Oil Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has been on the political agenda since 1980 and the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.

Arctic Resources ANWR Introduction Arctic Sea Ice

The legislation called for the possibility of oil development on the coastal portion of the Refuge (often called the coastal plain or area 1002).

Areas around the Arctic Ocean have become the newest places for oil exploration and development. Along with the American activities in and along the Alaskan coasts, Russia, Canada and Norway also currently have active programs.

The pro-drilling in ANWR side consists primarily of representative of the oil industry, including the petroleum geologists, the Alaskan Government and various local business groups.

Oil is especially important to the Alaskan population because of the revenue it generates. During the past decade, for example, anywhere from 73% to 86% of total state revenue has been generated from oil sources.

The pro-drilling side advocates opening up ANWR on the grounds that it provide jobs for residents, increased state revenues and can be accomplished in an environmentally safe manner.

Opponents of ANWR oil exploration and development span the gamut of environmental groups within the United States, from local Alaskan groups such as the Alaskan Wilderness League and the Northern Alaskan Environment Center, to national groups such as Republicans for Environmental Protection and the majority of the more commonly know groups such as Environment Defense, the Sierra Club, The Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Earth, The National Resources Defense Council and the Wilderness Society. In fact, it's more than fair to say that opposition to ANWR oil exploration is one of those rare issues where you can find consensus among all or most environmental groups.

Because of the large number of environment groups opposed to opening ANWR to drilling, specific opposition positions change from group to group. Here are five general consensus points.

• The amount of potentially recoverable oil is insufficient to meet any perceived or real oil shortage or reduce American dependence on imported oil.
• The mainstream groups are pro-economic development. The great majority of the Alaskan coastal region and the North Slope region has been open to oil development. The Clinton Administration approved a variety of oil leases in the neighboring National Petroleum Reserve. Environmental groups are only trying to preserve a very small portion of the coastal land.
• Alternative and more environmentally friendly means of meeting United States oil needs are readily available. For example, automobile fuel efficiency standards in the United States have remained close to constant for well over 16 years. Increasing the fuel efficiency standards would do more to save oil than would drilling for more oil.
• Wildlife Refuges and wilderness areas are important biological, recreational and scientifc areas for the entire American public.
• Climate change is drastically changing the Arctic ecosystem. Research on potential changes is necessary prior to any further development in the area.

Copyright 2001. Patricia A. Michaels.