Ryding’s Blog

Source Notes

Title:

ANWR Reality (YouTube, July 24, 2008)

Summary:

This is a news story created by reporter Jim Angle and Fox News highlighting the controversy over oil drilling on the ANWR, and specifically focusing much of the report’s efforts on the town known as Kaktovik, Alaska.  This source uses interviews from citizens and stakeholders, as well as production estimates and diagrams to deliver its message effectively.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Mainstream journalistic source.

Featured media type: multimedia video

This source is a video posted on YouTube.

Publication Information:

This video was taken from Fox News and published on YouTube on July 24, 2008.

Author:

There is no author for this source, but Fox Reporter Jim Angle is featured.

Location:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPfslGt04gc&feature=related

Accessed:

I last accessed this link on the morning of March 13, 2009.

Support:

Debbie Miller- Alaska Wilderness League (environmentalist)- makes the claim that “The Wilderness would be gone forever” after the introduction of oil drilling into the ANWR.

Doug Settles- BP Exploration League- makes the assertion that the environmental impact of oil drilling has been greatly reduced in recent years, and the environmental footprint that drilling leaves is often greatly exaggerated.

John Boehner (Republican of Ohio)- House Minority Leader- speaks of the fact that in 1995 Congress did pass a bill permitting oil exploration and drilling on the ANWR, but President Clinton nullified those efforts through a veto of the bill.

Adam Linn- Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation- native to Kaktovik, Alaska and authority figure of the Kaktovik Inupiats.  Although the ANWR is relatively close to Kaktovik, Linn entirely advocates the introduction of oil drilling into the region because of the positive economic benefits that would be generated from the processes of oil exploration and drilling. 

These sources combine in order to form a news story that features differing viewpoints on the issue of oil drilling.  One might assume that the natives of Kaktovik would be against oil drilling on the ANWR, but Fox News provides the viewer with a somewhat unique perspective from Adam Linn.  Debbie Miller’s argument is not as strong as the other forms of support stricly due to the fact that she bases her argument on emotional appeal, and not statistics or fact.

Audience and Agenda:

Fox News and YouTube are both media platforms that already have a large amount of American citizen awareness, and consistent audiences that cause their messages to be spread effectively throughout the the U.S. via television, the internet, and virally.  YouTube has legal rights to this source featuring Fox News’ report, and Youtube is owned  by google, which acquired the media source in 2008.  At the time that I initially watched this report on YouTube there had been 240 people who had previously watched it, and no comments left by any of the viewers.  While this is a strongly composed report, it has reached a very small audience for a YouTube video.

Usefulness:
This video aims at providing a non-bias viewpoint on the issue of drilling on the ANWR by delivering testimonials on the debate from both sides, but it does a much better job of featuring the argument that is in favor of introducing oil exploration and production in the region.  It is making the argument that the environmental concerns associated with drilling are not actually that large, and the economic benefits that could be created would potentially outweigh the negative environmental factors that come along with it.  This source was initially attempting to address television watchers, speficially those tuned into Fox.  The information delivered in this article clashes with the perspective of Karla Dutton from my fourth interview on this issue.  Dutton believes that natives are already experiencing the adverse effects of oil driling in Alaska, but this story gives the testimonials of Alaskan natives who are in favor of the introduction of drilling near their lands.  This source leaves out the species that could potentially be harmed by drilling when formulating the stance against the introduction of drilling into the ANWR.

Works cited:

• The Alaska Wilderness League-

http://www.alaskawild.org/

• John Boehner- 8th District of Ohio-

http://johnboehner.house.gov/

• The Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation-

http://www.kaktovik.com/

Source Notes

Title:

Rep Don Young Urges Producing American Energy & Opening ANWR (YouTube, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

This source is a video featuring Congressman and Alaskan Representative Don Young at the podium in Washington, D.C. urging Congress to vote in favor of his bill, the American Energy Independence and Price Reduction Act (also known as the HR 6107 bill). If passed the bill would open the ANWR up to oil drilling, and generate roughly $200 billion to help finance the development of alternative energy resources in the future.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Citizen source, expert and stakeholder
This source is a Youtube video.

Featured media type: multimedia video

Publication Information:
This video was taken from the floor of Congress and posted on Youtube on July 9, 2008.

Author:

There is no author specified for this source.

