Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Razorguns
Well-known member
Fuck the Caribou shit. WHY are we spending ALL this money on this crap, if it's only going to lower gas price 1c, and the # of refineries stay exactly the same?
Are politicians really that dumb about how the oil industry works?
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...ageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home
U.S. Senate backs drilling in refuge
Canada says Arctic oil fight isn't over
Wildlife, culture at risk, Ottawa argues
TIM HARPER
WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON—The U.S. Senate, ignoring opposition from Ottawa, Canadian natives and environmentalists on both sides of the border, has voted to open an Arctic refuge to oil drilling.
The move overrides an 18-year-old pledge by Canada and the U.S. to protect migrating Porcupine caribou herds in northern Yukon and ignores Ottawa's claims that drilling will disrupt a northern Gwitchin culture that is 12,000 years old.
Prime Minister Paul Martin has expressed Canadian opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to U.S. President George W. Bush in person and by phone, and Environment Minister Stéphane Dion has had at least two meetings with White House environmental officials on the issue.
A bid by Democrats to strip the drilling provision from a budget bill failed by a 51-48 margin yesterday, dashing the best opportunity for opponents to block the provision, which Republicans have sought for more than a decade.
A glimmer of hope remains for opponents because the House of Representatives must pass a similar measure in its budget bill next week. But historically the House has passed drilling measures only to have them die in the Senate, suggesting that is a faint hope.
Joe Linklater, chief of the Gwitchin First Nation in Old Crow, Yukon, said the loss of the caribou herd would be akin to the loss of the buffalo from the Great Plains.
"When the caribou herd is threatened, our culture is threatened," he said. "It is the only culture our people know."
In Ottawa, Dion said Canada would continue pressing its case. Under a 1987 agreement, the two countries were supposed to refrain from activities that could hurt the Porcupine caribou herd or its habitat.
Alaska Senator Ted Stevens led the push for drilling.
"I believe the tide of public opinion is changing," he said. "The American people know that development in (the Arctic refuge) will help lower energy prices, reduce our dependence on unstable and unfriendly regimes, and grow our economy."
He told fellow senators there was nothing pristine about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, calling it "a barren, frozen, wasteland" in the winter. Displaying large pictures of the area, Stevens said the tundra "has no beauty at all."
Yesterday's vote was a major victory for Bush, who has been pushing to get the refuge opened to drilling since he came to Washington in 2001.
The tipping point for him came with soaring gas prices in the wake of hurricanes Katrina in August and Rita in September — even though opponents have maintained the amount of oil available from the Arctic wildlife refuge is not worth the potential ruin of an environmentally fragile area.
Martin said in a New York speech last month there is only 200 days of oil available in the Arctic. The Canadian figures are under dispute here, but even the most optimistic models indicate about 10.4 billion barrels of oil are in the refuge, enough to meet U.S. demands for about 16 months. No oil would flow for 10 years, and the area would not reach peak output until around 2025.
Dion said yesterday it's important that Americans understand this is an international issue.
"To us, it's not an internal issue for the Americans," Dion said. "It's an issue for the continent and for the planet, because if we start to put at risk our ecosystems because we want to put energy first, whatever the consequences, well, the biodiversity is a key aspect of the quality of life for human beings.
"This drilling would give oil only 10 years from now for a very short time. ... It doesn't make sense for six months of oil to destroy a so fragile ecosystem."
U.S. Democrats have estimated there is enough Alaskan oil available to bring down the cost of gas at the pumps by a penny, 20 years from now.
But part of the Republican pitch was based on national security. They argued the United States cannot be dependent on oil imports from often unstable Middle East regimes.
Even with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in full production, however, the U.S. would still import 68 per cent of its oil, up from 64 per cent today, unless it changes its energy strategy.
There are 55 Republican senators, 44 Democrats and an independent who generally votes with the Democrats. The Senate has killed the drilling proposal many times, usually by mustering the 41 votes needed to block a vote in a measure known as a filibuster.
This time, Republicans placed the drilling proposal in a budget bill, and Senate rules prevent filibusters on budget bills. An amendment to remove the drilling provision failed, and the entire bill passed late in the day by a vote of 52-47.
The same tactic was used to open drilling in the refuge 10 years ago, but it was vetoed by then-president Bill Clinton.
Bush, however, has taken every opportunity to encourage Congress to move ahead with drilling in the Alaskan refuge.
Although the environmental lobby is pointing to a House vote next week as a way to derail drilling, a spokesperson for Republican Representative Richard Pombo, the chair of the House resources committee and a drilling proponent, said they are trying to "manufacture a perception" of a close vote.
"When you get down to the facts," he said, "the House has never been the problem with (Arctic drilling). It has been the Senate.
"But we'll need all hands on board. We will get no Democratic votes and we will likely lose some moderate Republicans."
Republicans control the House 232-202 with one independent.
Larry Bagnell, a Liberal MP from Yukon, said he was still hopeful: "This is only a loss of one stage of the process. The budget reconciliation bill is not through Congress yet. It's still got votes to go through. ... We will have hope and we're still fighting."
Martin may convey his disappointment over yesterday's vote to Bush when the two see each other today at the Summit of the Americas in Argentina.
"I would think this is something that will be very much on the Prime Minister's mind," Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan said.
In Argentina, Bush issued a statement praising the Senate for a decision he said would lower American gas prices and utility bills.
"Thanks to technology, we can reach this energy with little impact on the land or wildlife," he said. "I applaud the Senate for passing legislation to improve our energy situation with this commonsense approach."
The amendment to remove the drilling provision from the budget bill was brought by Washington Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell, who called the Alaska oil "a false promise."
She told senators the drilling would not help lower U.S. gasoline prices and could not be done "in an environmentally safe way."
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is considered an environmental jewel, a 7.9 million hectare sanctuary that is home to caribou, polar bears, wolves and more than 150 species of birds.
Tucking the drilling provision into a budget bill, Cantwell said, was a back-door gimmick to help oil companies make even greater profits.
The Gwitchin on both sides of the Alaska-Yukon border have been fighting against drilling for almost 20 years, fearful the caribou herd will be further depleted.
The Gwitchin, about 7,000 people in total, have always been dependent on the caribou to feed themselves. Linklater said the 265 First Nation members living in Old Crow also count on the 123,000-strong herd for their clothing and their spirituality.
If they were to disappear, bears would prey on moose and when the moose disappeared, the bear would follow "and we would lose fur-bearing animals all down the ecosystem."
Those who believe the drilling can be done in an environmentally responsible way are spouting nonsense, said Pete Rafle of the Washington-based Wilderness Society.
He said the drilling would need 610,000 hectares, not the much smaller area proponents have promised.
"This is one of the few remaining unspoiled wilderness areas in North America," he said.
"Oil drilling by its very nature is a messy, dirty business."
Are politicians really that dumb about how the oil industry works?
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...ageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home
U.S. Senate backs drilling in refuge
Canada says Arctic oil fight isn't over
Wildlife, culture at risk, Ottawa argues
TIM HARPER
WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON—The U.S. Senate, ignoring opposition from Ottawa, Canadian natives and environmentalists on both sides of the border, has voted to open an Arctic refuge to oil drilling.
The move overrides an 18-year-old pledge by Canada and the U.S. to protect migrating Porcupine caribou herds in northern Yukon and ignores Ottawa's claims that drilling will disrupt a northern Gwitchin culture that is 12,000 years old.
Prime Minister Paul Martin has expressed Canadian opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to U.S. President George W. Bush in person and by phone, and Environment Minister Stéphane Dion has had at least two meetings with White House environmental officials on the issue.
A bid by Democrats to strip the drilling provision from a budget bill failed by a 51-48 margin yesterday, dashing the best opportunity for opponents to block the provision, which Republicans have sought for more than a decade.
A glimmer of hope remains for opponents because the House of Representatives must pass a similar measure in its budget bill next week. But historically the House has passed drilling measures only to have them die in the Senate, suggesting that is a faint hope.
Joe Linklater, chief of the Gwitchin First Nation in Old Crow, Yukon, said the loss of the caribou herd would be akin to the loss of the buffalo from the Great Plains.
"When the caribou herd is threatened, our culture is threatened," he said. "It is the only culture our people know."
In Ottawa, Dion said Canada would continue pressing its case. Under a 1987 agreement, the two countries were supposed to refrain from activities that could hurt the Porcupine caribou herd or its habitat.
Alaska Senator Ted Stevens led the push for drilling.
"I believe the tide of public opinion is changing," he said. "The American people know that development in (the Arctic refuge) will help lower energy prices, reduce our dependence on unstable and unfriendly regimes, and grow our economy."
He told fellow senators there was nothing pristine about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, calling it "a barren, frozen, wasteland" in the winter. Displaying large pictures of the area, Stevens said the tundra "has no beauty at all."
Yesterday's vote was a major victory for Bush, who has been pushing to get the refuge opened to drilling since he came to Washington in 2001.
The tipping point for him came with soaring gas prices in the wake of hurricanes Katrina in August and Rita in September — even though opponents have maintained the amount of oil available from the Arctic wildlife refuge is not worth the potential ruin of an environmentally fragile area.
Martin said in a New York speech last month there is only 200 days of oil available in the Arctic. The Canadian figures are under dispute here, but even the most optimistic models indicate about 10.4 billion barrels of oil are in the refuge, enough to meet U.S. demands for about 16 months. No oil would flow for 10 years, and the area would not reach peak output until around 2025.
Dion said yesterday it's important that Americans understand this is an international issue.
"To us, it's not an internal issue for the Americans," Dion said. "It's an issue for the continent and for the planet, because if we start to put at risk our ecosystems because we want to put energy first, whatever the consequences, well, the biodiversity is a key aspect of the quality of life for human beings.
"This drilling would give oil only 10 years from now for a very short time. ... It doesn't make sense for six months of oil to destroy a so fragile ecosystem."
U.S. Democrats have estimated there is enough Alaskan oil available to bring down the cost of gas at the pumps by a penny, 20 years from now.
But part of the Republican pitch was based on national security. They argued the United States cannot be dependent on oil imports from often unstable Middle East regimes.
Even with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in full production, however, the U.S. would still import 68 per cent of its oil, up from 64 per cent today, unless it changes its energy strategy.
There are 55 Republican senators, 44 Democrats and an independent who generally votes with the Democrats. The Senate has killed the drilling proposal many times, usually by mustering the 41 votes needed to block a vote in a measure known as a filibuster.
This time, Republicans placed the drilling proposal in a budget bill, and Senate rules prevent filibusters on budget bills. An amendment to remove the drilling provision failed, and the entire bill passed late in the day by a vote of 52-47.
The same tactic was used to open drilling in the refuge 10 years ago, but it was vetoed by then-president Bill Clinton.
Bush, however, has taken every opportunity to encourage Congress to move ahead with drilling in the Alaskan refuge.
Although the environmental lobby is pointing to a House vote next week as a way to derail drilling, a spokesperson for Republican Representative Richard Pombo, the chair of the House resources committee and a drilling proponent, said they are trying to "manufacture a perception" of a close vote.
"When you get down to the facts," he said, "the House has never been the problem with (Arctic drilling). It has been the Senate.
"But we'll need all hands on board. We will get no Democratic votes and we will likely lose some moderate Republicans."
Republicans control the House 232-202 with one independent.
Larry Bagnell, a Liberal MP from Yukon, said he was still hopeful: "This is only a loss of one stage of the process. The budget reconciliation bill is not through Congress yet. It's still got votes to go through. ... We will have hope and we're still fighting."
Martin may convey his disappointment over yesterday's vote to Bush when the two see each other today at the Summit of the Americas in Argentina.
"I would think this is something that will be very much on the Prime Minister's mind," Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan said.
In Argentina, Bush issued a statement praising the Senate for a decision he said would lower American gas prices and utility bills.
"Thanks to technology, we can reach this energy with little impact on the land or wildlife," he said. "I applaud the Senate for passing legislation to improve our energy situation with this commonsense approach."
The amendment to remove the drilling provision from the budget bill was brought by Washington Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell, who called the Alaska oil "a false promise."
She told senators the drilling would not help lower U.S. gasoline prices and could not be done "in an environmentally safe way."
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is considered an environmental jewel, a 7.9 million hectare sanctuary that is home to caribou, polar bears, wolves and more than 150 species of birds.
Tucking the drilling provision into a budget bill, Cantwell said, was a back-door gimmick to help oil companies make even greater profits.
The Gwitchin on both sides of the Alaska-Yukon border have been fighting against drilling for almost 20 years, fearful the caribou herd will be further depleted.
The Gwitchin, about 7,000 people in total, have always been dependent on the caribou to feed themselves. Linklater said the 265 First Nation members living in Old Crow also count on the 123,000-strong herd for their clothing and their spirituality.
If they were to disappear, bears would prey on moose and when the moose disappeared, the bear would follow "and we would lose fur-bearing animals all down the ecosystem."
Those who believe the drilling can be done in an environmentally responsible way are spouting nonsense, said Pete Rafle of the Washington-based Wilderness Society.
He said the drilling would need 610,000 hectares, not the much smaller area proponents have promised.
"This is one of the few remaining unspoiled wilderness areas in North America," he said.
"Oil drilling by its very nature is a messy, dirty business."
