Democrats v. Arctic abundance

Investor's Business Daily
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 28 July 2008

Energy: It has become something of an article of faith among those who oppose drilling in the Arctic that it's too much trouble for too little oil. Well, how about 90 billion barrels of oil? Too little for you? That's how much oil is estimated to be in the Arctic region, with at least a third of it under sovereign U.S. territory, according to a new study by the U.S. Geological Survey.

Put into perspective, the U.S. "official" estimate for total oil reserves is 21 billion barrels. So by putting our Arctic resources into play, we would more than double our reserves overnight. What's more, there could be more oil up there — much more — according to Donald Gautier, who wrote the report.

"Most of the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially unexplored with respect to petroleum," Gautier said. "The extensive Arctic continental shelves may constitute the geographically largest unexplored prospective area for petroleum remaining on Earth." That phrase stuck in our mind — "essentially unexplored." How much of the rest of the U.S., including the oil we have offshore, is likewise "essentially unexplored"? And this study only counted oil that could be retrieved using current technologies. So Arctic reserves may ultimately prove to be much larger.

By the way, the report adds almost as an aside, there's also about 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Arctic region. That's about 27% of the world's total. This again puts the lie to the "peak" oil theorists, who have asserted repeatedly that the amount of oil we can use is in terminal decline and that it's therefore futile to drill for more. It's not. Let's put this in perspective. That 90 billion barrels of Arctic crude is enough to run the entire world economy for three years. And it could fuel the U.S. alone for 12 years.

Using a conservative estimate, let's say we pump 3 million barrels a day after developing these Arctic resources. That would boost total U.S. crude output of 8 million barrels a day by 38%. It would shrink the trade deficit, saving us roughly $137 billion a year in money we now send to Mideast and South American oil potentates, some of whom use the money to train and equip terrorists.

This latest report, by the way, means there are now about 938 billion barrels of oil available for us to take from the Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska and shale-rock formations in the West, based on current technologies and prices of less than $100 a barrel. In short, we're not running out of oil, we're swimming in it. Yet, Congress, bizarrely, refuses to allow more crude to be extracted from federal property, imperiling our economic future. After all, oil is the lifeblood of our economy today and will be throughout the 21st century, as most forecasts show.

Put in context, Congress' inaction must be seen for what it is: a frontal assault on the long-term living standards of all Americans. As a federal Interagency Task Force report released this week noted, global oil demand has risen by 4.4 million barrels a day since 2003. But we've added about half that to supply. Americans who feel squeezed by higher oil prices should know they have a stark choice: More oil and lower prices, or less oil and higher prices. And they should also know who's to blame for this energy mess: the Democrat-led Congress.

Knowing what we do today, those in Congress against drilling are derelict in their duty and don't deserve to keep jobs in November.