Location:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlfmvwxxgHM

Accessed:

I last accessed this link in the early morning of March 13, 2009.

Support:

Former President Bill Clinton (1993-2001)- vetoed an earlier form of the HR6107 bill on the grounds that it would take about ten years for the new legislation to take any kind of effect.  According to Congressman Young, that was 13 years ago.

The U.S. Congress- has passed a form of the HR 6107 bill in the past, before it was vetoed and thrown out by President Clinton.

The Trans Alaskan Pipeline- an 800 mile-long, 48 inch in diameter pipe designed for the transportation of oil out of remote refuges in Alaska.  The pipe was built in roughly three years.

Don Young uses these three forms of support to improve his argument in very different ways.  First, statistics on the Trans Alaskan Pipeline give the impression that an addition line to the ANWR is entirely feasible in the near future.  The fact that Congress has passed a bill very similar to the HR 6107 in the past shows that there is support for this legislation. Lastly, looking back on Clinton’s veto and seeing how entirely wrong his logic was definitely helps in dismantling the opposition to this bill.

Audience and Agenda:

The original intended audience for this speech by Congressman Young was entirely  the rest of the members of Congress.  However, through C-Span and YouTube this source has reached a much larger volume of people than Young likely had originally expected.  At the time that I last viewed this video there had been 975,766 people who had watched it before me, and 226 of those people decided to respond on the message board.  This is a relatively large amount of people considering this is not even taking into account the amount of people who saw it on C-Span (the location where YouTube was able to duplicate the post from).  Young was likely very pleased with this, as it is obvious he feels that the opposition to his argument is ridiculous and needs to be exposed.  Youtube is a constantly expanding website that features nearly every sort of video that one could imagine.  Youtube reaches approximately 80.6 million people monthly on their site.

Usefulness:

This source was created in order to urge Congress to vote in favor of the HR 6107 bill, and poke holes in the arguments that oppose the passing of the HR 6107.  In this video Young is making the assertion that the U.S. “No longer has the will to develop our resources,” and that in order to solve the problem of energy in the United States we need to “address the supply side of the issue.”  Young believes that even though we need to move toward the use of alternative forms of energy, we rely so heavily on oil right now that it makes no sense to abandon the process of oil drilling.  This argument relates well to my interview with Adrian Herrera, in which Herrera speaks of the amount of times that a bill on the ANWR has reached Congress only to fall on deaf ears.

Works cited:

• The Miller Center of Public Affairs- features biography of former President Bill Clinton.

http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/clinton

• The U.S. Congress- 

http://www.house.gov/

• fairbanks-alaska.com- provides information on the Trans Alaskan Pipeline.

http://fairbanks-alaska.com/trans-alaska-pipeline.htm

• http://www.quantcast.com/- statistics on YouTube traffic.

http://www.quantcast.com/youtube.com

Source Notes

Title:

ANWR Land Use (The University of North Carolina, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

Those who are in favor of the introduction of oil drilling into the ANWR prepose that the exploration and drilling take place in a portion of the region known as the 1002 Area.  This source is a map of Alaska that features the highlighted area of the ANWR.  Inside the highlighted area are divisions and percentages relating to the amount of land that would be dedicated to oil development, wilderness lands, and refuge lands as proposed by people in favor of spreading the practice of oil drilling into the ANWR.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Academic source featuring a still image.

Publication Information:

The University of North Carolina is responsible for the content of this map and article, but the date when they were published is unclear.

Author:

There is no author attributed with the content of this source.

Location:

http://www.unc.edu/%7Emoney/geography/anwr1.html

Accessed:

I last referred to this website on March 12, 2009.

Support:

The United States Geological Service-  found in a 1998 geological survey that there is between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels of technically available oil and gas derivable from the ANWR.

The McDowell Group of Anchorage Alaska- estimates that there would be “1,000 jobs created during the construction phase of the ANWR development project.”

Alaska Congressman Al Adams- supports the exploration for gas and oil on the ANWR because he feels that the oil development in Purdhoe Bay has increased the general standard of living in that area, a region somewhat similar to the ANWR.

The AFL-CIO (America’s Union Movement)- supports drilling on the ANWR because of the labor potential that would translate into new jobs.

