• Apr 20, 2006

As the Arctic ice caps shrink due to the warming of the planet, it's expected that vast reserves of additional oil and gas will become available, as approximately 25 percent of the planet's petroleum is thought to lie under the polar ice caps. In an effort to map these hydrocarbon resources, the US Geological Society (USGS), BP, and Statoil will be heading far north to conduct widespread surveys next year.

What is frustrating a few people is that the survey activity will take place in conjunction with the International Polar Year, which is a large scientific project intended to establish benchmark polar environmental data so that the future effects of global warming can be understood. To critics, this seems a bit like joining the World Wildlife Federation to help collect data on endangered species, only to bring a hunting rifle just in case something looks tasty.

[Sources: Taipai Times; International Polar Year]



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 36 Comments
      • 8 Years Ago
      It's like burning down a house to look for the jewelry.

      The Canadians shouldn't be upset. Soon they will have beach resorts on the Northern Territories shores. Your on notice: you have 54 years to make your northern girls hot so they look good at the new beach! :)
      • 8 Years Ago
      For a quick & dirty overview of oil, production, usage, reserves etc:

      http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_top.asp

      Regardless if you believe in "Global Warming" their are some simple facts.

      Oil depletion continues, reserves are falling, prices may fluctuate but eventually will increase. The other things we can be sure of, localized political situations that will affect our ability to sustain a steady reliable supply of of, that applies not just to us but other countries, established and developing.

      While most of us who come here love to drive, the simple fact is, it's not the most efficient way to be using energy.

      The world is using between 75 and 80 million barrels per day with America using about 20 to 25% of it. If we could pump at the same rate as we consume the Alaska range is good for about 515 day or call it a year and a 1/2 the lower 48 is good (using the same formula) about 3.7 years, total world reserves, anybody's guess 20 to 100 or so years.

      So-----

      It's time to look at any and all alternatives and if it aids the enviroment instead of affecting it in a negative way, so much the better.



      • 8 Years Ago
      Richard -

      The market really is better at making choices than policy handed down from on high. I think my grandkids (son is 10 months now) will look at a hemi the way you and I look at a Stanley Steamer.

      All the analysis is static and dependant on no technological advances. We will never run out of oil, it just will price itself out of most uses. Semantic difference - maybe, but it still drives me nuts when people say we wil run out of oil (and I know that is not what you said).
      • 8 Years Ago
      Like everyone has been saying, this can only end up bad. The fight for oil is getting to rediculous and i dont see a stop to it any time soon.
      • 8 Years Ago
      MIGUEL: You are missing the point there, the fact that the oil extraction takes place in a relatively small physical boundary, is not related with the actual points of discussion... that the extracted oil will produce vast pollution, that the US greed for power and status (yes, power in the end, not only richness) yields no place for common sense and respect for the environment, which belongs to ALL.

      .... or would you accept that a Chinese company settles in your land, and say dig holes around just a 0.000001% of the US land then extract vast amounts of mineral resources like goldand get away with the money?

      ME: Miguel, Im afraid that I may have missed the point you were trying to make, and if I did, I apologize. The ANWR is in Alaska, which is an American state. As for the vast pollution that you speak of (in the realm of global warming), the idea that we as humans are responsible is just a theory. Scientists have not been able to prove (nor disprove) who, or what, is responsible because the earth operates on a cycle. Volcanoes that erupt worldwide are causing more harm to the ozone than all the major cities combined.

      Every time a volcano erupts, it sends water vapor, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, and hydrogen fluoride into the atmosphere. The sulfur dioxide in the troposphere then forms sulfuric acid. Through a series of chemical reactions, chlorine monoxide is formed, which destroys ozone. The amount that this produces far exceeds that of the major cities of the world. Now, as another poster asked someone earlier, do I think we should contribute additionally to the problem? Certainly not, but its not all our fault and drilling for oil in the ANWR is not going to cause any more harm to the ozone. It will, however, allow us to get out from under the Arabian thumb long enough to come up with something better.

      It seems to me that all of those that are pointing the finger at GW Bush (whether you like him or not is irrelevant) are forgetting one very important tidbit of information: many environmentalists groups were yelling at President Clinton to do something about protecting the ANWR from drill wells towards the end of his tenure, but he didn't. Look, I'm not a fan of "dubya" at this point but I still respect the office that he holds (I would say the same for any man that has occupied the office).
      • 8 Years Ago
      re: #20
      And we also want your hockey players.
      Oh, wait...nevermind.
      • 8 Years Ago
      #23 Ken - YOUR CAPS LOCK IS ON. Ensure is the word you want, not insure - unless you are State Farm.

