What does it say when one of America's largest oil companies drops out of a lobbying group trying to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling? What does it say when that company is one that already operates on Alaska's North Slope which is near the refuge? Could it be that there's just not enough oil there to be worth it?
Geotimes reports that the U.S. Geological Survey estimates there are between 4.4 and 5.8 billion barrels of recoverable oil there. In a world that consumes close to 30 billion barrels of oil a year, it doesn't amount to much, and it's an amount that could easily be saved by conservation. But, those numbers could still mean real money for Conoco/Phillips and BP (which withdrew from the lobbying consortium earlier), both of whom operate in Alaska already.
Does anybody know the reason for this strange behavior? I would be grateful if anyone can point me to some explanation for this man bites dog story.
(Comments are open to all. After clicking on "Comments," click on "Or Post Anonymously" if you don't have an account. See the list of environmental blogs on my sidebar.)