All of these sources take an extremely conservative approach to the development of their side of the argument.  They base their opinions on what is immediately beneficial for American citizens, and it would create an effective argument if delivered to an individual with more conservative approaches to American issues.

Audience and Agenda:

The audience for this article is conservative individuals who already have a somewhat formulated opinion on the issue of the ANWR.  In no way would this map and article appeal to people with a liberal or environmental approach to looking at the region.  The University of North Carolina is responsible for the content of this page, but due to the fact that there is little publication information, it is hard to development a statistic on the number of individuals who view this image and article.  Funding for the university of North Carolina and this webpage comes from multiple sources such as student tuition, independent donors, and state funding.

Usefulness:

This source is an image and article that attempts to strengthen the viewpoint that the 1002 Area is an extremely small region in comparison to the entirety of the ANWR and Alaska as a whole, and therefore the implementation of oil drilling on the 1002 Area should not be blown out of proportion.  This image wants the viewer to take into consideration that proponents of drilling on the ANWR wish to do so on the tiny red region that represents only .08 percent of the Alaskan territory.  It is trying to address conservative United States citizens, as well as attempt to give perspective to people who disagree with their stance.  This article does not give any information on the publication date, the author, and doesn’t provide a proper link back to the University of North Carolina, so it seems to lack some of the information that builds credibility for my other sources.

Works cited:

• The University of North Carolina- 

http://www.unc.edu/

• The McDowell Group- 

http://www.mcdowellgroup.net/

• The United States Geological Service-

http://www.usgs.gov/

• The AFL-CIO-

http://www.aflcio.org/

Source Notes

Title:

Bodman: ANWR Drilling to be stripped from energy bill (ANWR News Blog, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

This source is a blog post that describes the process and reasoning behind the removal of ANWR drilling from a past bill sent to Congress.  This procedure happened during the tenure of the Bush Administration, and it turned the bill into yet another form of proposed legislation on this issue that died after being sent to Congress.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Citizen, journalistic commentator

This source is a blog post that is featured on the ANWR News Blog.

Publication Information:

This source was published on June 15, 2005 on the ANWR News Blog online.

Author:

The author of this blog post is not listed.  The blog simply states that the author is “ a professional journalist in California with more than 15 years of experience.”

Location:

http://anwrnews.blogspot.com/

Accessed:

I last referred to this post on March 12, 2009.

Support:

Rocky Mountain News- originally published the article this blog is commenting on.

Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.)- author of the bill in question.

The House of Representatives- passed a version of the bill in April of 2005 that included the introduction of drilling on the ANWR.

There are numerous bills on the ANWR that are sent to Congress every year.  These forms of support show which individuals and institutions are responsible for the introduction of this particular bill into Washington, D.C.

Audience and Agenda:

The author of this blog remains unnamed, but it is clear that his or her intention was to create a journalistic source that  provides independent and diverse information about the ANWR, as America continually debates whether or not oil drilling should be permitted on the region.  The author claims to be a non-bias source, but it is obvious that his opinions and perspectives parallel the side of the argument in favor of drilling on the ANWR.  There is no funding necessary for this source, as it is entirely ran and maintained through one individual by choice.  It is not detailed how many individuals visit this site on the page itself, or on quantcast.com.  However, there are at least a few comments on each of the postings on this blog, so it appears that this blog is a site that is visited relatively often for opinions and news updates on the ANWR.

Usefulness:

This source is useful to my argument because it correlates strongly with some of the information that I gathered from my interview with expert Adrian Herrera.  Herrera informed me that there are currently 19 bills on ANWR awaiting enactment by Congress in Washington, more than any other issue in the United States.  While this blog doesn’t provide any strong opinions on the topic, it gives insight into the complications dealing with potentially passing a bill on ANWR.  This document was created on order to relay the information that yet another bill featuring ANWR had been revised in order to phase out the portion preposing the introduction of oil drilling on the ANWR.  It is trying to address every individual who wishes to stay updated on the legislations dealing with ANWR.  While this source is useful to my topic because it shows how complicated things have been for the ANWR in Washington, it lacks some usefulness simply because it is slightly outdated.  The information present in this post features the outlook on the ANWR situation under the Bush Administration, and as we all know, the United States is currently being ran by the newly elected Obama Administration.

Works cited:

• Rocky Mountain News- 

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/

• The House of Representatives-

http://www.house.gov/

Source Notes

Title:

Polar Bears Adrift (Science & Spirit, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

Oil drilling on the ANWR is heavily disputed because of the projected negative effects that many people think it will have on certain species in the region.  One of the species that could be greatly effected by the expansion of drilling into the ANWR is the polar bear.  This article highlights the controversy over the treatment of the polar bear, as well as the potential effects that oil drilling could have on the lifestyle and population of polar bears.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Academic Research Source

This source is an article that was featured in the March/April 2008 issue of the periodical Science and Spirit.  It is also published on the Science and Spirit website.

Publication Information:

This article was published in Science and Spirit magazine and online in March/April of 2008 under the Heldref Publications Company.

Author:

The author of this source is Diane Cole.

Location:

http://0-web.ebscohost.com.janus.uoregon.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=15&hid=107&sid=b6946a45-6acf-448d-b618-d29e0dd883ea%40sessionmgr108

(derived through Ebscohost, so membership may be required)

Accessed:

I last accessed this page on March 12, 2009.

Support:

The Minerals Management Service (MMS)- announced in January of 2008 its decision to sell oil and gas leasing for 46,000 square miles in Alaska’s Chuchki Sea.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- contemplating whether or not to list polar bears as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

The U.S. Geological Survey- collected data predicting the potential environmental harm in the near future of the 20,000-25,000 polar bears existing today.

The Department of the Interior (DOI)- commissioned studies on polar bears in order to reach a decision on whether or not the species should be classified as endangered.

Ian Stirling- senior research scientist with the Canadian Wildlife Service- provides statistics on the feeding habits and necessities of polar bears.

All of these credible forms of support do a good job of bolstering the opinion that whether or not you agree with the author, it is undeniably an issue that is attracting much attention, research, and controversy.

Audience and Agenda:

This article is an academic research source by Diane Cole, an author who has contributed to well-established periodicals such as The New York Times and Newsweek.  This particular article is featured on the website for Science & Spirit, as well as on other online journalistic archives which require membership.  The Science and Spirit website recently expired on March 3, 2009, but was initially established through Heldref Publications, a non-profit academic publishing firm stationed in Washington, D.C.  The audience for this source is as many viewers as possible, as Cole is attempting to make a strongly persuasive argument that shifts the nation’s opinions on the manner in which we should handle the dwindling polar bear population.  ”Polar Bears Adrift” by Cole gets an average of about 6.2 thousand online viewers monthly.

Usefulness:

This source is extremely important to the development of the answer to my should question because it strongly correlates with the information that I took with my interview with Karla Dutton last Wednesday.  It was created in order to address the treatment of polar bears, which author Diane Cole views as extremely inappropriate.  This source asserts that the situation the polar bears are currently experiencing is causing the population to dip to the point that they will soon be on the Endangered Species List, and the expansion of drilling will only devastate the population further.  Dutton and Cole both view polar bears as one of the species that could be most heavily effected by the introduction of oil drilling into the ANWR.  They use these thoughts on the polar bear situation to formulate their opinion that deriving oil from the ANWR is not worth devastating a species that might not be able to recover in the future.

Works cited:

• www.internzoo.com- provides information on Heldref Publications.

http://www.internzoo.com/Employer/HeldrefPublications-1011.aspx

• The Minerals Management Service website- support

http://www.mms.gov/

• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- support

http://www.fws.gov/

• The U.S. Geological Survey- support

http://www.usgs.gov/

• The U.S. Department of the Interior- support

http://www.doi.gov/

• www.winedalebooks.com- information on Diane Cole

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:Jf-Xne-XrIgJ:www.winedalebooks.com/books/cole.html+Diane+Cole&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari

• http://www.quantcast.com/- provides information on this article’s online traffic.

http://www.quantcast.com/pdf.com

Source Notes

Title:

Sources of Alaska Oil and Gas Government Revenues (AOGA Educational Seminar, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

This source is pretty much summarized in the title.  It is a report filed by the Alaska Oil and Gas Association (AOGA) that highlights the major forms of tax income generated by the State of Alaska.  It specifically addresses royalties, corporate income taxes, property taxes, and the production (severance) taxes that are in place because of the presence of oil drilling in Alaska.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Institutional, nonprofit 

This source is a report posted on the AOGA website.

