Bringing a friendly disagreement from a bar, where both sides can fling manufactured facts without consequence, to the satisfaction of all, onto the Internet, where both sides will waste time looking up ever-more dubious references that will never convince their opponent, is a contemptible practice. Nonetheless, I feel driven to add this analysis from the Energy Information Administration to a recent off-blog discussion of the effect of opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.
The conclusion of that notoriously left-wing hippy environmentalist 5th column in the Department of Energy is that by 2025 Americans will be able to reap the windfall of ANWR black gold to the tune of a savings of $0.76 per barrel. Assuming that we successfully invade a new oil-producing state in the Mid-East every 6 years, we should be able to prevent EIA's expected scenario, that "the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could neutralize any potential price impact of ANWR oil production by reducing its oil exports by an equal amount."
It's true that the American people are ----------1, but I doubt any positive psychological impact of opening ANWR would persevere through 17 years of absolutely no impact on prices.
1 Word suppressed to prevent misuse of quote.