TITLE

House and Senate process rival Energy bills

PUB. DATE
May 2003
SOURCE
Power Economics;May2003, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p4
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Reports on the processing of rival energy legislative bills by the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate. Aim of reducing the energy dependence of the country; Promotion of energy resources; Controversy over the proposed drilling of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
ACCESSION #
10289013

Tags: POWER resources -- Law & legislation;  LEGISLATIVE bills;  UNITED States -- Politics & government;  ARCTIC National Wildlife Refuge (Alaska);  ENVIRONMENTALISM

 

Related Articles

  • SOUND OF A TREE FALLING. Kolbert, Elizabeth // New Yorker;11/18/2002, Vol. 78 Issue 35, p35 

    Criticizes the United States government's environmental policies. Battle between the Congress and the administration over the management of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; Political factors that influence the policies.

  • Arctic Oil, Frozen Dialogue.  // Christian Science Monitor;8/30/2000, Vol. 92 Issue 196, p10 

    Presents opinions on the 2000 United States presidential candidates views on oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge of Alaska.

  • ALASKA'S Oil War. Ebersole, Rene S. // Current Science;4/6/2001, Vol. 86 Issue 14, p8 

    Solicits views related to oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Commitment of oil companies to drill the area without damaging the environment; Support of United States President George Bush for the exploration plans; Disadvantages of advanced oil drilling technology.

  • Should We Drill in Alaska?  // Junior Scholastic;9/17/2001, Vol. 104 Issue 2, p5 

    Argues the viability of drilling oil and natural gas in Alaska. Percentage of the American citizens opposing to the oil drilling; Views of environmentalists on land and wildlife of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; Recognition on the need for additional energy sources.

  • Over a Barrel.  // New Republic;8/20/2001, Vol. 225 Issue 8, p7 

    Reveals that oil exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is not only beneficial for the United States, its environmental impact is also negligible. Call to Democrats for compromise by approving the exploration in exchange for increasing the fuel-economy standards for sport...

  • HOUSE OKS ARCTIC DRILLING, BUT LOW-SULFUR PHASE-IN STAYS.  // Overdrive;Sep2001, Vol. 41 Issue 9, p19 

    Focuses on the bill passed by the United States House permitting oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Reduction of the dependency on foreign sources of energy; Swithcover of the mandates regarding the phase-in of low-sulfur diesel fuel; Views of president...

  • Energy supply bill clears House panel. Laws, Forrest // Western Farm Press;10/15/2005, Vol. 27 Issue 21, p16 

    Reports on the move of the House Resources Committee to pass legislation that would open a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife refuge to drilling for oil in Alaska. Opposition from environmental organizations; Detail of the area covering the drilling plan; Capability of the project on...

  • Legislative Background.  // Congressional Digest;Jun/Jul2001, Vol. 80 Issue 6/7, p173 

    Reports on legislative bills related to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Legislative choices of the 107th Congress; Energy policy of United States President George W. Bush's administration.

  • Oil debate in Alaska is all in a name. Rosen, Yereth // Christian Science Monitor;6/29/95, Vol. 87 Issue 150, p4 

    Discusses the conflict between oil development and environmental preservation due to the oil drilling project of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska. Debate on the subject; Details of the government decision to endorse oil drilling by the ANWR.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of your local library

Public Libraries Near You (See All)
Looking for a Different Library?

Other Topics