Drilling Debate in Alaska

I became interested in drilling after researching why drilling in Alaska’s ANWR is a bad idea in writing class. After Cold War, American government bought a piece of ground which is closed to Bering Strait, Asian land and Canada from Soviet Union. After fighting with America during Cold War, Soviet Union lost most of their armament, they didn’t have enough money to recover their military. They had to gain enough money so that they could still keep their military strong and stay at preceding status among world’s other countries. Now that place is named by American government which is called Alaska. As we know, Alaska state is the biggest state in America, many people are interested in researching it because people want to know how many resources are stored in Alaska state and people also want to figure out whether the resources in Alaska state are useful and harmless for consumers to use. Not long before, as soon as oil producers explored that there were many oil resources storing under or near Alaska state, they raced to control the oil field and started drilling as much as they could. After many experts knew there were many oil produces drilling in Alaska ANWR crazily, many different scientific experts started a serious debate on whether we can drill in Alaska. Oil drilling is big a modern problem that makes many experts argue about it. Oil is bad energy for the environment, oil reserves are getting less and less and are more difficult to explore. “Allowing companies to drill in Alaska's Northern Slope would boost the revenues of American oil companies that would like to explore the area for petroleum. Expansion of the oil industry in the Northern Slope would also create thousands of jobs and decrease U.S. dependency on oil imports from politically turbulent Middle Eastern countries. While some Democrats from oil producing states would support oil production in Alaska, a many of them oppose it. A wide range of environmental conservation groups have also formed a broad coalition against the repeal of the oil export ban. Both sides have fired up their political engines as Congressional panels consider the ANWR oil ban legislation. The ANWR, which was signed into law in 1973 by president Richard Nixon, has remained controversial even since then. Supporters of an end to the oil export ban have proposed many bills that would repeal it. In 1992, oil ban repeal supporters pushed ANWR drilling legislation through the Senate Energy Committee for the first time” (Alaska Oil Dispute). According to DOE (2008), “there is considerable uncertainly regarding both the size and quality of the oil resources that exist in ANWR. DOE (2008) says that maximum potential capacity – accessing all the oil that’s available to be pumped – would not be realized until 2026. As EDF wildlife expert Michael Bean notes, the effects of development extend well beyond the physical limits of that footprint.”

As that article says, drilling in Alaska’s ANWR is exactly a bad idea. I have read many articles. I discovered that many experts propose not to drill in Alaska’s ANWR. There will be more problems against drilling in Alaska’s ANWR. Personally, I strongly object to drill in Alaska. I don’t mean that we should stop use oil among the world in every equipment. Obviously most oil producers only considered that how much oil they could drill and how much money they will gain, in fact they don’t know how dreadful consequences are coming. They neither think about more profits they gain while leaving for people to cost more power to moderate negative effects nor how difficult to spend vigor on educating people. For many oil producers, money is the most important, so do I, but If I am oil producer, I will not compete with other oil producers on pillaging oil field, I will look forward to what energy will be the most popular in the world and starting studying on the future energy. That means I will give up drilling then I will appeal other scientists to research on my program which is established by my own abilities.

Drilling cannot provide enough oil. Just because ANWR oil would be too little to drill, far more oil seeps naturally into the sea and the rate of consumption is increasing. Nowaday, many consumer know that oil is still kept providing by oil producers, but they may not know oil resources are in short supply which means oil resources are becoming less and less while the price of oil is becoming higher and higher. We should know the oil consumption is much more than oil provision. We should not only focus on how to drill more oil but also how to use oil efficiently, it means that we should start on oil consuming equipments such autos, rockets, airplanes and other machines. Many auto companies and auto addicts are seeking high horsepower autos so that they can show how advanced technologies they have invented and they are proud of them. While Japanese government restricting a ban which is every auto made by Japanese auto companies must limit their horsepower under 208 from at the beginning of twenty – first century to 2007 so that Japanese could control the wastage of oil and they could lower the consumption as much as possible. Why Japanese cancelled this ban since 2007? That is Japanese auto companies could make high horsepower autos and they could limit oil consumption in autos at the same time. For example, if they want to make a 1000 horsepower auto but could not control the oil consumption in such a lunatic auto, they will give up. That’s why Japanese government cancelled the ban to encourage Japanese auto companies to research on more efficient autos. As we know, Japanese hybrid techniques are leading other auto companies in the world. When Toyota created the first hybrid auto, American auto companies didn’t start researching hybrid techniques. According to Daniela Muhawi (Oil Drilling In Alaska, 2004). “It is virtually impossible to get an unbiased assessment of the campaign to open the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. On one hand, the recoverable oil in the refuge, possibly amounting to as much as ten billion barrels, is enough oil to supply the entire needs of the United States for about 18 months.”

It would not decrease oil prices, because demand is increasing tremendously , drilling will not make us more energy independent, and more and more people are coming out of poverty. Recently, there has been a global economic crisis which has damaged a lot of businessmen deadly. Actually, the main reason that caused the global economic crisis is energy crisis. With the population grow faster and faster, many resources such as food, energy and earth are consuming at a amazing rate. Businessmen and companies import or produce resources difficultly, so they have to raise the price of products to earn as much profit as they can in such small amounts of products in order to sustain their lives. According to Raymond James (Oil slips as demand for crude wanes, 2009), “the market doesn't seem to think that this plan is going to solve the economic problems in the short term.”

It would destroy the ecology around ANWR. It will bring harm to wildlife and ecosystems; animals world have no place to live and reproduce and it will cost much money to moderate the environment. Humans are the only selfish species who will destroy everything in our path to benefit us, if they destroy one of our largest undisturbed ecosystems what will they leave for the future generations? According to Jain (Oil Drilling In Alaska, 2009), “the amount of oil in the refuge is marginal at best. It is not going to make a difference. Also drilling in the Arctic Refuge is symbolic of a larger effort. It’s about getting into one protected area and using the momentum to get into another.” According to scientists and arctic natives (The Arctic and Alaska, 2007). “The Arctic is thawing very rapidly, documented by new reports from scientists and arctic natives. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment was released in late 2004, and shows changes from the ice at the North Pole to animals and human settlements. More recent reports from Greenland show outlet glaciers moving meters per hour and rapidly thinning. The Arctic Ocean ice cap is shrinking in summer to the smallest it has ever been in modern measurements, and even winter cold has not been refreezing it as extensively as before. That sea ice is habitat for the polar bear. Declines in bear nutrition, birth weight and survival have moved the U.S. government (urged by three environmental groups) to propose the bear be named a species threatened with extinction.”

According to Coon (Tapping Oil Reserves In A Small Part Of ANWR: Environmentally Sound, Energy Wise, 2001) “Drilling in the ANWR will not threaten that natural preserve and will increase U.S. energy independence.” Even though there are only small species of animaks living in Alaska such as polar bears, we can move them to anther place so that humans can start drilling without any troubles. I oppose his opinion, because we should invent a new less harmful and renewable energy to put in our life. We can not only keep using oil independence forever, we can’t wait for another new natural energy for a long time, right now we have to reduce the negative effects of drilling oil. If they really want to drill, they shouldn't touch Alaska. There are places in that state that likely have never felt human foot steps.

In conclusion, drilling in Alaska’s ANWR is a bad idea. Drilling can’t support enough oil, it would not decline oil prices and It would destroy the environment. The small amount of oil that American would get ten years from now is not worth the damage that it would do to Alaska's environment. They need to put more emphasis on renewable resources and get them into production instead of continuing to rely on fossil fuels. I'm against drilling in the ANWR, but there may be other areas of Alaska that would be fine. However, they need to develop other sources of energy, so they are not reliant on this diminishing resource, foreign or domestic. In the end, people should stop drilling oil in Alaska’s ANWR.

References
Alaska Oil Dispute. http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/WM27.cfm
Knickerbocker, B (2008, February 5). Polar bear habitat at center of Alaska drilling debate. Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0205/p03s03-uspo.html?page=1
Live Earth Blog (2007, May 27). The Arctic and Alaska. http://www.liveearthblog.org/environmental-news/the-arctic-and-alaska.html
Muhawi, D (2004, December 18). Oil Drilling In Alaska. Ecoworld.com. http://ecoworld.com/features/2004/12/18/oil-drilling-in-alaska/
Revkin, A. C. (2003, March 5). Experts Conclude Oil Drilling Has Hurt Alaska's North Slope.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE1D9143FF936A35750C0A9659C8B63
The Associated Press (2009, February 17).Oil slips as demand for crude wanes. MSNBC.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12400801/
">http://american.edu/ted/alaska.htm

Coon, C. E. (2001, August 1). Tapping Oil Reserves In A Small Part Of ANWR: Environmentally Sound, Energy Wise. Heritage Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/WM27.cfm

Knickerbocker, B (2008, February 5). Polar bear habitat at center of Alaska drilling debate. Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0205/p03s03-uspo.html?page=1

Live Earth Blog (2007, May 27). The Arctic and Alaska. http://www.liveearthblog.org/environmental-news/the-arctic-and-alaska.html

Muhawi, D (2004, December 18). Oil Drilling In Alaska. Ecoworld.com. http://ecoworld.com/features/2004/12/18/oil-drilling-in-alaska/

Revkin, A. C. (2003, March 5). Experts Conclude Oil Drilling Has Hurt Alaska's North Slope.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE1D9143FF936A35750C0A9659C8B63

The Associated Press (2009, February 17).Oil slips as demand for crude wanes. MSNBC.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12400801/