Publication Information:

This source was published on January , 2009 on the AOGA website.

Author:

No author is credited for this report.  It is simply property of the AOGA.

Location:

http://www.aoga.org/pdfs/09EducationSeminar/Seminar%20Gov%20Revenue%20FINAL.pdf

Accessed:

I last accessed this website on March 12, 2009.

Support:

The AOGA- The AOGA “16-member companies represent the majority of oil and gas exploration, production, transportation, refining and marketing activities in Alaska” (http://www.aoga.org/who.html).

The member companies of the AOGA include:

• Alyeska Pipeline Service Company
• Andarko Petroleum Corporation
• BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.
• Chevron
• Eni Petroleum, and many others.

The ACES production tax- tax enacted to make sure that both Alaskan industries and citizens receive a portion of the income from Alaska’s nonrenewable resources.

Governor Sarah Palin- the Palin Administration went through the necessary steps to work towards the ACES tax in order to ensure the fair and proper distribution of funds generated from oil and other nonrenewable resources in Alaska.

The AOGA is a company that is composed of several other large, well-established companies.  The taxes described in this source are supported by these member companies, as well as the Governor Palin Administration in Alaska.

Audience and Agenda:

The AOGA is a nonprofit organization created with the intention of fostering the long-term existance of the oil and gas industry in Alaska.  While the AOGA is nonprofit, the industries that are a part of the AOGA make up the majority of oil and gas activities in Alaska.  The revenue for the AOGA is generated primarily through donations from independent sources and contributions from its member organizations.  The audience for the report on the Sources of Alaska Oil and Gas Government  would include any individual curious about the state revenue generated from taxes, as well as the types of taxes that are instituted in the state of Alaska (property, production, etc.).  In addition to their website, the AOGA sends out a newsletter to its subscribers, which is frequently read by the nearly 42,000 individuals in Alaska who have jobs related to the Alaskan oil and gas industry.

Usefulness:

This source was created in order to inform the reader of the importance of the tax money generated from the oil and gas industry every year in Alaska.  According to this source, petroleum revenues to the State of Alaska have averaged over 85 percent of the total income.  These numbers compare favorably to the ones taken from my interview with Adrian Herrera. The document was composed in order to give a perspective of how much Alaska depends on the oil industry for its state and citizen incomes.  It is trying to address any individual with curiosity on the issue, but does a particularly good job of convincing the reader that the industry is an absolute necessity to the preservation of the state.  This source was initially created and presented to its member companies at the 2009 AOGA Educational Seminar, and now is  main feature of the AOGA website.  

Works cited:

• AOGA website- hosts this source, as well as features information about the 2009 AOGA Education Seminar.

http://www.aoga.org/index.html

• The ACES website- provides information on the format of the ACES production tax.

http://gov.state.ak.us/aces/aces_materials.php

• The Offices of Governor Sarah Palin-

http://gov.state.ak.us/index.html

Title:

Interview with Karla M. Dutton (Defenders of Wildlife, March 12, 2009)

Summary:

Karla M. Dutton is the Alaska Program Director for Defenders of Wildlife, an organization based in Washington, D.C. that is dedicated to the protection of American wildlife throughout the nation.  She is also a resident of Chugiak, Alaska.  Mrs. Dutton was generous enough to take part in a 20 to 30 minute interview with me on Wednesday, highlighting her thoughts on the ANWR and whether or not oil drilling should be introduced into the region. 

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Citizen, expert, stakeholder (as a citizen of Alaska)

This source is a telephone interview that took place between Mrs. Karla M. Dutton and myself.

Publication Information:

The information shared  by Dutton in this interview has yet to be published, and much of it will likely not be published on this blog.  For further questions and specifics on this interview, including a transcript of the questions, notes taken from the conversation, and contact information for Mrs. Dutton visit the Defenders of Wildlife website, or please contact Jeff Ryding at Ryding’s Blog, or e-mail him at ryding@uoregon.edu.

This interview was conducted on Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Author:

There is no author for this source in the typical sense, but all of the information comes from Karla Dutton and the Defenders of Wildlife, and was gathered by University of Oregon student Jeff Ryding.

 Location:

There is no online location for this source, but notes on the interview are available upon request.

Accessed:

The interview with Karla Dutton was conducted on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 9 a.m.  I was last in contact with Mrs. Dutton that same evening in the form of e-mails regarding her recommendations for additional sources.

