Oh, and that's in 2025. Here's some analysis using the Department of Energy's "Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge" (May 2008)
The opening of the ANWR 1002 Area to oil and natural gas development is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018. In the mean ANWR oil resource case, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR reaches 780,000 barrels per day in 2027 and then declines to 710,000 barrels per day in 2030.
Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United States. The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows: a reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case.
The median case suggests the effect on gasoline prices in 2025 will be $0.02 a gallon. The immediate effect will be zero as we’ll have to wait a decade to see any oil from ANWR. (Link)
I understand it makes good politics to respond to high gas prices by claiming new exploration will take care of the high price of gas and those damn Democrats are getting in the way of cheap gas for everybody. But any oil still to be found and pumped is many years away, would be bound for the global marketplace, and sell at market pricing. (Do you really think American oil companies are going to give U.S. customers a "sweet deal" when they can sell it at global pricing on the open market?)
I want to know more about Oil 2.0 products. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Comments
Here's the thing: I'd rather that money go to American companies, instead of to those radical anti-Americanists seeking to decapitate every non-believer.
And who knows, we may just be able to maintain some leverage against any embargoes those countries may be tempted to try out on us.
Not only that, but its a very small price to pay - ANWR is not as big as the environmentalist lobby would have you believe.
Drilling in ANWR will not prevent oil excreting bugs from appearing -- if they are ever going to appear.
Mike, I don't think you understand just how little oil is available in ANWR. Let's put this in perspective... We consume 20 million barrels of oil a day, of that, around 15 million is imported. Minus the 1.5 million we get from Canada, that leaves us vulnerable to the tune of 13.5 million from potentially hostile sources. 710,000 barrels is not going to give us any leverage if we faced another embargo.
The ONLY way to ensure our immunity to future embargoes and being held hostage by anti-american radicals is to break our oil habit. There is no other option. Any other option is an illusion, a gimmick, like the gas tax holiday. It sounds good, but it won't achieve anything of real substance.
We have to get out of our cars and into electric cars. That's the only option. These ideas about domestic oil production are like suggesting band aids for a bullet wound in the big picture of things. We need to grow a pair as a nation and make the difficult transition that needs to be made to reliance on a different source of energy. That's what we should be spending money on, not trying to cling to the glory days of oil. It's over now, global trade has made it so that the days of cheap oil are gone forever. Let's accept it and move forward, demanding real substantial solutions, and not these cheap two bit political gimmicks.
Dah...I think we should not drill anywhere then....that seems to be working great!! Huh, huh,...how about we just count on hope... That would be a big change...What a bunch of idiots...
All these genius's can tell you how much a gallon it won't help 15 or 20 years from now ...too bad they couldn't forsee how much it's gone up in the last 15 or 20 months!!!
Benjamin, where is this electricity, produced in the quantities sufficient enough to sustain current vehicle needs going to be produced? Wind mills -- nope, those kill the birds. Uh, hydroelectric -- uh, no, those kill the fish. Nuclear -- no way! that kills everybody!
Grow a pair and make the difficult transition to electric? Difficult? Which one of my four children shouldn't eat today so I can have a shiney little electric car in the drive-way. I still have $20,000 to pay on my 2007 mini-van. With the fuel prices, skyhigh because of our current energy policies, I can barely afford my current payments! Where should I come up with more money to buy an even more expensive electric car -- that, by the way, needs to seat my family of 6?
I truly recognize the need for alternative fuels and vehicles, and modest conservation. I've even seen that Honda is going to begin mass production of hydrogen cars. Good for them. I live in Sequim, though. Where is my local fueling station? Closest one is in Seattle, somewhere.
Like it or not, we are still stuck with oil while we are in the development stage, then the transisition stage to alternative fuels. So, yes, while we still need it, we need to drill for it so hostile nations of the world can't be slinging us up by that "pair" your so fond of. Not just ANWR, but in the reserves of Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, etc. and off shore. The time will come, and it may be sooner than we think, that alternative feuls and transportation become an economic possibility. In the meanwhile, two cents from here, two cents from there, two cents from another field...after awhile those pennies do add up to real savings. And those savings mean all of my kids get the some luxuries...like food.
