GIP and stuff

[kellinator]

Look at this awesome icon relevantpink made for me! She picked "shipwrecks" from my interest list and gave me this great multi-purpose icon.

I'm still hunting for my current political icon. I've seen a couple of good candidates over at liberal_icons. I hate to give up the Kerry icon, but I'm reaching the point where I sit there debating over which icon to delete every time I get a new one, and that's just sad. But, you know, you don't want to get rid of the nice ones people made for you... I did delete a Munch icon a while back. See? It has happened.

Oh, forgive me while I indulge in a moment of "told you so":

Drilling approved for Alaska oil reserve

I'm sorry. I'd like to be writing politically insightful things, but right now I'm still trying to figure out what the hell I can do to make a difference.

In the meantime, I'll probably just write fluff.

Comments

[dwivian]

have you ever been to alaska or dealt with people in the oil industry?

Er... yes?

You know, there are lots of oil-rich areas of Alaska being drilled, and there is no reasonable slant approach to the ANWR reserve. So, telling me those people won't be employed is akin to decrying motor cars because carriage manufacturers will go broke. If the skill isn't needed then it isn't needed. Why would one want to manufacture some demand? It's foolish.

Besides, the oil industry is not going to abandon oil search and initial drilling just because ANWR becomes viable -- they still have to stay ahead of the consuption curve, and those people will still have jobs so long as we drive SUVs down here.

And, lots of oil production is WONDERFUL for the people of Alaska, as taxes are parceled out per barrel, and thus each citizen gets a bigger break or incentive (they have an amazing lack of taxes because the oil industry pays most of the cost of government).

I think you might enjoy broadening your views on this issue some more. You came close to seeing the whole picture, which is a good thing.

[alfabettezoupe.livejournal.com]

i see the whole picture just fine :)

i lived in alaska until this may and my ex is a directional wellplanner for bp/halliburton. i've heard all the issues, inside and out.

while i can see the positives in drilling in the anwr, i can also see the minuses.

no, of course the drilling isn't going to stop other places... that's not the point though. unemployment is rampant in anchorage and fairbanks. it's not going to do either of those cities any good to do something that will provide even fewer jobs.

[dwivian]

I don't see that increasing slant drilling in the Prudoe Bay (did I even spell that right?) area would reduce unemployment in Fairbanks or Anchorage. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding, but that looks like one HELL of a commute.

I see the minuses, too -- they are claiming about 10 million barrels, INCLUDING SHALE. WTF?!!? Like BP will mine the shale before moving to land they already own where it's much warmer to do that... So, there isn't a lot of oil to be had, as far as I can tell. But, remove it and some of the shale-oil will leach back down, and maybe we'll get 6-7 million barrels. Even so, that's not a lot, considering our daily demand is 20 million.

And, I'd love to hear more from you on how the industry impacts Alaska, as one day the oil will start being more trouble than it's worth. What do you see happening then?

[alfabettezoupe.livejournal.com]

they do it in shifts. people go up to the slant for several weeks to several months and work for the most part nonstop. then they're home for several weeks and then the cycle starts again :)

that's the other part that really makes no sense. sure it's easier to get at, but the reserve there is small. there's not really enough oil to make it all that worthwhile. however the oil in other areas that is harder to get at is hugely plentiful.

there's enough oil in alaska that we could stop dependency on other countries. the problem is that it's not as neat and clean as the oil from the middle east. therefore it's going to take a ton of refinining to make it useable, but it is there.

i would love to see more companies use parts of alaska for drilling (not the anwr necessarily). people tend to forget that if you chopped the state into 4 equal pieces, the 5th largest state would be texas. it's huge and for the most part uninhabited.

[dwivian]

Cool discussion! I'm going to have to defer to your superior experience on this one.

[dwivian]

Oh, and since you've heard more...

....have you heard any assessment of the likely quality of the oil? I know we love Saudi reserves because it is a premium grade, easily refined. As we barely can manage refining what we get now, would the ANWR oil be more or less dirty? Could we even make use of it, or would we export it like we do much of the Prudhoe Bay oil?

[alfabettezoupe.livejournal.com]

hehehe, answered this in the above before i saw this :)

the oil is good, but it's going to need a lot of refinement to be made useable. you then get into the arena of whether it would be good to set up the refiniries in alaska or not. in all honesty, i don't see that as a bad idea. the state is enormous and in unprotected areas there's more than enough room to build and run things without having any impact on the people within the bigger cities.

[dwivian]

That's what I was afraid of -- I'd heard that we export most of our oil to other countries that can use the lower grade, or afford it, whichever. It seemed odd that we were an oil exporter with our demand, but if the oil is a pain to clean, it makes sense.

I just don't see the refineries being in Alaska, though. A refinery is, necessarily, dirty, and that'd be a real mess for the argument that we try to take care of the environment with the drilling. Houston has the worst air on record, on average, and it's because of all the nearby refineries. I'd hate to see the air in Anchorage destroyed like that. But, building a "clean" refinery is going to be so cost-prohibitive that it won't happen until we're on the downslope of oil availability, I fear.