November 2009
National Review;11/2/2009, Vol. 61 Issue 20, p53
In this article the author offers her views on why the U.S. needs to support domestic drilling for petroleum. She states that when the U.S. does not use their own oil reserves, they have to import more oil. The author cites the energy and environmental policies of Alaska to support her argument. The author also discuses why natural gas is clean energy alternative.


Related Articles

  • The Democrats' Sham Energy Bill. Tyrrell Jr., R. Emmett // American Spectator;Nov2008, Vol. 41 Issue 9, p82 

    The article presents the author's views on an energy bill brought to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives by congressional Democrats. He regards it as a cynical effort to placate an electorate that favors offshore oil drilling amid rising gas prices, while actually intending to...

  • Members of Congress, Industry Leaders Discuss Marcellus Shale.  // State Journal (WV);11/18/2011, Vol. 27 Issue 45, p11 

    The article reports on a discussion among members of the U.S. Congress and industry leaders on the proposed Marcellus shale development in 2011.

  • Will US policy be pro-industry? Luthi, Randall // Offshore;Jan2014, Vol. 74 Issue 1, p38 

    The article offers the author's insight on the role of the U.S. government in the offshore industry, focusing on whether the U.S. policy is in favor of the oil industry. He discusses topics including the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) which will start to plan for the 2017-2022...

  • Energy: love it or lease it. McManus, R. // Sierra;Jul/Aug88, Vol. 73 Issue 4, p16 

    The Interior Department hopes to lease much of the nation's coastline, including 1.1 million acres in California, to oil developers, a plan facing heavy opposition. Oil production on the outer continental shelf has always been a high priority in the Reagan administration, raising...

  • Interior dialogue: Californians give feds.. Fuller, B. // Sierra;Jul/Aug88, Vol. 73 Issue 4, p12 

    Over 3,000 people protested for 26 hours last February against Interior Secretary Donald Hodel's plan to open 1.1 million acres along Californian's northern Pacific coast to offshore oil development. The sale was postponed until at least mid-1989. Protest photos and speech excerpts.

  • America's need for (other people's) oil. Davey, Lawrence // Christian Science Monitor;11/8/99, Vol. 91 Issue 240, p11 

    Opinion. Asserts that the extension of a ban for oil drilling off the New England and Atlantic coast of the United States is a hollow victory for environmentalists due to the expected increase in offshore drilling in other countries.

  • No more oil spills.  // U.S. News & World Report;7/10/89, Vol. 107 Issue 2, p17 

    Reports on a speech, to be given on July 18 by Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan, Jr., that is expected to declare the administration's intention to allow offshore oil drilling in California and oil exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

  • ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT: Chevron CEO says supercommittee should increase oil-drilling access. Geman, Ben // Hill;9/8/2011, Vol. 18 Issue 120, p24 

    The article reports on the belief of petroleum company Chevron Corp.'s chief executive officer (CEO) John Watson that there is a need for the bipartisan deficit supercommittee to expand the U.S. oil-and-gas leasing in 2011.

  • Shell backs GOP plan to advance offshore permits. Geman, Ben // Hill;4/14/2011, Vol. 18 Issue 52, p14 

    The article reports on the initiative of the oil firm Royal Dutch Shell PLC to support the efforts of the Republican party to hasten the advancement of offshore permits in the U.S.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics