Against Drilling for Oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

¶ … Congress as well as those interested in both the energy industry and the preservation of wild areas in the United States have argued whether drilling sites in Alaska should be expanded. One area of debate has been the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska.

The Heritage Foundation has argued in favor of expanded drilling into the ANWR. They argue that much of Alaska remains untouched, with large areas of intact ecosystems on private land owned by the Alaska National Interest (Shanahan, 1995).

Those opposed to the expansion of oil drilling into this area say make multiple arguments: that Native American cultures, in particular the Inupiat Eskimos, will be negatively affected; that it is uneconomical to attempt to retrieve the oil contained in the disputed area, and that the ecosystems are important and would inevitably be harmed.

In the year 2000, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service examined the cost of retrieving oil from the disputed area. Their detailed analysis showed the difficulties involved in retrieving the oil make the task uneconomical. They concluded that there was a 50% chance of retrieving 19 million barrels of oil per day, but that cost would be $24 per barrel, making the project economically unfeasible (USFWS, 2000). There was still the 50% chance that costs would rise above $24/barrel. The market price for oil at that time was $25 - $35/barrel, making the proposed drilling a risky financial venture.

The United States government wants the country to be as self-sufficient as possible for energy needs. It is national law and policy, however, to protect the environment from harm caused by industrialization.

The Inupiat Eskimos have looked at the issue of drilling for oil in Alaska. Jacob Adams (1995), speaking for natives in the area, described how his native culture has relied for millennia on the natural resources of the area, including hunting bowhead whale and caribou, fishing from streams and rivers, and gathering wild berries in the summer. Their way of life and culture is completely interwoven into their relationship with the environment in which they live. He described how his tribe has blended modern realities with their way of life, making profits for shareholders while living off of the land. Adams argues for carefully regulated expansion of oil drilling for the economic benefits it will bring to the local natives.

However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes that further gas and oil exploration cannot be done without seriously damaging the environment. They view the area as pristine, and state that development would reduce its value for scientific study by interfering with the area's natural evolution and damage "the biological and ecological integrity of the entire Refuge" (USFWS, 2000).