adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : Show and tell on ANWR

Alaska Politics Blog

This is the place to talk about Alaska politics -- state, local, national. Public life in the Last Frontier has probably never been more interesting than right now -- the governor as candidate for vice president, the broad and still-evolving corruption investigation, a big election, powerful members of Congress under scrutiny, and the usual hardball Alaska politics. Come here for news, tidbits and information, and join the discussion. Keep your comments civil and on point. Avoid personal attacks. Do not use profanity. Posts that violate the Terms of Use will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned.

Contributors

Erika Bolstad

Erika Bolstad covers Alaska issues, including the congressional delegation, from Washington, D.C., for McClatchy Newspapers. Before joining the bureau in 2007, she spent seven years as a reporter at the Miami Herald, where she covered politics, government and the state legislature. E-mail Erika at ebolstad@adn.com.

Sean Cockerham

Sean Cockerham writes about Alaska state politics. He spent three years based in Juneau for the ADN before joining the Tacoma News-Tribune to write about Washington state politics. He went to Iraq twice for the News Tribune, and previously wrote about Alaska government and politics for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. E-mail Sean at scockerham@adn.com

Kyle Hopkins

Kyle Hopkins covers politics and other stories for the ADN. He covered the 2006 campaign for governor, has blogged extensively about Alaska politics, covered Anchorage city government and was a reporter based in the Mat-Su. He grew up in Southeast Alaska and previously was a reporter at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and Anchorage Press. E-mail Kyle at khopkins@adn.com

Features

2008 Election

At one point the races with Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young promised to be the highest-profile campaigns in Alaska history.

SECTION

Palin coverage

The nation was captivated by Sarah Palin's run to the White House, and now Alaska awaits the return of their governor.

Photo galleries

Reader-submitted Palin photos

SECTION

Alaska political corruption

The FBI raided state legislatures offices in Aug. 2006, and the fallout since has been epic in Alaska's political world.

Show and tell on ANWR

Posted by Alaska_Politics

Posted: July 22, 2008 - 10:34 am

From Erika Bolstad in Washington D.C. --
House Republicans in front of the pipeline on their visit to the North Slope and ANWR

The House GOP tour of the Arctic plain is over, and the ten Republicans who made the trek, led by Rep. John Boehner, the House minority leader, recapped their journey this morning. Seemed a little like show-and-tell, with each member of the class playing their part. (There's even a class picture!) More after the jump.

As cheerleader, Rep. Michele Bachman, R-Minn., a self-described "hardy girl from Minnesota," said she was left with the impression that ANWR is a cold, dark snowy place: "I was wearing my down-filled parka with Gore-tex. This is an area that nine months of the year, is under snow and ice. And three months of the year, is under complete darkness. It's a perfect area to drill."

As teacher's pet, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., who thanked Boehner for a "great educational trip.": McCarthy said he learned that drilling technology has improved to the point that the footprint of the drilling pads is smaller than it was in the 1970s. "When you talk about an environmentally friendly manner, in all aspects, they're showing the ability to do it," he said.

And as the stick-to-the message class president, Boehner, R-Ohio:

When asked whether it was unrealistic to believe that drilling in ANWR would bring down short-term prices: "We all know that we need to conserve more energy. We need biofuels, we need the development of alternative sources of energy, we need nuclear energy. And, over the next 10, 20, 30 years, we're going to need to produce some more American-made oil and gas."

When asked whether some places should be set aside as special, here's what Boehner said: "We flew over this entire area. "Whether it was the NPRA area, on the west, or the whole Prudhoe Bay are in the middle, and then ANWR on the eastern side of the slope. It's all the same terrain. There is absolutely no difference. We saw more wildlife in the NPRA than we saw anywhere else. And so, the fact is, we can drill there in an environmentally sound way."

And when asked why, unlike their Senate Republican counterparts, they continue to press for drilling in ANWR, here's what he said: "We're for all of the above. We've made it perfectly clear that we need conservation, we need biofuels, we need alternative sources of energy, we need nuclear and we need more oil and gas production...we need to explore all those areas where there are substantial deposits of oil and gas."

login or register to post comments

10 July 22, 2008 - 4:29pm | relyk

LOL

Yep I excel in many areas.

I just said I was an engineer. But I do want a job with an oil company and or mining company. Rather do infrastructure forever but when the guys digging the holes are making more than the guys telling them where how and why to dig the wholes I decided I wanted to do something where I'd get mine too.

I did write a report on Global Warming once though. Here a interesting bit of info. The temperature of phoenix during the night is around 90 say, 10 miles away in the desert it is 70. Guess where the temperature is measured. At the airport on top of a several foot thick slab of concrete that's been soaking up heat all day. What probaly 10-20% of cities are located in desert environments. Tell me that won't scew some statistical data. Also did u know it snowed on Pioneer Peak today.

9 July 22, 2008 - 4:15pm | relyk

The north slope coast goes from Barrow to the Canadian border ANWR begins just past Prudhoe which is smack in the middle. That means 50% is not open to development. There is 10 billion barrels of oil in ANWR whether the other 99.9% is open to development I want them to open ANWR were the oil is concentrated into a small area making development economical. Most bang for the buck. Or in this case environmental impact.

July 25, 2008 - 3:09pm | sewolf

There is no public data which confirms that there is any oil in ANWR. Only USGS estimates.

Chevron and BP who shared the Kaktovik well have those results, and aren't publicly talking.

Have you ever heard of Mukluk?

8 July 22, 2008 - 4:08pm | relyk

KTUU

Currently it is 36 degrees in Barrow. Not a big deal what the temp was though.
I'd bet they were freezing their ***es off to take that shot, trying to look tough. I think all the politicians should visit the area though a picture is worth a thousand words. If it is beautiful it will never pass, if it is cold and desolate then maybe it will pass.

7 July 22, 2008 - 3:49pm | relyk

U have friends?

What friends do u have in ANWR wearing T-shirts come on dude. You can't wear a t-shirt in Anchorage right now it's so cold. Not to mention it could have been early morning or late evening in that picture and blowing 10-20, if they were wearing parka's yeah but a light jacket. The pipeline does run very near the 10-02 area, if the picture was of anwr it would just be them and flat tundra behind them, not an exciting picture.

July 22, 2008 - 3:59pm | ak_iceman2003

It will be 50 in Barrow

It will be 50 in Barrow this week -- look it up.

July 22, 2008 - 4:17pm | lewiserhart

Not really

Algore told me it would 80 plus and under water. Where is my water ski.

July 22, 2008 - 4:20pm | ak_iceman2003

Ahh... so now you're a

Ahh... so now you're a climatologist as well as a miner and oil worker.

6 July 22, 2008 - 3:24pm | relyk

Can't wait

It will be nice when daily news goes out of business, that way I won't have to read a bunch of excellent points finally made by our congressman regarding ANWR framed as if they are children. Journalism 101 obviously isn't a required subject for journalism at our major universities, who what when where why, the answers to these questions contains should contain no opinion.

5 July 22, 2008 - 3:15pm | relyk

95%

Dude ANWR is 19 million acres. That rules out your 95% percent open to development theory.

There is estimated 15 billion barrels oil in the Chucki Sea but polar bears won't like the platforms so can't drill there, 10 billion barrels oil in ANWR but there are mountains in refuge so nope, beaufort sea has estimated 10 billion barrels but there are whales near there so nope, National Petroleum Refuge set to lease land with 8 billion barrels of oil and despite the name I'm guessing hmmm. oil drilling will be such an eyesore birds flying over will go blind and starve to death. Figures saying there is 5 billion barrels of oil in ANWR are based on 25 dollars a barrel and we all know at 130 dollars a barrel a lot more becomes economical to develop.

