Really good ANWR podcast

[44hunter45]

Randy has had Dave and Nephi on his podcasts. This episode of their show was the best education ever for me in ANWR.

Oil & Ice- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 07/20/2021 · 1h 28m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[Lilhowie83]

Randy has had Dave and Nephi on his podcasts. This episode of their show was the best education ever for me in ANWR.

Oil & Ice- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 07/20/2021 · 1h 28m

podcasts.apple.com

I have been listening to their podcast ever since Randy had them on, I need something to fill in the gaps between new releases on all my other podcasts. They are fun to listen to and well versed on the topics they discuss. They are definitely great ambassadors for the cause of public land. I'll have to skip ahead and listen to this one.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Randy has had Dave and Nephi on his podcasts. This episode of their show was the best education ever for me in ANWR.

Oil & Ice- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 07/20/2021 · 1h 28m

podcasts.apple.com

I feel like they should have at least cited me as their source before regurgitating every comment I made on the ANWR thread.

Great episode, for a short discussion I think they covered all they key points.

 

[BWALKER77]

The arguments presented in the above podcast are based on one test well that no one knows the results of and economic concerns.
Prudhoe Bay was drilled many times before oil was hit. The economics can't be determined with out modern exploration techniques.
To me it's all grasping at straws.
If it's not economical it won't be developed,period.
I've actually set foot on ANWR. The coastal plain where proposed exploration would take place is a small part of the refuge and not a very scenic one at that.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The arguments presented in the above podcast are based on one test well that no one knows the results of and economic concerns.

Chevron knows the results. Chevron has also severely curtailed it's exploration budget, they are not an outlier the entire industry has backed off exploration dramatically.

The economics can't be determined with out modern exploration techniques.

You can estimate development costs; drilling, pad building, road construction, take away costs, etc. You also can look at the results from Prudhoe bay and Mackenzie Delta which bookend the play West to East and derive a basic rate of return.

Taxes and litigation are also an important part of the equation. The entire state of Alaska basically runs on OG, it funds everything from the wildlife agencies to healthcare, roads, and the permanent fund. This makes Alaska one of the most expensive places to operate from a tax perspective.

Litigation, there is really no argument that ANWR is the mostly highly visible and heavily litigated plays, possibly the most on the planet. That's a risk that any company will fold into it's planning. Chevron could spend 300MM on developing the play and then get stuck in court for 10 years.

At the end of the day there are a ton of active oil plays around the country and on the planet. All of the major AK operators have numerous other basins they can drill. Capital is finite and you are going to spend it where you can get the best ROR and have the least risk.

In the case of Chevron they have 2.2 Million acres in the Permian producing 652,000 BOE a day, they also have large positions in CO, CA, WY... and only about 34% of their production comes from the US.

The entire state of Alaska produces ~400-500 BOE a day, Chevron worldwide produces 3,083 BOE. It doesn't make any sense for them to try and develop a tiny, risky slice of Alaska.

All that being said, because Alaska has put all their eggs in the oil and gas basket I think small AK based companies will be pushing for ANWR for decades and AK senators will beat the drum for political gain for decades.

I predict we will be beating this dead horse for the rest of my life.

The coastal plain where proposed exploration would take place is a small part of the refuge and not a very scenic one at that.

Scenic and ecologically important are not synonyms. Yellowstone, for instance is not particularly scenic compared to the rest of our rock and ice national parks, but it holds an incredible amount of wildlife compared to our other parks. I believe that is the argument being made in the podcast and by various groups including USFWS about unit 1002.

​

 

[Ben Lamb]

I predict we will be beating this dead horse for the rest of my life.



Scenic and ecologically important are not synonyms. Yellowstone, for instance is not particularly scenic compared to the rest of our rock and ice national parks, but it holds an incredible amount of wildlife compared to our other parks. I believe that is the argument being made in the podcast and by various groups including USFWS about unit 1002.

​

1.) You will. This is about virtue signaling and identity politics, not actual resource development.

2.) Precisely. This is a wildlife refuge. The American people specifically set it aside to protect wildlife. Drilling does not fulfill the mission.

 

[theat]

The arguments presented in the above podcast are based on one test well that no one knows the results of and economic concerns.
Prudhoe Bay was drilled many times before oil was hit. The economics can't be determined with out modern exploration techniques.
To me it's all grasping at straws.
If it's not economical it won't be developed,period.
I've actually set foot on ANWR. The coastal plain where proposed exploration would take place is a small part of the refuge and not a very scenic one at that.

I have also set foot in ANWR. You are right in that the coastal plain within the 1002 oil development area is not particularly scenic, but that isn't why it is an important part of ANWR. The 1002 area happens to be where between 1/2 and 3/4 of the Porcupine Caribou herd spends May-July. This is their primary calving grounds. Just seems like a bad idea to develop the area where 200,000 caribou go to give birth to their calves.


This is some video filmed mostly within the 1002 area of catching caribou for disease testing and collaring.

 

[BWALKER77]

I have also set foot in ANWR. You are right in that the coastal plain within the 1002 oil development area is not particularly scenic, but that isn't why it is an important part of ANWR. The 1002 area happens to be where between 1/2 and 3/4 of the Porcupine Caribou herd spends May-July. This is their primary calving grounds. Just seems like a bad idea to develop the area where 200,000 caribou go to give birth to their calves.
View attachment 189739

This is some video filmed mostly within the 1002 area of catching caribou for disease testing and collaring.

When I flew into Prudhoe I seen caribou all over the place close to town and around the pipeline. I don't think it bothered them much.

 

[BWALKER77]

1.) You will. This is about virtue signaling and identity politics, not actual resource development.

2.) Precisely. This is a wildlife refuge. The American people specifically set it aside to protect wildlife. Drilling does not fulfill the mission.

The podcast addresses your second point and it's not that simple.

 

[Akcabin]

There are over 30% more caribou n other critters in Prudhoe Bay that before oil exploration. Paid for by private industry that work together with the local native population who also have animal subsistence boards that offer advice and our state biologists. Chevrons investment in AK may be a small percentage of their global holdings but still worth near billions. And very important to them.
The federal government will get the majority of tax dollars n set the rules, not the state.
Responsible resource development can happen and does every day. If given a chance .

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Chevrons investment in AK may be a small percentage of their global holdings but still worth near billions. And very important to them.
The federal government will get the majority of tax dollars n set the rules, not the state.
Responsible resource development can happen and does every day. If given a chance .

"Total expenses would be the royalty/production tax, transportation, property tax and production cost.

In Texas, this totals $36.70/bbl. Subtracted from the $50 market price, this is $13.30 per barrel the producers make before federal corporate income tax.

In Alaska the total expenses would be $43.60 per barrel. Subtracted from the $50 market price, this is $6.40/bbl the producers make before state and federal corporate income tax. Alaska has a state corporate income tax; Texas does not."



Roger Marks- Petroleum economist with the Alaska Department of Revenue

The oil tax difference between Alaska and Texas

Like much of the discussion marketing the initiative, it sounds good until examined in detail.

www.adn.com

 

[Akcabin]

Yeppers that's correct. Lots of clean burning natural gas liquids in AK gas also.
Lots of different ways to measure success. My comments refer to the fact that wildlife has done considerably better since oil exploration. While providing jobs, economies and tax dollars to run our governments.
And biologists are all over the place because they can access it. Studying global warming, insects. Several labs and a university in barrow. Many of these funded by private dollars.
Hey I feel that responsible resource management can happen. Even Mr Marks supports it
I'm glad that folks can access the haul road and millions of acres of public lands.

 

[Sytes]

Randy has had Dave and Nephi on his podcasts. This episode of their show was the best education ever for me in ANWR.

Oil & Ice- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 07/20/2021 · 1h 28m

podcasts.apple.com

Thanks. I needed one for a little drive I'm on today. Perfect timing!

 

[Irrelevant]

There are over 30% more caribou n other critters in Prudhoe Bay that before oil exploration.

hmm let's pump the brakes one that claim. The Porcupine herd has been at it's highest #s and lowest #s since the pipeline when in.

Porcupine caribou herd numbers highest in monitoring history

"Currently we don't have any studies specifically looking at what factors are affecting those demographics," said Jason Caikoski, a wildlife biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Listen now

www.alaskapublic.org

"monitoring started back in the 1970s..."
"the low point was 123,000 – back in 2001."

 

[ThunderNocked]

I have been listening to their podcast ever since Randy had them on, I need something to fill in the gaps between new releases on all my other podcasts. They are fun to listen to and well versed on the topics they discuss. They are definitely great ambassadors for the cause of public land. I'll have to skip ahead and listen to this one.

Check out TundraTalk! run by some guys up in Fairbanks, AK!

 

[ThunderNocked]

Randy has had Dave and Nephi on his podcasts. This episode of their show was the best education ever for me in ANWR.

Oil & Ice- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 07/20/2021 · 1h 28m

podcasts.apple.com

checking it out now! I can listen to it at work!

 

[Deleted member 18333]

When I flew into Prudhoe I seen caribou all over the place close to town and around the pipeline. I don't think it bothered them much.

Everyone that worked in and travelled through the Pinedale Anticline said the exact same thing regarding MD and pronghorn on the winter range. "Doesn't bother them, I see them all the time standing on the side of the rig roads and well pads". Hell, even I used to say that. Kevin Montieth's research showed that is does bother them. Alot!

 

[Ben Lamb]

Everyone that worked in and travelled through the Pinedale Anticline said the exact same thing regarding MD and pronghorn on the winter range. "Doesn't bother them, I see them all the time standing on the side of the rig roads and well pads". Hell, even I used to say that. Kevin Montieth's research showed that is does bother them. Alot!

I remember those statements well. I remember the statements that the development would be done in a way that mule deer wouldn't be displaced, and pronghorn would thrive as would grouse. Then the mountain of exceptions for the developments came, and all got approved. The Jonah & Anticline play tell us exactly what happens when we nuke critical areas for O&G. If the calving grounds are developed, the herd dies off.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The arguments presented in the above podcast are based on one test well that no one knows the results of and economic concerns.
If it's not economical it won't be developed,period.

I dug into this a bit more and tried to educate myself.

Interesting assessment.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/ofr-98-0034/ANWR1002.pdf

Here's what stands out to me.
1. 84% of the resources is in the NW, shall we say third of unit 1002
2. Test well is on private/ Native Corp lands, it's on the other side of the Anticline which is the line of basically Good / Bad recovery potential
3. During the lease sale there were few bids, of those that did bid, no one bid on the east of the Anticline leases
4. The state of Alaska knows the Chevron well results, there was a lawsuit... state won, but only a couple of geologists at the State are allowed to know the results.
5. So neither the State who knows the results, nor Chevron bid on the Eastern Leases + Chevron has not tried to drill on the Native Corp lands. That says to me that well is a dry hole, if it had revealed huge oil reserves they wouldn't be keeping it secret and either they or the state would have bid on those leases.
6. Given the number of Exploratory wells near lease 29 I bet people have some idea of the reserves, closest to the unit 1002 Boundary. At least enough to weigh the PR nightmare versus $.

The 1002 area happens to be where between 1/2 and 3/4 of the Porcupine Caribou herd spends May-July.

View attachment 189739

Seems like it's possible the best part of the play is outside of the calving area...

 

[Irrelevant]

^I had to give a like just for effort alone!