help meet our energy needs. 

                Economy is hurt by the rising costs for energy.  As we spend more money to fuel our cars means fewer purchases in other areas of the Economy. It affects jobs. Why has the number of jobs in the US dropped?  We are seeing the affect as a slowing economy. Slowing due to less money available as Energy needs increase a bigger bite out of the pocket books.  This has cause higher costs for bringing food to the local Food Chains. These costs cause the cost of Food and Other daily needs to also increase.  This also takes a bigger bite out of our personal budgets.  This will cause a loss of tax revenue to local and Federal levels.  As demands for even more money for growing all levels of Government means there is a demand for higher taxes, which in turn will cause the economy to further slow because the consumers have less money to pay for other than basic necessities.   Congress wants to increase taxes on the oil companies.  This will cause increase in costs for Gas which will further slow the economy.  The Cause and Effect more taxes less money for the oil companies have available for drilling and exploration.  Making it more expensive and take longer to find new oil supplies. This may also stop drilling for Oil in the US because of the higher taxes. Companies have to make a profit. And if it is cheaper to drill in other countries what is the incentive to drill in the US.

                Immigration is another factor. Why do we have so many illegal aliens within this country? Some Estimates say 12 Million yet other estimates say it could be as high as 20 Million. Who knows for sure? If we make them all Citizens and they are allowed to bring in their extended Families does that mean to our energy needs if we add nearly 100 million more people to our population.  That is a very large influx of people into the US and would have a devastating effect on our infrastructure. Not only straining our Energy needs but government programs to help low income people.  This will also mean demands for more tax dollars. The economy could not handle such a large change in Population and people will be fighting for use the scarce energy availability. The same government officials that block energy independents also want unlimited immigration.  Does that make sense?  We need to use less energy yet we want to greatly increase the Population a total mixture that can be a disaster to our economy and our current standard of living.

                Government actions to prevent energy independence because of special interests will continue to cause the standard of living to drop.  I found one site very interesting on what thecost for energy has done in the past 28 years a number of good charts covering energy usage and availability.  It is an eye opener.  Consumption and Availability of energy needs past and future has a very bleak view.  And the more regulations move more jobs overseas.  Why do we not build and develop energy needs here in the US.  It means more jobs for Americans. The US Government needs to fight for more exploration, more development and Building Nuclear power plants. Each Nuclear power plant built could mean less coal burning to provide Electricity. Which is better burn coal or use Nuclear power that has no CO2 production?  What is the future you want for this country?  We have to start today to supply needs of the future.  

Alternative energy supplies are not efficient nor will they pick up the energy shortages that we face in the next few decades. Unless you want to start taking national forests property to cut down the trees in hundreds of square miles to build wind and solar power plants to just replace our current nuclear power plants.  So do you want 33 square miles for solar panels to replace one Nuclear power plant?  Cause and effect demands of various groups keep things in a grid lock.  Where will we be in 10 years if the current lack of real energy reform continues to happen? Cost of basic energy needs will continue to grow every year taking a large bit out each families budget.

 

David 

Bellevue, WA

ANWR: Things We Need to Know

Picture courtesy of Arctic Power

For more information: http://www.anwr.org/

History

1960 Arctic National Wildlife Range – 8 million acres original

1964 Wilderness Act –defines “wilderness”, “refuge” terms = no development allowed

1977 Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) comes online

1980 ANILCA –Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act - expanded ANWR.

      8 million acres “wilderness” area

      9 million acres “refuge” area

      1.5million – “10-02” area (8% of total ANWR) “for the study of oil & gas      exploration”

      (ANWR total area now 19.5 million acres)   

1983-85 – 2D seismic survey done of 10-02 Area (very outdated technology)

1995 – Clinton vetoes Balanced Budget Act –included successful Congressional ANWR  vote (ANWR would be producing today if not vetoed)

1998- USGS releases ANWR report (based on 2-D seismic)

5.7mb (95%)  10.3mb(mean)  16mb(5%) @ $24pb

                  @ 10.3mb = 1-1.5mbd = 30 years.

Based on an assumed recovery:

Technical - 37% now 65% Economic- $30pb<> 

@10.3bb X $90pb = $968,200,000,000

2005- USGS updates ANWR report –acknowledges technological production advances /  economics would push 1998 report recoverable reserves estimates up.

2007 Prudhoe Bay pumps 15 billionth barrel of oil! – (1975 original estimates 4-9bbls)  

ANWR: Things We Need to Know

Interesting tid bits ...... 

.....Half of our annual national debt is caused by the importation price of petroleum. The OMB says over 10% of that could be wiped out by ANWR oil! 

..... Over 100 Wildlife Refuges across the nation have oil and gas wells on them currently, over 47 of them are active.

..... The Audobon Society owned and operated oil and gas wells on the Ranier Wildlife Refuge in Lousiana and a wildlife refuge in Michigan for over 40 years; 

..... plus during Senate and House hearings of on the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in 1972-3, Greenpeace and Sierra Club biologists testified before Congress to route the pipeline due east through the 10-02 Area as "it had no redeeming environmental value nor scenic beauty" associated with it and would not disrupt the caribou they stated who would not have to cross it.

ANWR Bills on the Books

This information came via email from Adrian Herrera, our special guest on yesterday's Do The Right Thing Radio show. Good news for those who enjoyed Adrian's appearance, he will be on with us again next Monday at 6:00 pm eastern. 

Here is a link to yesterday's show: 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cyberpastor/va/2008/06/02/do-the-right-thing-radio

The picture is courtesy Arctic Power.

ANWR BILLS ON THE BOOKS 

Here are a collection of the texts of bills pending on ANWR in the US Congress.  

1) American Made Energy Act HR5437 by Rep. Nunes (CA-R) and Rep Ross (AR-D-bluedog)  This was the first serious bill introduced this year and is a copy of former Rep. Pombo's bill from 2006.  In my opinion, it is one of the best bill introduced on the subject and gives everyone a piece of the pie, using ANWR taxes (@$289 billion) to fund all form of alternative energy and cleaner conventional energy sources.  This bill is the only bill that puts physical dollars into average citizens pockets by giving tax breaks directly to citizens who purchase or use renewable energies and alternative energy development.  Everyone wins with this bill.

2)  American Independence and Security Act  S. 2758  by Sen. Murkowski (AK-R) and Sen. Stevens (AK-R).  Money used for Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Mothers with Children with Nutritional Needs program.  This bill is based upon the price of oil reaching $125 dollar per barrel for 5 days or more

3)  American Independence and Price Reduction Act HR6071 Rep Young (AK-R) and Rep Bartlett (MD-R)  Our newest and greatest hope this summer!  This bill was introduced last week and will be the focus of the new ANWR battle in the House.  Roscoe Bartlett , a strong anti-ANWR foe, was first to fold and now is cosponsoring the bill.  Representative Walsh of New York is another convert.  Others are hoped to follow. This is the bill to promote all forms of energy with the creation of an Alternative and Renewable energy trust fund.  This fund similar to HR5437 will benefit the creation and usage of alternative renewable energies to find a way forward away from oil.  The fund will help pay for the alternative energy projects, not paid for in the Energy Policy Act of 2005.  

All these bills are pending , but more are needed as they are burried in committee by leadership.  The goal is to shame the leadership into doing something. ANWR and OCS amendments need to be introduced to other bills that will make it to the floor.  Debate time is needed and that is hard to come by when one doesn't control the clock.  

A good bullet to use on the podium is to list these three bills off and say, "these bills sit in Congress and are the solution to our energy needs and rather than do something about it THE LEADERSHIP OF CONGRESS UNDER THE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI IS DOING NOTHING!  These bills need to be pushed, the solution is there.  We need to make that solution happen.....

ANWR contains up to 42 BILLION BARRELS OF OIL , THE AMERICAN OCS CONTAINS 102 BILLION BARRELS.   WE ARE SITTING ON TOP THE SOLUTION AND DOING NOTHING ABOUT IT.

We are expecting more amendments to be introduced and hoping particularly these happen in the Senate where it is easier to get them to the floor..

You need debate time and then that will lead to a vote.  At the moment neither is happening.... we only have a short window to work with now and all pressure must be put on.

all the best

happy reading.

Please feel free to use this information and/or picture but please give credit to Arctic Power. 

The goal is not to sit on the information but to get it out to as many as possible, and if it's not too much trouble, let me know your blog so that I can help keep Adrian informed of how much his info is being distributed. - Cyber Pastor

Email from Adrian Herrera

This is an email where Mr. Herrera and I are making plans to have some guest posts take place. As a teaser and to get this info out, I'm posting it here - keeping in mind that this wasn't meant as a post but a personal email. I've deleted some of the beginning that wasn't needed.

I'm excited about having this gentleman share with us in the near future!

Also enjoy the picture of the caribou and the "no impact" displayed. 

CP

So FYI on this  Sen McConnell (R-KY) has introduced an ANWR amendment into the Senate Wednesday.  That makes two in the Senate and one in the House.  Thats a lot of political pressure to do something.  Despite this the tea leaves at the moment are still not talking to me. The leadership in Congress is too strong against this.  But it is an avenue to operate on and that is what we need to exploit.  The fact that the answers ARE on the House and Senate floors.  Thats what matters.  The press is also listening and reporting for once which is good.  See my oscar award winning (well ok maybe not) preformance on CNBC .  

