hit counter html code
The Cultural Economist The Cultural Economist: Three Points On ANWR

30 June 2008

Three Points On ANWR

There has been much discussion - mostly acerbic, ignorant and deceptive - about drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Without taking sides, I would like to point out three facts everyone is missing:

* In order to support America’s economy, we are going to need every barrel we can pump during our transition to other fuels (and life styles). The less oil we have, the higher the rate of inflation, the higher the rate of unemployment, and the worse our recession will be for all Americans. If you would like to understand why, then pick up a copy of my book “Oil, Jihad and Destiny”. It’s all there.
* Curtailing oil production will increase air pollution. America depends on oil to keep warm in winter. Heating oil, propane, and kerosene are cleaner burning than coal. If these fuels are unavailable, or unaffordable, then families are going to burn waste, wood and coal to stay warm – dirty or not. This – by the way – is already happening.
* Drilling in places like ANWR is just the tip of the iceberg (a pun). The USGS believes 25% of the world’s remaining oil is under Arctic ice (soon to be the Arctic sea). Russia and Canada are already sparring over rights to drill. If we are concerned about the environment, it should be understood the Russians have a miserable environmental record. If they drill, it will be disastrous for the environment because they are just not going to care. The point is, liberal environmentalists are NOT going to stop exploration for oil in the Arctic. It’s just a matter of who does the drilling. If America doesn’t, then some other nation will get the oil – dirty or not.


It’s nice to be concerned about the caribou and a polar bear. But don’t you believe it is also important to be concerned about human welfare? Is there a way to inject a dose of reality into the ANWR debate?


TCE
6/30/2008

.

0 comments: