[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ounds like you don't believe Bush's promise for "clean" extraction (whatever that means).

[JayHMorrison]

Whatever is in ANWR (east of Prudhoe Bay), you can likely double. Remember, the National Petroleum Reserve (NPRA) (west of Prudhoe Bay) is also there. NPRA is estimated to have about the same amount as ANWR. ANWR is 5 to 16 billion in technically recoverable reserves. NPRA is 6 to 13 billion.
The only reason you hear about ANWR so much is because it is closer to the current pipeline infrastructure.
The limitation of Alaska oil is the pipeline. No matter how much oil is there, that pipeline can only pump 2.2 million bpd. Getting an expanded pipeline approved and built would take forever.
If you take the mean estimate for both, that would keep the pipeline full for about 25 years.

[JayHMorrison]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ounds like you don't believe Bush's promise for "clean" extraction (whatever that means).

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JayHMorrison', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ounds like you don't believe Bush's promise for "clean" extraction (whatever that means).

[pip]

What exactly is there terrible environment impact of oil production anyway? I see probably 100 oil wells on my way to work everyday. The corn grows just as tall 15 feet from an oil well as it does 300 feet away.
A drilling rig and associated dirt work takes up maybe 3/4 of an acre. After about six months you can't tell the rig had even been there. It's my opinion the evironmental concerns we hear are just a political move to scare people who know very little about the production of oil. Is there something about Alaskan e&p that is different because of the climate?

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')Is there something about Alaskan e&p that is different because of the climate?

[Leanan]

It's not so much oil production as just the human presence. Environmentalists would protest if someone wanted to put a bank of wind turbines in ANWR, too. You'll need to bring in heavy-duty equipment, which means trees will be cut down and roads and airstrips will be built. Amenities for the people who work there will have to be constructed: housing, shopping, entertainment, etc. Once the infrastructure is there, people will follow. At least, that's what's happened before, and environmentalists believe it will happen again. Once the roads are built, tourists, hotels, snowmobiles, etc. will follow.

[Canuck]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pip', 'W')hat exactly is there terrible environment impact of oil production anyway? I see probably 100 oil wells on my way to work everyday. The corn grows just as tall 15 feet from an oil well as it does 300 feet away.

[pip]

Wow, checked out the link above. The entire area developed in the Prudhoe Bay covers an area of only like 20x50 miles. This is Alaska we're talking about! I'm think I'm less impressed with the evironmental problems than I was before.

[Whitecrab]

According to that documentary:
-Most of Alaska's already being tapped. The environmentalists are saying, "can't we have just this one untapped area for the wilderness?"
-Although ANWR drilling would "only cover a small area," it would infact take lots of small drilling sites all over the place. And if each site needs moving materials and equipment and people to build...
-The Alaska pipeline's maintenance has been slipping to save money. If it ever goes, it's a man-sized hose spitting oil for hours upon hours until they fix it

That said, I'd say tap it, but only when we're well into the peak. All the profits oil and profits go to the government to invest in the best technology we've got.

[stayathomedad]

I was just remembering a page on the web, where some wise guy calculated that all the claimed and believed amount of oil in ANWR is just enough so that AOL can send out those stupid "Try AOL for 1000 Minutes for Free" CD's for 10 (ten) more years. ????[smilie=5censored.gif] ??????Does anyone know where that page is, I cannot find it anymore, even through the search engines.

If you do not know, let me rephrase, how much oil does it take to make one CD?

[backstop]

Just to clarify the issue, can anyone tell me how many days global oil supply is proven in the ANWR ?

Backstop

[nero]

there is no proven oil in ANWR. The emphasis on proven. There is believed to be a possibility of another Prudoe bay's worth of oil in there. Thats about 10 billion barrels of oil. Thats four month worth of world oil consumption or the possibility to delay peak oil by a couple of months.

[backstop]

Thanks Nero. Its not my patch, but if I were an Alaskan I think I'd keep it as it is with a view to a limited but sustainable supply of very fine meat, hides, furs etc.

Backstop

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hats four month worth of world oil consumption or the possibility to delay peak oil by a couple of months.

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat's an invalid way to look at it IMO. There are many areas all over the world that are significantly smaller that we are extracting.

[Whitecrab]

This source is from May 2001: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')url=http://www.oilanalytics.org/policy/policy_bush.html]link[/url][/url]
Myth #1: Oil from ANWR will reduce our vulnerability to OPEC decisions.
The Administration correctly notes that Area 1002 of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska lies above the most promising oil prospect in the nation (Figure P-3). But how much oil is there? To answer this question we must distinguish between the amount of oil physically in place from that which can be extracted under existing technological and economic conditions (Figure P-4). The U.S. Geological Survey's (1998) estimate of the amount of oil-in-place in the 1002 area is 20.7 billion barrels. The amount recoverable with existing technology is 7.7 billion barrels. The economically recoverable amount--that recoverable at $20.00 per barrel--is estimated to be about 3 billion barrels. The technically recoverable oil is the equivalent of 390 days of supply at our current rates of use; the economically recoverable oil is just 152 days of supply.

To what extent can ANWR reduce our reliance on oil imports and diminish OPEC's ability to manipulate oil prices? The Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects world oil production in 2020 to be 112 million billion barrels per day (EIA, 2000). If we decide to develop ANWR today, the EIA projects that by 2020 it could supply 1.4 million barrels per day (Figure P-5). This amounts to about 1 percent of global oil supply. Dust in the winds of the global oil market, and ultimately, a trifling influence on the price of gasoline and home heating oil. This flow of oil would be about 5 and 8 percent, respectively, of the 2020 levels of U.S. oil consumption and oil imports forecast by the EIA.

[stayathomedad]

funny how no one answered my question

[Whitecrab]

That's a shame. It would be quite a political zinger, if we could confirm it was true.

[Ayoob]

Video feeds from Forbes.com: video
Yipes