Tesla
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-10-06 10:49 AM
Original message |
|
January 10, 2006
Dear :
Over the past several months, a healthy debate has occurred in our country about drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). I appreciated knowing your views on this important issue.
As you know, after a great deal of thought, I voted against drilling in the ANWR. I thought the risks outweighed the potential benefits. The United States will never be petroleum independent-we simply do not have the oil. Department of Energy (DOE) figures show that we are currently 56 percent dependent on foreign oil. The DOE estimates that the ANWR would reach full production by the year 2020, and even then, it would only decrease our dependence on foreign oil by about 2%.
We desperately need a comprehensive energy policy, and the Administration should get a lot of credit for putting a comprehensive package together. The energy bill that the Senate passed this Congress addressed important issues, such as electricity reform, nuclear and hydroelectric plant regulations, energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, new gasoline content standards and many others. These, in particular, are more important to the energy needs of Ohioans than drilling in Alaska.
While I oppose drilling in the ANWR, I do not believe drilling should be restricted on all federal land. The federal government is the caretaker of millions of acres, which undoubtedly contain oil and gas reservoirs, and I support the President's efforts to identify potential energy sources on our federal lands. In less fragile ecosystems, oil and gas exploration can coexist with the natural environment. I believe that it is our duty to find these sources and then carefully assess the costs versus the benefits in each case.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns. If you have any further questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
Very respectfully yours,
MIKE DEWINE United States Senator
|
Kolesar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-10-06 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
1. The nebbish is correct in the points he made |
|
There is a lot that he does not address though. For example, we could surely use a vote for increased automobile &truck efficiency standards. You don't see him trumpeting the immunity from liability the nuclear industry achieved in the energy bill, either.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 04:14 AM
Response to Original message |