October 30, 2001
From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:Just 'cause you say it a lot, doesn't make it true
I notice in the Smarter Times: Letters About the Times section that a Peter Larkin noticed an earlier use of the 140-day myth mentioned in the immediately preceding post:
On page 15 of the Sunday, October 14, 2001 edition of the NYTimes, a news article cites environmentalists' claims that drilling in the Alaskan Wild Life Refuge "would not yield any oil for at least seven years, and would then yield only enough for 140 days." The Times has used this 7 year, 140 days argument in the past on both its news and editorial pages. This particular environmentalist claim has always struck me as dubious at best. In fact, in the same edition of the paper there is a letter to the editor from Frank H. Murkowski, U.S. senator from Alaska, in which the senator says there is enough oil under the Arctic coastal plain to replace 30 years of imports from Saudi Arabia and 50 years of imports from Iraq. He also claims an oil pipeline to deliver oil from the Arctic could be completed in a minimum of one to two years, not seven as the environmentalists argue. Although the Times news article mentions Senator Murkowski, it uses the environmentalists' numbers on the Arctic oil issue, not those of the senator.The huge discrepancy between the numbers attributed to "environmentalist" and those of the Senator cry out for some explanation. It strikes me as irresponsible to repeat over and over again the environmentalist claims on this issue if there is any chance, as Senator Murkowski suggests, they may not be accurate.
A reader of this site (!), Graeme Hein, also writes in to point out that any one oil field looks useless when measured against total consumption. He calls this a stock tactic of the "enviro-nazis".
This appears to be one of those myths that become truth by repetition, much like the revisionist economic historians who claim growth didn't follow the Kennedy and Reagan (and coolidge) tax cuts. Anyway, I'm glad I was able to put some real numbers into play. If anyone knows Peter, I hope you'll send him this. And if anyone can address the "seven year" claim, which seems ridiculous in light of the rapid development of other oil fields, let me know.
Posted by Mindles H. Dreck at October 30, 2001 05:34 PM | Technorati inbound links