Support:

Defenders of Wildlife- employer of Dutton for the past three years, and institution partially responsible for her status as an expert on this issue.

Issues Policy Council (IPA)- Dutton is part of this committee which is responsible for the direction of the Alaskan Conservation Alliance (ACA).  The ACA is a group that represents 40 member organizations and 38,000 individual Alaskan citizens at the state capitol.

University of Rhode Island-  institution where Dutton earned her B.A. in Natural Resources Management (1981), and her M.A. in Marine Affairs (1995).

Georgetown University- institution where Dutton earned her Senior Executive Management Program certificate.

These sources collaborate in order to generate a strong sense of credibility for this source.  Dutton clearly has a diverse number of degrees (as seen from her time at the University of Rhode Island and Georgetown University), and work experience that qualifies her as an expert on the protection of many of the nation and world’s threatened species.  In addition, as a resident of Chugiak, Alaska, Dutton would qualify as a stakeholder when considering the expansion of oil drilling in Alaska.

Audience and agenda:

Defenders of Wildlife is an organization primarily focused on the preservation of many of America’s native species that are threatened by various forms of change occurring in their environments.  It is a non-profit organization that generates most of its revenue through personal contributions from outside sources.  One of the ultimate goals, in addition to the general protection of those species, is for the Defenders of Wildlife to develop a unified alliance that has a significant influence on issues in Congress.  Defenders of Wildlife employed more than 150 individuals, and had more than 500,000 members nationwide in 2008.  In addition to this large amounts of members, the Defenders of Wildlife website reaches an average of about 229,000 people each month, with 22 perfect of those individuals being regular users.  It is clear that the Defenders of Wildlife agenda and message is reaching a large amount of U.S. citizens.  For this interview my source was attempting to address just myself, with the knowledge that the information taken from the interview would be spread on the internet and in the University of Oregon classrooms.  Mrs. Dutton wishes that her message about ANWAR would reach as many people worldwide as possible; one of the reasons that she was so readily available and willing to do an interview.

Usefulness:

This source has been extremely useful to the process of developing an argument and stance regarding the issue of oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  I had already conducted an interview with an Alaskan citizen and expert (Adrian Herrera) who is entirely for the introduction of drilling on the ANWR, so it was very beneficial for me to talk with another Alaskan citizen and expert who has differing viewpoints on the controversy.  That way I can look at the dispute from multiple angles.  In the interview Dutton was forming the argument that there are species such as polar bears that are already experiencing the negative effects of oil drilling in Alaska, and the expansion of the practice would only increase the harm on those species’ environments.  She also asserts that there have already been negative consequences of drilling for multiple native villages in Alaska, which rely much more heavily on the earth’s natural resources than the typical American citizen.  These statements, in combination with the fact that Dutton feels the right research on oil drilling in the region has not been performed, provide the basis for Dutton’s reasoning that oil drilling on the ANWR would be an insensible process at this current time.  While this source was very helpful, I failed to go into depth with her about the specific dangers to the species in the region such as polar bears and caribou.  I will likely have to get this information from other sources.

Works cited:

• Defenders of Wildlife- current employer of Dutton.

http://www.defenders.org/index.php

• The Alaskan Conservation Alliance (ACA)- directed by Dutton and the rest of the Issues Policy Council.

http://www.akvoice.org/

• The University of Rhode Island-

http://www.uri.edu/

• The University of Georgetown-

http://www.georgetown.edu/

• www.quantcast.com- provides statistics on the amount of traffic on the Defenders of Wildlife webpage.  

http://www.quantcast.com/defenders.org#traffic

Source Notes

Title:

Interview with Pat Hughes (The Chevron Corporation, March 11, 2009 )

Summary:

Mr. Pat Hughes is stationed in Richmond, California as a Senior Staff Analyst for The Chevron Corporation, an organization he has been a part of for the last 33 years.  Hughes is known as a job-market analyst, which means that he takes a “global perspective” on issues dealing with oil.  Earlier this week I was permitted to have a roughly 25 minute to half hour conversation with Mr. Hughes on his opinions and stance on the possibility of oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Citizen, expert

This source is a telephone interview between Mr. Pat Hughes and myself.

