ANWR to be toast in the 109th Congress

At least some parts of the Energy Bill will poke through in 2005


President Bush and Veep Cheney promise that scenes like these will be more common in the Alaskan arctic

With peak oil descending on America like a ton of bricks, the 2004 election appears to have tipped the balance against the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Wampum has a detailed political analysis specifically on the ANWR issue. The writer's Democratic strategy conclusion near the end of this piece is quite interesting:

Democrats need to decide what they want to do about ANWAR. One option is to stand, fight, and lose on the narrow issue of ANWAR. Another option is to try to add provisions that will make the inevitable drilling more environmentally friendly.

My preferred option is to present a comprehensive energy plan as an alternative to the Republican bill and then allow the Republican majority to pass what it will.

The comprehensive plan should set out a road to energy independence for the United States. It should reject the false choice between economic growth and environmental protection and find ways to do both by creating new industries concerned with environmental protection and clean up.

It should be forward looking by calling for investment in new energy technologies such as hydrogen. It should combine new sources of energy with more efficiency and conservation. It should be practical and easily explained.

If any plan can meet those goals, I, for one, am fully prepared to compromise within the party on any specific item (ANWAR, nuclear power, CAFE standards, Gulf drilling, or whatever) to be able to agree on a comprehensive alternative to the Republican plan.

If we take that route, Democrats will not only win elections when the public tires of ineffective Republican policies, but will also have a mandate to enact a set of policies upon attaining power.

My own gut feeling is that the energy picture is going to blow wide open. Political resistance to oil drilling will pretty much vanish. Saving ANWR from greedy, Cheney-connected interests will not be possible. So I agree with the Wampum writer -- compromise with an aim to ameliorate environmental damage while limiting the theft and corruption normally associated with energy extraction seems wise at this juncture.

See also: this analysis posted by Bob at Howlings. ANWR's best friend may be the water-polluting chemical MTBE, as it has so far gummed the works for the Energy Bill.