Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Noncompliance
»
General Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jomama: [QB] BP bowing out of ANWR lobbying group HURT: Oil giant's pullout will take $50,000 yearly from Arctic Power's pocketbook. By Liz Ruskin Anchorage Daily News (Published: November 26, 2002) Washington -- As the lobbying group Arctic Power gears up for yet another year of trying to persuade Congress to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, Alaska's second-largest oil producer has dropped out of the effort. BP Alaska told Arctic Power last week that it would no longer contribute money to the group and that the company's representative on the board was resigning. "It's not a message about ANWR at all," said BP Alaska spokesman Paul Laird. "It's simply a business decision that BP made that it no longer wants to be part of the debate." He said BP paid annual dues of $50,000. "It's definitely a hit financially," said Kim Duke, executive director of Arctic Power. "It's disappointing." The news was cheered in the Washington offices of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "We've been targeting BP for four years to get them to finally live up to their green logo and green image," said Athan Manual, director of U.S. PIRG's Arctic wilderness campaign. "This is a really big step." Arctic Power, devoted solely to opening ANWR, gets most of its funding from the state. Last year the Legislature granted it $3.5 million. The 19 million-acre refuge in northeastern Alaska is closed to drilling, but Congress has struggled for years over whether to open 1.5 million acres on the coastal plain. The House last year passed a bill opening ANWR, but the Democrat-controlled Senate did not. The fight will begin anew in 2003, but this time with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate and the White House. Manual said Arctic Power lost more than money with BP's withdrawal. "I think it undercuts (Arctic Power's) credibility on the Hill," he said. "Their prestige and influence is diminished a bit." Duke said she sees BP's move as another sign that Alaska isn't as important to the big firms operating there as it once was. BP has significant operations elsewhere in the world. The oil giant has been scaling back its Alaska work force and said it won't explore far afield from its existing North Slope wells. "The companies have such an international focus now," Duke said. Still, she can't imagine BP would walk away from ANWR if Congress decides to allow development there. "I think once it's open, they would definitely be involved," she said. "It's the biggest onshore prospect in the entire country." Environmentalists hope BP will decide it can't afford the bad publicity that would accompany the development of an area that's become the poster region for the conservation movement. BP has been working for more than two years to remake itself in a greener image. It has embraced solar energy and changed its motto to "Beyond Petroleum." Meanwhile, BP's chief executive, Lord John Browne, announced in March a new worldwide policy of not funding political activities or political parties. Laird said the company will stay out of the debate but not necessarily out of ANWR itself. "When and if a decision is made to open it, we'll evaluate the decision on the basis of whether it's going to be commercial for us and whether the opportunities in ANWR are competitive with investment opportunities elsewhere in the world," he said. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reporter Liz Ruskin can be reached at 1-202-383-0007 or lruskin@adn.com [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Noncompliance.com
Noncompliance Copyright 2005
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2