From Media Matters
Glenn Beck falsely claimed that “drilling in ANWR alone would yield 100 million barrels a day.” In fact, according to Energy Department researchers, if the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is opened for drilling for oil in 2008, the estimated peak production would yield, at most, 1.45 million barrels a day in 2028.
Still, when the New York “Communist” Times won’t fact check Bill Kristol’s columns before they are published why should we expect more from CNN, the most trusted name in infotainment?
ANWR would produce enough oil to supply us for a whopping 1.4 years, at our current rate of consumption (and assuming we’d use only ANWR oil, which of course we wouldn’t. But if we did….)
Is it really worth destroying that amazing ecosystem for that little oil?
And the damage to ANWR would last for decades. Clearly some people will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from their gas-swilling Hummers when the last drop has been pumped from the Earth.
Well, heck — apparently, many of us are willing to sacrifice our own back yards for a little natural gas. ANWAR is relatively obscure ..
http://www.catskillmountainkeeper.org/node/290
Wiki
The story prompted me to look up some facts.
From Beck’s original statement on the topic, I think we can find the reason for his absurd statement.
Indeed, it’s Beck who may be talking about ANWR on a planet other than Earth.
Re: Saudi oil.
The reporting system in use makes overestimating reserves desirable — apparently, from what I can recall, because it allows countries to cheat on OPEC agreements limiting production. Saudi Arabia has been reporting the same reserve number for about twenty years even though a considerable amount of oil has been removed in that period.
My point is that relying on Saudi reserves is inherently dangerous. Short-term increases in production will help cut prices, but the notion that production increases will solve the problem for the long-term is itself part of the problem.
Beck and his fellow clowns from CNN remind me of some sort of diabolical jesters waltzing across the airways sowing seeds of deceit and untruth. Their game is to inspire public confusion about basic facts so intelligent decisions are out of reach.
Why do these guys hate America so?
Special places are really special.
Well, I’d guess this is about raising the stakes for speculators — in a very public manner, by the use of an authoritative voice, realities be damned! Someone’s out to make a killing from potential & so it’s quite necessary to inflate the potential.
Considering that the recent steep increase in prices is due to speculation, there is no reason to believe that increasing supply will have much impact on the situation. In fact, even if ANWR was currently producing oil, that oil could become inflated in price because of the speculator induced expansionary economic bubble.
In other words, feeding the bubble wouldn’t help, and supply increases might even reward speculators.
There are some economic ideas at work here, but it’s very wrongheaded to assume that the oil market is an efficient, well functioning market right now. Creating a public oil exchange would help, since it would allow oil producers and buyers to come together without the middle men who are — presumably — the speculators in the process and the main drivers behind the bubble.
Despite what Beck believes, current conditions justify a much more regulated market, even a quasi-nationalized framework where market conditions are enforced for national security reasons. Talking about government enforced markets conditions may sound odd, but oligopolistic conditions are not a free market. And when a few sellers are allowed to corner a market and drive prices up for buyers on a crucial commodity such as oil there are national security implications. A market does not reach equilibrium once that point is reached, only government intervention can restore the market to an efficient state.
Here’s an article from the Center For American Progress that covers some of the ideas I mentioned in my last post. Unfortunately, I discovered it after my last post.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/06/offshore_drilling.html
One more thought — the cost of developing new oil has risen to the point where development relies on higher prices. In other words, not only won’t increased drilling alleviate higher prices the oil industry is dependent on those higher prices to make newer forms of oil recovery economically viable.
It’s hard not to speculate on whether the current bubble was artificially induced by those who would gain if the price remained at an artificially high level.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2008/06/speculators-acc.html
There is an article from the Washington Times inside, an odd resource to cite but it’s an informative article. Some highlights: