Why America Must Drill for Oil in ANWR

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is home to over 45 different species of land and marine mammals including shrews, grizzles, wolverines, moose, otters, and many more. It's even home to hundreds of herds of caribou and several types of unique flora. Yet no matter how one looks at this resourceful land, there is no way to justify the lack of utilization of its resources. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve would be beneficial not only to America's economy, but to that of the whole world. There is no logical reason to stop such resourceful efforts because we must not, and we cannot, afford to place the welfare of ANWR's river otters and the like above our own. Oil excavation in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be nothing but an advantageous endeavor.

The economic benefits of oil excavation in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge are twofold. First, excavation would greatly increase the domestic production of oil, leading to less dependence on foreign oil, as well as thousands and thousands of new American jobs. Though the exact quantity of crude oil reserves in ANWR is impossible to determine precisely, several United States Geological Survey analyses, most recently in 1998, have determined there exist between 5.7 and 16.0 billion barrels of oil beneath the icy tundra. Indeed as opponents to this proposed drilling continue to spout "very little oil" rhetoric, it's forgotten that they used the same slogan in attempts to prevent drilling for oil in Alaska's Prudhoe Bay when that was a hot topic in 1967. When drilling eventually began there, Prudhoe Bay turned out to be the largest oil deposit in North America . Many have speculated that a similar stroke of luck may befall drilling in ANWR.

The second economic benefit, which would be realized by the entire world, would also extend the benefit to the United States of greater energy supply. An increase in crude oil, even if only a brief spike in global production, would nevertheless power the world's economy for more time to buy more time, in effect, for development of alternative energy sources. Chevron, among many other oil companies, has already announced the beginning of research into greenhouse gases and alternative fuel sources . That research needs time to mature; meanwhile, the world still needs fuel.

While opponents of drilling in ANWR continue to push for these alternative energies as ready, feasible substitutes for gasoline, they overlook the fact that these substitutes can't provide the kind of energy on a global scale that the world needs now. Solar, wind, and ethanol power still need much more development to be practical and to create more benefit than they incur cost. For example, solar power doesn't work in low-sunlight areas while ethanol is still expensive to refine. The drawback of wind power is self-evident: the windmills need wind.

As people continue to purport these currently inefficient energy sources as alternatives to gasoline, there is a greater and greater need for a drastic paradigm shift to the world of now. Gasoline is the only fuel we have now that is practical, relatively cheap, and already in the presence of an infrastructure set up to run on it. Drilling for oil in The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would have both national and global economic benefits that cannot be denied. Why should we deny ourselves this valuable resource that is even on our own soil?