Publication Information:

The content derived from this interview is information that has not yet been published, and most of it will likely not be published on this blog.  For further questions and specifics on this interview, including a transcript of the questions, notes taken from the conversation, and contact information for Pat Hughes, please contact Jeff Ryding at Ryding’s Blog, or e-mail him at ryding@uoregon.edu.

This interview was conducted at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

Author:

There is no author for this source in the typical sense, but all of the information comes from Chevron’s Pat Hughes, and was gathered by University of Oregon student Jeff Ryding. 

Location:

There is no online location for this source, but notes on the interview are available upon request.

Accessed:

The interview with Mr. Hughes was conducted on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 9 a.m.  I last contacted Hughes for a minor follow-up interview on Thursday, March 12, 2009.

Support:

The Chevron Corporation- responsible for Pat Hughes’ employment for the past 33 years, where he became an expert on the issue of global oil and energy development.

Prudhoe Bay Oil Development-  provides comparisons with the ANWR in an order to generate statistics about possible oil production in the ANWR.

The Department of Interior’s (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (in particular, lead scientist John Watson)- provided statistics highlighting the potential amount of oil that could be derived from the ANWR.

Chevron is one of the most well-known and respected energy providers in the world.  Spending 33 years with this organization qualifies Hughes as an extremely well-informed expert on the issue of oil drilling.  The Prudhoe Bay Oil Development numbers, while not perfect because of minor regional differences with the ANWR, give researches a good idea of the possibilities in the ANWR.

Audience and Agenda:

The Chevron Corporation is one of the most well-known and respect energy providers in the world.  The majority of the American public is extremely familiar with the corporation, most likely due to the extensive presence of Chevron gas stations spread throughout the United States.  In addition, The Chevron Corporation website attracts an average of about 179,000 people monthly.  Chevron works with fuel sources that span from oil to hydrogen, and Chevron Energy Solutions was recently named as one of Fast Company magazine’s “50 Most Innovative Companies.”  The intent of the website for The Chevron Corporation is to promote both the quality and quantity of energy that Chevron provides, the means in which they do it, and to boost sales and brand awareness.  The funding for Chevron comes almost entirely from energy sales.  Chevron is the parent company that has absorbed many others such as Texaco and the Gulf Oil Corporation.  Pat Hughes has been a member of this extensively innovative corporation for the last 33 years.  The agenda of Mr. Hughes in particular is to promote his experiences, viewpoints, expertise, and the general stance of his corporation in regards to the expansion of oil drilling across the globe. 

Usefulness:

This source directly addressed my topic because I was able to have a global expert comment on issues that are related directly to the region in question (the ANWR).  The predominate message from my interview with Pat Hughes was that the U.S. does not have the proper information to formulate a plan on whether or not to drill on the ANWR, and the current numbers are not convincing enough to effectively promote drilling.  According to statistics that Hughes emphasized were strictly estimates, “If oil production levels were similar to that of the Prudhoe Bay Oil Reserve in Alaska, an estimated 8 billion barrels of oil could be produced in the ANWR.  This translates to the production of one million barrels a day, every day for 10-15 years after the introduction of oil drilling.”  Hughes went on to put these numbers in perspective, stating that, “Due to the recession, the U.S. is currently losing one million dollars (the same amount) in oil sales daily.”  Due to his experiences and statistics such as this, Hughes’ stance is that he would prefer to have the ANWR remain a region that is protected from oil drilling.  However, he continued with the disclaimer, “If I had to choose a new region to explore with oil drilling in the United States, I would likely choose to spread drilling into the ANWR.”  One can see that most of Hughes’ reasoning behind his perspective the ANWR comes from skepticism about the resources in the region, not from the potential environmental concerns of oil drilling (which is views as generally overstated).  This citizen source could feature a large amount of personal bias in regards to oil hazards, due to the fact that Hughes works for a company that prides itself on safe, clean energy solutions.

Works cited:

• Columbia University  website- hosts information about Prudhoe Bay Oil Development.

http://www.columbia.edu/~sp2023/scienceandsociety/web-pages/Prudhoe%20Bay.html

• The Chevron Corporation- has employed Pat hughes for the last 33 years.

http://www.chevron.com/

• Chevron Energy Solutions-

http://www.chevronenergy.com/

• www.quantcast.com- provided statistics on the amount of traffic on the Chevron website.

http://www.quantcast.com/chevron.com#traffic

• The Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management-

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html

Source Notes

Title:

Interview with Steve Grover, Ph.D (ECONorthwest, March 11, 2009).