      Percentage land in US under farm is decreasing, and while it is urbanizing the percent under forest is increasing. We are not running out of farmland. The government continues to pay farmers to idle their fields. See Paul Ehrlich for more crappy predictions of doom and gloom. http://www.junkscience.com/news/fumento.htm

      http://biology.usgs.gov/luhna/chap2.html

      And your prescription (biting the bullet), will only lead to lead poisoning.

      Talking about something 'that everybody knows' is a prescription for disaster, and will lead us down the same path that led to Galileo's appointment at the inquisition. I give you these examples of things we all knew to be true:
      just for fun: http://www.livescience.com/bestimg/?cat=myths
      Alar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alar_scare
      Audi sudden acceleration: http://www.audifans.com/archives/1998/07/msg02207.html
      and to really piss some folks off: http://www.husseinandterror.com/

      I am amazed at how static people think the human race is - the problems we faced as a species were different 500, 100, 50, and even 10 years ago. When was the last mass outbreak of bubonic plague? Who worries about mass starvation (now only a product of governments)? While there are always set-backs, the march of progress is un-deniable. Have a little faith in progress. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/08/D8ECEHUO0.html

      The good old days weren't all that good.

      To paraphrase Niem;

      First they came for the SUVs
      and I did not speak out
      because I did not drive an SUV.
      Then they came for the hemis
      and I did not speak out
      because I did not drive a hemi.
      Then they came for the pickups
      and I did not speak out
      because I was did not drive a pickup.
      Then they came for my minivan
      and there was no one left
      to speak out for me.





      KEN
      • 8 Years Ago
      THE WAY I LOOK AT IT ETHANOL SEEMS LIKE A GREAT IDEA. THE PROBLEM I SEE IS WE ARE DEVELOPING LAND EACH DAY WHICH IS EATING INTO OUR FARM LAND, WOODLANDS, AND WETLANDS WHICH MAKE OUR NATION HABITABLE. I CANNOT SEE A LONG FUTURE FOR ETHANOL BECAUSE SOON CORN FOR FUEL AND CORN FOR FOOD WILL BE COMPETING. I TRULY BELIEVE IT WILL TAKE A REAL TRANSFORMATION FROM THE LIFE WE LIVE TODAY TO INSURE OUR FUTURE FOR FOOD AND FUEL. WE NEED TO BITE THE BULLET AND CUT FUEL CONSUMPTION. INSTEAD OF HELPING THE PROBLEM MOST PEOPLE NOW ARE BUYING SUV'S. THEY SHOULD BE OUTLAWED. WHY SHOULD THESE PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO WASTE THE RESOURCES JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR IT? I FEEL THE RIGHT TRACK IS THE HYBRID, BUT I HOPE IT BECOMES MORE AND MORE SOLAR INSTEAD OF FUEL.
      • 8 Years Ago
      "Forcing us (Canada) to spend billions on Arctic sovereignty measures."

      Well at least I'll be able to fill up my car for awhile. I got nothing out of the gun registry.

      • 8 Years Ago
      To #3,

      Wow Tommy, wonderful hyperbole.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Hey Frank at #29 et al: so is it fair if I summarize your thoughts like: "well, if the world is NOT melting let's go around and suck all the oil we can, and pollute all that we can, and in the meanwhile abuse our power by taking all available resources". and complement with "well if others are doing things wrong, why don't we? furthermore... why stop doing something wrong so that others can take over all the wrong-doings?"

      --> if that does not sound like a stupid enough way of thinking, if that is the smart way of thinking... then convince me and convince the other readers, and I'll personally go help stupid bush dig those freaking holes. but please use intelligent arguments.

      BTW, the chinese overpopulation (which I will NEVER defend) is not the topic of this article, it's the US aiming at the north pole resources.
      • 8 Years Ago
      To #16.
      You are missing the point there, the fact that the oil extraction takes place in a relatively small physical boundary, is not related with the actual points of discussion... that the extracted oil will produce vast pollution, that the US greed for power and status (yes, power in the end, not only richness) yields no place for common sense and respect for the environment, which belongs to ALL.

      Also, why would they say that the maritime passages belong to all??? Only when it's for their convenience, right? what about the Panama passage? We all know who took control of it.... or would you accept that a Chinese company settles in your land, and say dig holes around just a 0.000001% of the US land then extract vast amounts of mineral resources like gold (uh oh... I guess some big ones from the US and Canada are already doing the same to Peru's land) and get away with the money?

      Nothing far away from reality:
      http://www.tierramerica.net/english/2005/0618/iarticulo.shtml

      http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/peru404/thestory.html

      Also, why wait 25 more yrs if we can act now???
    • Load More Comments