I grew up in Alaska and have many relatives there. ANWR is an arctic wasteland. Nothing is there. There has been very little oil spilled in Alaska (except for the Exxon Valdez). There is very little risk now in Prince William Sound because now there are tug boats guiding every tanker in and out along with back-up emergency vessels on standby. So there is very little risk of environmental damage. The project will help Alaskans through royalty revenue, Western oil companies through increased profits (yes profits are good for anyone who owns stock which is almost every mutual fund in almost everyone's retirement portfolio) plus it will provide good paying jobs to Americans. Better that than that giving the money to OPEC.
I always question any "official calculation" from our government. I wonder if they've calculated how much gas will go up if we don't drill for more oil! If they just understood basic economics (supply and demand) the answer is simple. Drill, drill and drill. When technology catches up and electric cars are cheap, then we will drive them and leave gas powered stuff behind. But for now, drill!!!!!!
It is imperative we open ANWR. It needs to be done immediately. By opening ANWR we send a clear signal to OPEC… we don’t need them as much as they think we do. Do not let Russia take our oil or Canada…. They can do that with the technology now being used and that would just be wrong…
I live in Alaska, never been to ANWR but then again neither have any of the environmentalists or the hypnotized public that speak their canned green mantra. We are not your national park. WE should be allowed to develop our natural resources for our state and for our nation. ANWR is not the pristine park you think it is and we are very capable of monitoring and taking care of our state.
Alaska is a frontrunner in looking at alternative sources. We are utilizing and researching wind power, geo thermal power using the hot springs, hydro, coal and yes solar power. We need to look at alternative fuel sources but until then we need fuel for heat and vehicles.
The environmentalists fly all over our great nation and world crying their cry. Maybe they should walk from venue to venue; of course up here they will need to run should one of those pristine bears start chasing them!
Open ANWR now…no more delays!
Christine - I don't where you come from or what your attitude problem regarding windmills, hydro, and nuclear are based on, but where I live we have numerous wind farms, no hydro we have no major rivers, and there's a nuclear plant about 3 hours away. We also have coal burning plants. In case you didn't know this, America has some of the largest coal reserve in the world, so generating electricity is actually trivial for us. We have numerous possibilities there.
As for this: "Which one of my four children shouldn't eat today so I can have a shiney little electric car in the drive-way. I still have $20,000 to pay on my 2007 mini-van. With the fuel prices, skyhigh because of our current energy policies, I can barely afford my current payments! Where should I come up with more money to buy an even more expensive electric car -- that, by the way, needs to seat my family of 6?"
I have to ask you what your point is? Drilling isn't going to help anyone for 10 years. And in those 10 years, India and China will likely have doubled at the very least, their oil consumption, significantly adding to the market price per barrel. What do you think is going to happen tomorrow if we say "open an ANWR", what, you think oil is going to go back to 30 bucks a barrel and gas is going to drop back to a 1.50? It's not going to happen. Sorry, it's not. You and everyone else clinging to this are clinging to false hope that is not based on reality or logic or reason.
I have kids too, times are tough all over. But we have an obligation to our kids to ENSURE the future security of the American way of life. Like it or not, that requires YOU giving up YOUR gasoline powered car or finding a way to run it on water because there isn't enough oil in the world to bring back the days of cheap oil now that China and India have joined the industrialized nations party. So you can cling to this false hope, but it isn't going to change anything. And you whining about it and complaining about your car bill doesn't change the painful realty you're going to have to face.
And really, you talk about your kids, what about what you're doing by supporting the complete depletion of our oil reserves in the name of your economic hardship? As long as it's cheap and convenient for you in the present, too bad for your kids in the future right? Come on. Give a damn about their future. You owe them that.
The people wanting to drill seem to have the same myopic vision that a hard drug addict has, when it comes to oil. They're willing to deplete our reserves down to nothing in the name of that quick fix they want, in the same way that a drug addict will sell off their stuff to get their quick fix. No thought given to tomorrow at all, just "me me me" in the "now now now".
It never dawns on them that they would be a lot happier and healthier in the long run if they kicked the habit, even if it means spending a lot more money up front for rehab. They're never short on poor me excuses as to why they don't do what's necessary to kick the habit.
Benjamin, your blathering about just "kicking the habit" is rather simplistic, as if we could just turn off the spigot and everything would be fine and dandy. The REAL myopic people are the ones who think that we can just stop using fossil fuels at the snap of a finger. Fact of the matter is that wind and solar are NOT going to provide more than 1-2% of our power needs for a long time to come, fuel cells and storage batteries still need a lot of development to be feasible, and the MOST workable non-fossil-fuel alternative (nuclear) was killed off by the eco-retards a quarter of a century ago. This economy runs on energy - we need gas and oil for our cars, aircraft, railroads, and trucks. Holding hands and "hoping" for a workable alternative to fall in our lap is a pretty pathetic approach to long-term planning. We need oil, we have it in the ground, let's drill and refine it for use NOW while we come up with SENSIBLE plans (i.e. based on nuclear energy) for down the road.
The Arctic Wildlife National Refuge (commonly disparaged as ANWR) is not a wasteland. It is a wildlife sanctuary that is a truly rare jewel. I know this because I took the time to visit and photograph this amazing place. What most fail to realize is that oil companies already have gained numerous leases to drill in this fragile ecosystem. Most recently Alaska sold off drilling rights offshore from the Arctic Refuge enabling multinational corporations the ability drill for more oil. This was only last year.
The truth of the matter is that as soon as the general population feels a squeeze in energy prices oil companies and their puppet senators and congressmen exploit the fear of the public to gain access to more drilling rights. The concept that this area is devoid of life or is a wasteland is the definition of deceptive. This land is like no other and contains the breeding ground of North America's last and greatest wild herding animal the Caribou not to mention that the majority of North Americas migratory birds also use this land to breed.
I welcome people to educate themselves to what is really in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by viewing recent photos of this amazing location. Drilling in the Arctic Refuge would be no less a travesty if we let Exxon drill in Yosemite valley or Yellowstone.
<a href="http://www.jmg-galleries.com/blog/category/photography/locations/alaska/arctic-refuge/">Photos and Articles</a>, <a href="http://www.jmg-galleries.com/gallery/set.php/72157594358474158/page1/">more photos</a> and <a href="http://www.jmg-galleries.com">more</a>.
Jim Goldstein: I was born and raised in Fairbanks. I know that land up there. It is a WASTELAND. Nobody goes there in the summer because there is nothing but muskeg and mosquitoes. How much time did you really spend there before you couldn't stand getting bitten? One day, two days? I know you didn't visit in the winter because it is twenty below zero on a warm day!
Drilling in that area will not harm the wild life. The footprint would be minuscule compared to the vast size of the place. Comparing this to Yosemite or Yellowstone is just plan idiotic. Take your camera and go to some of the other vast areas of Alaska that look just like it but are already in Federal parks and wildlife refuges like Denali or Wrangell St. Elias National Parks. There is plenty of land that is already off limits. This creates a tough situation for Alaskans who depend on natural resources for their livelihoods. I think that is more important than keeping your photo backdrops free of human development!
I enjoy reading these comments from Alaskans who think that mosquitoes and a lack of buildings makes a place a "wasteland." No, that makes it a wilderness.
John said: "This creates a tough situation for Alaskans who depend on natural resources for their livelihoods."
We all know that this is code for "Alaskans who depend on their oil welfare payments." Join the rest of the world and work for your money. Corrupt Alaskans with their corrupt senators don't deserve any more welfare from the rest of the country.
That said, it is important to get the facts right. $0.75 per barrel does not equal two cents a gallon. That's because it is $0.75 per barrel of *oil*, whereas we care about the price per gallon of *refined gasoline*. It takes several gallons of oil to make one gallon of gas, so you can't just divide by 31.
Slim: Don't insult Alaskans simply because they actually work hard for a living and produce something that is needed in an inhospitable environment. You won't see Arabs, Russians, Canadians or even Brazilians complain about exploiting their natural resources. They know that society as whole BENEFITS from it. Why shouldn't U.S. citizens (yes Alaska is part of the USA last I checked) benefit? If you want your cut of the "welfare" then maybe you might be man enough to live in Alaska and work for it!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!