We are working with the CORE people to go to Alaska.  The polar bear is about to be listed on May 15th by DOI and that will be the first time an animal with an increasing population has been listed and the first time an animals population will be directly linked to global temperature.  This is nothing more than a smoke screen to allow litigation against the industry in ANWR and across the Arctic.  The science on this one is very bogus and politically motivated.  CORE, The State of Alaska and most probably the Native Corporations (particularly ASRC) will sue the feds starting June over this.  It is bad news all around really, no one will win.  At any rate we are helping with logistics.  I will get to typing now and try and send you some decent copy.  All the best

Sincerely,

Adrian

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=725912806  

Adrian Herrera

Arctic Power 

Latest From Adrian Herrera

Hi Pastor Boston,

I have been on the phone with Congress of Racial Equality folks about their Chairman Roy Innis's speeches on energy in America. I thought it would be a good thing for you to have a listen to the man and see what you think.

There is a video of him speaking at
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/index.php?page=blog&state=wi

Another site and person you should know is Alan Caruba who runs a blog
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2008/03/cold-north-pole-cold-south-pole.html

which is good on energy and the things we believe in. Allan also is a prolific writer of nationally syndicated opinion pieces on energy. He is worth your while talking to if you want.

Anyway, I would like to stay in touch with you to keep you informed on the issue and any events that are of significance for you to present to your readers.

All the best for you
Sincerely,

Adrian

Special Guest Comment

The comments below are from Adrian Herrera about NJ's post on ANWR. We are honored to have him stop by and make comments, and hope to have more from him in the future:


Good Job NJ! As Alaska's representative in Washington DC for Arctic Power, the ANWR lobby group, I am heartened to read your good words. I would like to plug our web site www.anwr.org which lists the current legislation in Congress to open the 10-02 Area.

I hope you all write or phone your congressmen/woman in support of the bills in the House and Senate (American Made Energy Act).

About the 2000 acres and the last comment by Halle Burton. It is understood, but not written that the "2000 acre" provision in ANWR legislation includes the surface footprint of the gravel pads where infrastructure would stand.

What is not known, nor written is whether the 2000 acres will include roads or pipeline rights-of-way (elevated). Also what is not known is if the 2000 acres will apply to the Native lands of Kaktovik, which are legally private and thus can be considered outside the authority of federal control.

There is a good legal case to argue that although the native lands are to be developed in tandem with federal lands under the Chandler Lake agreement, the 2000 acre clause may not apply to them. That is a question for the courts.

These issues will not be part of any legislation for ANWR, but will be worked out by the DoI after legislation is approved. It is unlikely however that this will be an issue. Only two areas have been detected for hydrocarbon plays in the 10-02.

One, in the southwest and another in the northeast corner. As the saying goes, oil is where you find it. At roughly a billion dollars a well pad, increasing by size, the footprint will be kept to a minimum regardless of the law, most likely it will be smaller than 2000 acres and could possibly not use roads at all. Alpine field to the west of Prudhoe is a good example of the trend in footprint size and infrastructure/technology.

It is estimated that 10-02 infrastructure will be more than 60% smaller than Prudhoe's. And no, the maze of roads and 1920s oil derricks shown by green propaganda you reference is total nonsense. Laughable to any geologist or engineer. Over 2/3rds of the 10-02 shows little or no sign of hydrocarbon plays. Dishonest propaganda at best in my view.

FYI: Pipelines already exist to within 5 miles of the 10-02 border to Badami and up and coming Point Thompson fields and a majority of the main processing infrastructure already exists at Prudhoe leaving only minimal infrastructure needed in the 10-02.

Last point, the reason NPR-A is being accessed is because all the proper environmental impact statements have been filed and approved with the EPA, the BLM, MMS, USGS and USFWS have all given their approval, as has the North Slope Borough.

America is desperate for oil; the Trans-Alaska Pipeline is less than half full; NPR stands for National Petroleum Reserve....duhh - thats its purpose. It is irrelevant if the 10-02 is open or closed for the State and Feds and oil industry to explore NPR-A. The fact is, we have the oil and technology to g (comment cut off due to length - CP)

Why a Tree Hugger Like Me Thinks the US Should Drill in ANWR

by NJ_GOP

I gave a speech yesterday, and the topic was about Drilling in ANWR. Even the Dems in the room said they were impressed!

Keep in mind these are speech notes and I didn't thoroughly check spelling / grammar / sentence fragments!!! So unlike me!

Oil –

What did you pay for gas this week? We are up to $3.05 per gallon and they are paying $3.25 in Pa. (where they have to actually get OUT of the car and pump it themselves!!!!)

