Editorial Comment

	Vol. 227 No. 1
PERRY A. FISCHER, EDITOR

ANWR spin. The crux of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) debate in the US problem remains the Democrats, who are nearly unanimous and perennial in their opposition but they have been joined by just enough Republican defectors to kill the idea – maybe.

The House had earlier dropped ANWR language from its budget bill after at least 22 Republicans told leaders they would not vote for the bill, unless the drilling provision was removed. However, it’s now attached to a $453 billion defense spending bill, designed to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s a risky move that could easily backfire in the Senate, delaying funding for the military and causing even greater defection among Republican ranks. As Arizona Senator John McCain (Rep.) put it, “The system is broken.”

The spin from both sides has been very entertaining, or dismaying, depending on your level of cynicism. The environmental-devastation cohorts continue to say that “ANWR is just six months of US production,” which is a ridiculous statement on many levels. If “just six months” were the threshold criteria for exploration worthiness, all drilling in the world would stop. Truth be told, every one of these environmentalists would give their right arm for the proceeds from just six hours of US production.

On the pro side, where it’s either drill or die, and where, supposedly, only a tiny wellhead would intrude on the arctic plain, there’s the rhetoric of US Interior Secretary Gale Norton. While characterizing the environmentalist’s six-month description as “a deceiving picture,” Norton went on to say that ANWR would supply every drop of oil for New York for 34 years, Illinois for 43 years and New Hampshire for 315 years, thus committing the ultimate two-faced spin.

And, of course, there’s the oilfield side. The most frequent spin that we put on it is that the drilling pad is much smaller than it used to be. Not that its size is irrelevant, but the drilling pad goes away.

Here’s a foolish idea: why not tell the truth? Something like:

“We in the oil industry know that developing the Prudhoe Bay complex has resulted in the development of gravel pits, permanent roads, pipelines, small cities and hundreds of square miles of associated infrastructure. Yet, there is no evidence of the endangerment of any species, let alone a reduction in any animal population. Quite the contrary, animal populations are healthy.

“We believe that the exploration and extraction of hydrocarbon resources is an honorable pursuit that has allowed the world tremendous prosperity. We know that E&P operations in ANWR will not be environmentally benign. We wish that they could be. But we believe that these resources can be developed, by any measure, with less environmental impact than was previously possible. We are willing to take whatever special measures are necessary to preserve the wildlife of ANWR.

“While the amount of recoverable resources is not fully known, it the most prospective area left in North America. Given the seven years or so that it would take for development to occur, together with the uncertainty and severity that a shortfall in supply could have on the US economy, it would be irresponsible not to at least appraise the resources of this relatively small, remote area.”

But such candor would never sell.

Fire down below. I got a new laptop computer. It runs even hotter than my old laptop, which I didn’t think was possible. I was waiting at an airport, having arrived about an hour before boarding. So, I pulled out my new laptop and began working. Forty minutes later, my thighs and my “boys” were roasted. I know just enough about reproduction science to appreciate that the reason a man sits with his legs farther apart than a woman, is to keep from burning his genes. Thus, it occurred to me that, sooner or later, some scientist would do a study about laptop use and fertility. Well, guess what?

New technology, such as infrared and wireless connection to the Internet, has resulted in a growing number of men using laptops on their thighs rather than at a desk. The combination of heat generated by a laptop and the posture needed to balance it (knees close together) can damage sperm and affect fertility, according to a study published in the journal, Human Reproduction. The findings warn young men that the time spent with a computer positioned on their lap could have long-term damage to their fertility. Researchers from the State University of New York said their study was the first to look at the effect of heat from laptop computers on scrotal temperature.

Using 29 volunteers aged 21 to 35, the researchers, led by Yefim Sheynkin, found that sitting with the thighs together to balance a laptop caused scrotal temperatures to rise by 2.1°C, and with a laptop in use, average temperatures rose 2.6°C on the left and 2.8°C (5°F) on the right. I’d guess that my new computer – which runs at about the same temperature as the surface of the sun – would easily double those numbers.

A study of 7,500 men who attended the Aberdeen Fertility Centre, at the University of Aberdeen, between 1989 and 2002, showed average sperm concentrations fell by nearly 30%. The reasons are unclear, but many environmental factors (drugs, alcohol, smoking, obesity, pesticides, etc.) have been linked to decreases in fertility. Now laptops must be added to the list.

Dr Sheynkin said that there are an estimated 60 million laptops in the US and 150 million worldwide, and laptops now outsell desktop computers. The researcher said that laptops could reach internal operating temperatures of more than 70°C (158°F). The research did not determine the exact frequency and time of heat exposure that would lead to reversible vs. irreversible changes to sperm. But he said that frequent use of laptops over years, without sufficient recovery time between exposures, “may cause irreversible or partially reversible changes in male reproductive function.” Something to think about, especially if you’re still planning on fathering more children.

I am, of course, writing this on a laptop. In the background, an old Bing Crosby holiday song is playing, “Chestnuts roasting on an open fire...”

Last but not least, from all of us who contribute to World Oil, to each and every one of you, here’s hoping that 2006 is the best, most prosperous year you have ever had.

And if you follow the Chinese Lunar Year, this year, it begins on January 29th. It’s the year of the dog. Ba-roooooo!