The debate on drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge is an intensely debated topic of America today. Proponents of the oil drilling believe that the oil in the refuge will solve the high prices of gasoline, but they don’t even know what amount of oil the refuge holds and the amount of oil that we use every year in the United States. The drilling in ANWR will severely damage the wildlife refuge and its environment. The oil would take years to access with drilling and so far there has been no proof that the drilling would actually produce enough oil to sustain our needs as a country. Also a reason to not drill in the refuge is because the reserve is being saved for when our country is in a national emergency, or until when there is no oil left because of its rapid decline in availability. How did you feel when just about a year ago there was the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? That event killed the environment in the Gulf and millions of innocent animals died to our screw up, if the drilling in ANWR is allowed we could be faced with these same exact circumstances again. These are the reasons that the oil drilling in the national refuge should not be allowed.
How would you like to see a repeat of the devastating event that took place in the Gulf of Mexico? If we were allowed to drill in the refuge all that it would take is for another malfunction like that and the environment of that refuge would be damaged for years. “Most important of all are the more than 130,000 caribou of the Porcupine herd…, these caribou are at the heart of environmentalists’ case against drilling” (McCarthy). The reason that these specific animals are the reason for not drilling is that the caribou migrate to the plains, where the drilling would ...
... middle of paper ...
...table results are other reasons for the drilling to not take place. Lastly, the reserve should be saved until the country is in a more desperate need for the oil than it is now such as a national emergency of some kind, or even until there is no other oil left to be drilled for. The act of playing it safe and not drilling is the smarter thing to do because there are no positive outcomes from drilling for oil in ANWR.
Works Cited
Gelb, Bernard A. "Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)." Almanac of Policy Issues. Congressional Research Service, 28 Aug. 2002. Web. 09 May 2011.
McCarthy, Terry. "War Over Arctic Oil - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Cable News Network, 11 Feb. 2001. Web. 09 May 2011.
"The Debate Over ANWR Drilling Begins Anew." ENewsUSA. ENewsUSA, 2 Mar. 2009. Web. 09 May 2011.
My opponents 1st/2nd/3rd contention was that drilling in Alaska will cost billions. True, drilling in Alaska will cost billions but the positive impact on the U.S. economy far outweighs the cost. Also, the billions of dollars it will cost to drill in the ANWR will be mostly paid by companies who want to develop into the ANWR, not the U.
Drilling for oil in Alaska will cause the environment and animals to suffer. Oil drilling in Alaska started in 1980 when America found itself in an oil crisis. So a solution for this crisis was to start drilling for oil in other locations. The largest oil field in North America was in Prudhoe Bay on the north coast of Alaska. Prudhoe Bay would soon account for 20% of all domestic U.S. oil production. Despite the oil crisis in 1980, Congress formed a wildlife reserve just east of Prudhoe Bay. it was called The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge(ANWR). Document A.
The Keystone XL pipeline continues dividing the opinion of the people and being a controversial issue. The precious “black gold”, represents one of the main factors that moves the economy, nationally and globally. This extra-long pipeline will transport oil all the way from Canada to Texas. Some experts and the private oil corporation, who is the one in charge of this project, point to the benefits of this project, for example, will make the USA more independent from foreign oil, will create thousands of jobs and improve the economy. Nevertheless, are experts revealing how the pipeline is an unnecessary risk and will be negative for the environment, dangerous for the population living close to the big pipes, and long-term negative for the
..."Alaska Oil Spill Fuels Concerns Over Arctic Wildlife, Future Drilling." National Geographic News. 20 Mar. 2006. Web. 3 July 2010.
Pratt, Joseph A. “Exxon and the Control of Oil.” Journal of American History. 99.1 (2012): 145-154. Academic search elite. Web. 26. Jan. 2014.
Last year, news spread of an oil spill off the Gulf Coast. These events occur periodically and usually register much media attention. As British Petroleum (BP) executives could not shut off the crude oil or prevent the damage it caused, people took notice. Millions of dollars in tourism, commerce and sales were lost. Thousands of wildlife acres and ecosystems were also compromised. There were more questions than answers.
The Debate Over the Idea of Drilling for Oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Kraft, Michael E., and Scott R. Furlong. 2013. Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives, Anonymous Anonymous , ed. Charisse Kiino . 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Wheelan, C. (2011). Introduction to Public Policy (1st ed.). United States: W.W. Nortion & Company, INC. (Original work published 2011).
Plomin, R & Asbury, K. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, July 2005; vol. 600, 1:pp.86-98.
The United States relies on imports for about forty percent of its crude oil, which is the lowest rate of dependency since 1991 according to the U.S Energy Information Administration. Today our country is trying to keep on track in becoming less and less dependent. When it comes to the topic of the future ways the United States will get its fuel, most of us readily agree that the United States should become more independent by using natural gas that is already here on our land. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of the consequences drilling for natural gas brings. Whereas some are convinced drilling is safe, others maintain that it is actually in fact dangerous. Hydraulic fracturing or "fracking", the terms for drilling for natural gas, is dangerous to our public health and to the environment because of the water contamination it causes. Therefore, it is not something that should become a project for alternative fuel used by the United States.
The Heritage Foundation - Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. . Nick. "Basic Information about the DREAM Act Legislation | DREAM Act Portal."
... Washington, DC. Congressional Research Service. Marosi, Richard. A. (2011, July 26)
Light, Paul C., and Christine L. Nemacheck. "Chapter 7 Congress." Government by the People, Brief 2012 Election Edition, Books a La Carte New Mypoliscilab With Etext Access Card Package. By David B. Magleby. 2012 Election Edition ed. N.p.: Pearson College Div, 2013. N. pag. Print.
According to an online article from Thought Company, the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill polluted the waters of Prince William Sound, coated more than a thousand miles of pristine coastline and killed hundreds of thousands of birds, fish, and animals. This crisis has become a symbol of human-caused environmental disasters all over the world. Many years after the accident, and despite billions of dollars spent on cleanup efforts, crude oil can still be found under the rocks and sand on the beaches of southwest Alaska, and the effects of the spill are still apparent in the lasting damage done to many native species. (West, 2017) This specific incident was a major crisis that acted as a prodrome for the oil industry. For the purpose of this assignment it is important that we take a look at the details of this event. From there, we will look at how Exxon handled the