Speech title: Why a tree hugger like me thinks the US should drill in ANWR

ANWR stands for Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. It covers an area about the size of the of SC about 19+ million acres. Many environmentalists are fiercely opposed to drilling for oil there, as I once was. Here’s a paragraph from a column of the Minneapolis Star tribune dated march 2000

“…should Americans be willing to scatter oil wells across the last pristine sector of Alaska’s north coast, a fragile landscape of harsh beauty and critical significance to hundreds of species in the arctic ecosystem, one of the last big places on the continent where human presence is undetectable? If so, perhaps we should prepare for the post-petroleum era by planning to build hydroelectric dams in the Grand Canyon and to log the Boundary Waters Canoe Area for stove wood.”

1. ENVIRONMENT

a. SPACE USED

Sounds like a reasonable argument except for some pesky facts that get in the way. While The area that will be explored for possible oil covers about 1.5 Million acres or about 8% of the reserve, the actual drilling of the oil itself, once oil is located, will be approximately 2000 acres – not “oil wells scattered across the Alaska coast”. To put that in perspective, it’s an area about the size of Newark Airport. I even read one analogy that said that if ANWR were a football field, the area for oil drilling would be a Tic Tac.

b. IMPACT ON ANIMALS/PLANTS MINIMIZED THROUGH TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVITY

c. Environmentalists say that we would be harming a pristine wilderness. And while I’m the first to raise an eyebrow at the ability of the government to restrict itself once it has a pass…I have to look at the situation with some objectivity

I am an environmentalist… and when you take into consideration the technological advances engineers have made in this area it is remarkable how low, some even say non existent, the impact to the environment will be.. Today’s technology can produce oil in far less space than in the past, and with barely any impact to the environment. They’ve even come up with a plan to build the roads out of ice – so that there will be no evidence of any road once it melts. And Alaskan oil is shipped via pipeline; there are plans to build additional pipelines to US markets if the ban is lifted.

d. NOT EXACTLY PRISTINE

There are humans living there currently, some Alaskan natives; and the area is only about 55 miles from the existing Prudhoe Bay Oil field which currently supplies us with between 8 - 25% our oil.

2. IS IT WORTH IT?

a. THERES A BUNCH OF OIL THERE

The untapped obtainable oil in ANWR Some estimates of obtainable oil are start at about 11 billion gallons and provide up to 50 years supply 19 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

b. IS A BUNCH OF OIL A GOOD THING?

Some say this will just continue our dependence on oil, when we should be seeking alternatives like ethanol. I have nothing against Ethanol, except that it is made from corn, which is being farmed on land that used to grow food, and that corn has to be shipped by truck to be made into gas, and so far has not proven to help the cost of fuel nor has it proven to be any kinder to the environment (was that even a claim? I seem to remember ethanol being some sort of “green” solution. So the cost of corn has risen dramatically, the cost of other food has risen, not that I have anything against farmers turning a profit but the whole ethanol thing has been pushed on us with not a single legislator opposing it even though it appears to be ineffective.

c. DEPENDENCY ON FOREIGNERS

ANWR is the logical solution to our dependency on foreign oil. When President Bush recently asked OPEC for the price in oil to be lowered he was told “hmmmm --- NO” … the message is we are at their mercy and there isn’t a single thing we can do about it.

DIGGING IN

d. POLITICAL

Environmentalists have become so attached to this issue which has become political for them. Think about it, if the major Greenie groups change their stand their contributors could feel their money was wasted and these groups would lose credibility and appear to be siding with the “big polluters”.

e. EMOTIONAL

I get it why the environmentalists don’t want drilling,. Like the message from the column earlier, they think that if we compromise our national wildlife refuge we are on a slippery slope. But legislators can create boundaries that would prevent abuses; and like it or not, our society depends on oil until we can, over time, develop more efficient ways to live in the 21st century. I just read about a car that runs on compressed air. The prototype is amazing. Americans will invent their way out of this crisis eventually, but we need solutions now, solutions that will significantly reduce our dependency on foreign governments and that will ease the economic burden of hard working people who want to heat their homes and travel to and from work each day.

CONCLUSION:

The reality is that today, right now, if we do not produce our own oil we need to buy it from someone else,

TODAY congress will not allow any drilling on Lake Erie, but Canada is drilling for Oil and natural gas in the same Lake Erie. Today congress will not allow any new off shore drilling but the Cubans and Venezuelans and China are drilling in the same waters – and they do not have the same strict environmental standards that we do.

the Gulf Stream flows north folks.

Buying foreign oil takes any environmental control over that drilling or shipping completely out of our hands. I trust American Engineers to take better care of the environment than foreign countries. And honestly, you have the “greenie groups” to thank for that level of corporate care.

As tree hugger, I see the best solution as one that we as Americans can control, and ANWR seems like the clear decision here. Who knows? Maybe if we had started drilling back in 2000 when the article I quoted was written we might not be paying $3.05 at the pump this morning.