U guys want cheap gas lets drill in some of these places, screw the environmentalist, use the 1.7 billion the state is currently giving away to Transcanada & Alaska residents to build a Oil Refinery. Gas will go down to $2.00 a gallon so fast. Set a billion barrels aside for instate use and don't tax the oil companies for producing this gas. I don't think I'm a socialist but if this idea makes me a socialist so be it.

July 22, 2008 - 4:04pm | ak_iceman2003

95% of the north slope coastal plain

95% of the north slope coastal plain is open to oil development.

4 July 22, 2008 - 12:40pm | aktraveller

Set aside more "special areas?"

Don't you people realize the vast majority of ANWR is already set aside? Only a sliver of it, the 10-02 area can be explored if Congress okays it. Good Lord, how much more of Alaska do you non-developmentalist druids need to have locked up in perpetuity??

July 22, 2008 - 1:43pm | ak_iceman2003

U have errors in the post above.. I corrected them below

Don't you realize that 95% of the entire North Slope is open for oil development. Only a sliver of it, the 10-02 area is protected. Good lord - how much more of Alaska do you pro-drilling fat-cats need to stuff your coffers with?

July 22, 2008 - 3:05pm | aktraveller

You have some errors in your post - I corrected them for you

I believe my earlier post referred to ANWR specifically. ANWR currently consists of 19.6 million acres comprising of three distinct legal areas of use within its borders. The southern part of ANWR taking 9.16 million acres is classified as officially “Refuge”. The central 8 million acres of ANWR is classified as “Wilderness”. There is a special area of 1.5 million acres on the Arctic Coastal Plain called the “10-02” Area. In Section 10-02 Congress set aside 1.5 million acres of the Arctic Coastal Plain specifically for “oil and gas exploration”. This means that within the 1.5 million acres of the 10-02 Area and with in the total 19.6 million acres of ANWR …..ONLY 2000 ACRES CAN BE USED! That’s less than ½ of 1% of the total area of ANWR. So actually you are incorrect. The vast majority of ANWR is closed permanently (as permanent as it can be) to oil exploration or development. The 10-02 area is the only portion that can be open to exploration with an act of Congress. US dependence on foreign oil needs to be lessened by developing our own oil and gas. I mean really where would you rather have oil extracted? In the Russian far east or the middle east where there are little to no environmental regulations to contend with or in the United States, specifically ANWR where there are some of the strictest environmental regulations in the world?

July 22, 2008 - 4:18pm | ak_iceman2003

I was referring to the

I was referring to the coastal plane. Regardless it's a moot point... McCain won't go there - neither will our next president. Focus your attention on something that will actually benefit America like requiring oil companies to drill the leases they already have.

July 22, 2008 - 5:35pm | rfn

As important

would be allowing them to drill the leases they already have.

But the polar bears wouldn't like that.

The whales would be upset.

The caribou would stop breeding.

The penguins feathers would all fall out.

(Don't tell the enviros there are no penguins in Alaska; it would destroy their whole belief system. They'd have breakdowns, be unable to continue their fundraising and would have to go on welfare. We just can't afford it.)

3 July 22, 2008 - 12:25pm | ak_iceman2003

Visted the Refuge?

Two points: (1) They're standing in front of the pipeline... the pipeline is nowhere near Area 10-02. (2) Cold and snowy? I have friends who were there last week wearing t-shirts.

2 July 22, 2008 - 11:33am | BunkerBuster

Clowns

These 10 morons wouldn't know a caribou from walrus. Go back to DC and keep kissing Bush's butt and repeating his lies.

1 July 22, 2008 - 11:07am | Sheridan_Sheraton

They must be impressed

when they pick up the Newspaper. I'm sure they figure they should find a way to control the resource because Alaskans surely can't do it responsibly for themselves.

Search Jobs | Place an employment ad

Alaska Politics Blog

Contributors

Features

Archive

Show and tell on ANWR