Statement: Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Issue: Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Strongly Supports: 1238
Supports: 2024
Neutral: 1563
Opposes: 3039
Strongly Opposes: 4256
Average position: 'Opposes' (based on '12120' opinions)
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is just east of Prudhoe Bay in Alaska's "North Slope," which is North America's largest oil field. Currently, the Prudhoe bay area accounts for 17% of U.S. domestic oil production. Over the years, studies performed by the US Geological Survey have shown that large deposits of crude oil reside within the land designated as the "1002 area" of ANWR, as well. Oil interest in the region goes back to the late 1960s.
A 1998 United States Geological Survey (USGS) study indicated at least 5.7 billion (95% probability) and possibly as much as 16.0 billion (5% probability) barrels (0.9 to 2.5 km³) of technically recoverable oil exists in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 1002 area. The U.S. consumes about 20 million barrels daily. If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil reserves were used to supply 5% of the U.S. daily consumption -- most is imported from Canada (19%) Mexico (15%), Saudi Arabia (11.5%), Nigeria (10.5%) and Venezuela (10.5%) -- the reserves, using the low figure of 4.3 billion barrels, would last approximately 4300 days, or almost 12 years. Using the high estimate, the reserves would last approximately 11800 days, or 32 years.
Supporters say drilling would increase energy independence because we need less oil from the Middle East and Venezuela. It would also create jobs. Wharton Econometrics Forecasting Associates estimates that as many as 736,000 jobs could be created by Coastal Plain of ANWR. Money, the USGS also figures that the 10.4 billion barrels would be equivalent to $300 billion in investments.
They also contend that the protected Caribou are not present in the oil field zone. Drilling only occurs in the winter when caribou have gone south to Canada. The Arctic Circle herd in Prudhoe Bay has increased from 5,000 in 1977 to 31,000 in 2002. Also, there are scientists who claim the migratory birds or the polar bears won't be negatively affected either.
Finally, supporters argue that ANWR is made up of 1.5 million acres of land set aside by Congress, only 2000 of those acres are proposed for oil drilling (.13% of ANWR). The platforms are small and separated, each one consists of 50 yd X 50 yd blocks of concrete which are only used in the winter and are spread out so as not to hurt the ground beneath them.
Opponents of drilling in ANWR argue that the amount of oil estimated is actually very small compared to the amount of oil consumed in the U.S. The amount of yield from drilling in Alaska is not worth the time, energy, or controversy of wasting our reserves. It's better to be dependent have something to fall back on.
They also claim the United States energy needs are far too great too be met by drilling in ANWR. It's time the government invested money in developing alternate energy sources such as wind, wave, solar, and fuel cell power. Fossil fuels are going to run out sometime this century and the world cannot afford to wait more than another 30 years to develop other sources.
Further, the drilling will harm the protected Porcupine Caribou and other animals as well as the permafrost.
Finally, if there is drilling allowed in ANWR, it is only a matter of time before drilling happens off the coast of Florida and other places around the country.
 |
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
Close Window
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||