Summary:

Steve Grover has been the senior economist and management director in charge of Energy Modeling and Economics for  ECONorthwest for the last nine years.  I recently had a telephone interview with Grover on his perspectives and opinions in regards to oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Topic:

Should the United States experiment with oil drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in an attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Category:

Citizen, expert

This source is a telephone interview between Steven Grover and myself.

Publication Information:

The information taken from this interview with Grover has not yet been published by him or myself.  However, for further questions and specifics on this interview, including a transcript of the questions and notes taken from the conversation, please contact Jeff Ryding at Ryding’s Blog, or e-mail him at ryding@uoregon.edu.

The interview was conducted on the afternoon of Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

Author:

There is no author for this source in the typical sense, but all of the information comes from ECONorthwest’s Steve Grover, and was gathered by University of Oregon student Jeff Ryding. 

Location:

There is no online location for this source, but notes on the interview are available upon request.

Accessed:

The interview with Mr. Grover was conducted on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.  I have not been in contact with Grover since the interview.

Support:

ECONorthwest- ECONorthwest is an economics consulting firm that has offices spread throughout Oregon, Washington and Colorado.  The company works for both public and private-sector clients throughout the United States.  ECONorthwest is currently responsible for Grover’s employment and position as an expert on the issue of oil drilling (specifically the economic factors).

The U.S. Department of Energy- Steven Grover “has managed and worked on projects for the U.S. Department of Energy.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-  Grover has also been a part of projects directed by the EPA.

The National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL)-  The NREL is “the nation’s primary laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development (R&D)” (http://www.nrel.gov/overview/), and is part of Grover’s employment experience as an expert on the issue of U.S. energy.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison- the location where Grover earned both his M.S. and Ph.D. in economics.

All of these forms of support do a good job of establishing Steve Grover as an expert on the economic aspects of American energy.  Because of this, they give credibility to the information shared and derived from the phone interview on March 12, 2009.

Audience and Agenda:

The company ECONorthwest is a well-established organization for advising in the fields of economics, finance, planning, and policy evaluation.  It is the Northwest’s largest economic consulting firm.  Most of their funding comes from revenue generated from services rendered to their clients.  The intended audience for their website is all potential clients, as well as individuals who are curious about the consulting services and litigation support that ECONorthwest provides.  The intended audience for the interview itself was initially just myself, but Mr. Grover was aware that information taken from this interview would be viewed by University of Oregon students, as well as visitors to Ryding’s Blog.

Usefulness:

Steve Grover is against the introduction of oil drilling into the ANWR.  His main argument was that no matter how much oil could be derived from the ANWR, it would always be a finite source, and because of this it doesn’t make sense to potentially destroy a region that might never be able to recover from the environmental effects of drilling.  Instead, Grover is in favor of President Obama’s New Energy For America approach to the future of energy in the United States.  Grover agreed to do the interview in order to help me out with my project, but apparently he does this sort of interview relatively often.  Due to the fact that I was directing the content of the interview, I was able to directly address my topic question with this source.  His message of a need for energy change for the future of America is one that he openly discusses because he is an expert on the issue with a very concrete stance on the possibility of oil drilling on the ANWR.  However, in this interview I failed to discuss with Mr. Grover the perspectives of those in favor of drilling on the ANWR, and where he feels that the shortcomings are from that side of the argument.  The roughly estimated monthly traffic for Mr. Grover’s vita page is somewhere around 75,500 people, so he is a highly searched individual on the internet for his areas of expertise.

Works cited:

• ECONorthwest- information on ECONorthwest and background information on Steve Grover.

http://www.econw.com/people/person?name=grover&vitae=1

• The U.S. Department of Energy- part of Grover’s employment experience.

http://www.energy.gov/

• The National Renewable Energy Lab- part of Grover’s employment experience.

http://www.nrel.gov/

• The University of Wisconsin- Madison- the location where Grover earned 2 of his academic degrees.

http://www.wisc.edu/

• Quantcast.com- provided statistic’s for the amount of traffic on Grover’s vita page.

http://www.quantcast.com/person.com