START THE COMMOTION

As promised, here is todays compilation of more anti-war protesters around the globe..Click here to see more..
It's unbelievable how people are so against this war and yet our elected representatives are saying otherwise.

Feeling a little better right now, I went to class this afternoon and got my Environmental Science midterm paper back.. good news, I scored highest score in the class.. this is definitely a confidence boost to make me work just as hard for the other classes. Maybe I should've been in an environmental engineer major...

Anyway as it is a Friday, I have written another article relating to the demand of oil and natural gas as to whether the Arctic National Wildlife Reserves should be open to oil drilling considering the Americans are currently in conflict with the middle eastern oil supplier nations.

SHOULD THE ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE BE OPENED FOR OIL DRILLING?

With the current fluctuations in oil prices, the present high price of natural gas and an energy crisis in the West, the time is long overdue for a comprehensive energy plan. Dwight R. Lee, a Professor of economics argued that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil would bring a great benefit to the society. On the other hand, Amory B. Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins emphasizes that obtaining the oil is too expensive, it is too limited in quantity to relieve energy needs for long, and that its delivery system is inclined to interference. There is a continuous pressure to expand commercial use of national forests and parks, as well as opening wilderness areas to exploitation. Thus, the debates over protecting wilderness areas are commonly focused on economic arguments. However, considering the negative impact on the environment, the short-sighted and inefficient drilling product and the safety considerations, drilling for oil in the Artic National Wildlife Reserve does not pose as a logically solution to America’s fuel and energy problems.

Opening in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling is environmentally damaging and would not eliminate the concerns relating to the high price of crude oil or the unstable Western energy market. ANWR is a small part of Alaska's pristine Arctic tundra on the North Slope which has been set aside as a wildlife refuge. The remaining land on the North Slope is open to the crude oil industry for unlimited drilling. Thus it is unreasonable to exploit this small area which is meant to be reserved. It must be clear that drilling in the wildlife refuge is not a responsible course for this nation. The environmental risks of drilling in this nearly 19.6 million acres of pristine wilderness on the North Slope of Alaska refuge are extraordinary. Other than the risks of oil spills, peregrine falcons, endangered in 48 states, thrive there, and thousands of porcupine caribou roam the refuge, along with black, brown and polar bears and gray wolves [1]. ANWR is the last 5 percent of Alaska's North Slope not open to exploitation, nothing like it exists anywhere else in the world. Lovins highlights that oil reserves elsewhere are more accessible and more reliably transferred than those above the Arctic Circle (129). Protecting or exploiting this refuge is, at its core, a test of whether our nation has a conservationist ethic, as there is no room for error. When pristine wilderness is lost, it's lost forever. According to recent report published by The National Academy of Sciences, the environmental effects continue to grow despite efforts by the oil industry and regulators to minimize them, including new technologies that have reduced off-road travel and made drilling platforms smaller. Drilling for oil causes some impacts that can't be eliminated even though there continues to be tremendous progress.

In addition to the obvious environmental issues at stake, drilling in ANWR also does not constitute sound energy policy. It gives false hopes to citizens suffering from real energy problems today and ignores the tough decisions this nation must make if we are ever to embrace a sustainable energy policy for the future. Rolling blackouts, escalating power bills and the erratic energy market in the West can be directly attributed to California's botched deregulation plan, and can in no way be mended by drilling for more fuel in ANWR or anywhere else. Expanding oil exploration and drilling will not help people in California keep their homes warm nor will it stabilize the volatile energy market in the West. Even if Congress were to approve legislation to allow drilling in ANWR we would not see actual crude oil from the area for many years. Lovins emphasizes that the necessary environmental analysis and infrastructure development needed to produce oil could take up to a decade and cost billions of dollars (129).

The destruction of the Arctic’s pristine environmental refuge for the extraction of crude oil would add nothing in the short term and an infinitesimal amount in the long term to U.S. oil security. According to Lovins, exploitation would decrease the U.S. dependence on imported oil only in a short term by just a few percentage points (129). The report by The National Academy of Sciences says abandoned equipment and buildings are likely to mar the landscape for centuries because state, federal and local overseers haven't decided how the landscape should be restored. According to Dwight R. Lee, improvements in technology could now allow horizontal drilling to obtain oil which is far below the wellhead, and that this technique reduces the amount of land which is directly affected by the drilling operations (125). However, if improvements on present drilling pipes were made instead of making new wells, it would mean that even less land would be directly affected.

As a conclusion, drilling for oil in ANWR is no substitute for a sustainable energy policy. Instead we should choose a course that alleviates immediate problems, conserves energy, supports renewable technologies and wisely maximizes our natural resources. Conservation should also be backed by smart investments in renewable energy. Gains in solar, wind, geothermal, fuel cell, biomass and other renewable technologies will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and truly insulate the nation from OPEC's market power. It is crucial that everyone recognizes that oil, gas and coal as well as other fossil fuels will be part of our energy mix for the future and that steps need to be taken to increase production in more appropriate areas and improve our energy infrastructure. Rather than opening up new parts of ANWR to oil drilling, a more appropriate and effective short-term solution would be to reinstate the ban on exporting Alaskan oil. Since the concern is the erratic Western energy market, the administration should enforce the reasonable pricing clauses that require electricity producers to charge their customers fair prices. Instead of looking to environmentally sensitive areas to increase our oil supply, we should tap into the wealth of energy options. We should promote rather than fight efforts to conserve and invest in renewable energy, alternative transportation and alternative energy sources. We must encourage the research and development of cheaper, more fuel-efficient cars and provide more federal funding for other modes of transportation. Individuals and the business community should be encouraged to develop alternative energy solutions through tax incentives and grants as well as the active promotion of energy conservation. There are simply too many other viable ways to develop sources of energy to compromise the unique beauty and value of the ANWR.