Arctic Refuge drilling controversy: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:57, 19 March 2009

//This page is now under construction// ~ Ian13

Sorry for any trouble caused by the daily wikipedia maintenance. The page will return soon.

The reason for the maintenance is because numerous articles, including this one, are believed to contain false information.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+//This page is now under construction// ~ [[Ian13]]
-<!-- Please list issues on the talk page after posting messages here. Thanks. -->
-[[Image:Anwrmap.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Map]]
-The question of whether to '''drill for oil in the [[Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]]''' (ANWR) has been an ongoing political controversy in the [[United States]] since 1977.<ref>Shogren, Elizabeth. [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5007819 "For 30 Years, a Political Battle Over Oil and ANWR."] ''[[All Things Considered]]''. [[National Public Radio|NPR]]. 10 Nov. 2005.</ref> The issue has been used by both [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrats]] and [[Republican Party (United States)|Republicans]] as a political device, especially through contentious election cycles, and has been the subject of much debate in the [[News media (United States)|National media]].<ref>Waller, Douglas. [http://www.time.com/time/columnist/waller/article/0,9565,170983,00.html "Some Shaky Figures on ANWR Drilling."] ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' 13 Aug. 2001.</ref>
+Sorry for any trouble caused by the daily wikipedia maintenance. The page will return soon.
-ANWR comprises {{convert|19000000|acre|km2}}<ref>Burger, Joel. "Adequate science: Alaska's Artic refuge." ''Conservation Biology'' 15 (2): 539.</ref> of the north [[Alaska]]n coast. The land is situated between the [[Beaufort Sea]] to the north, [[Brooks Range]] to the south, and [[Prudhoe Bay, Alaska|Prudhoe Bay]] to the west. It is the largest [[National Wildlife Refuge|protected]] [[wilderness]] in the United States and was created by [[United States Congress|Congress]] under the [[Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act]] of 1980.<ref>United States. [[96th United States Congress|96th Congress]]. "Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act." Fws.gov <http://alaska.fws.gov/asm/anilca/toc.html>. Retrieved on 2008-8-10.</ref> Section 1002 of that act deferred a decision on the management of oil and gas exploration and development of {{convert|1500000|acre|km2}} in the coastal plain, known as the "1002 area."<ref name="usdoe">{{cite web|url=http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/overview.html|title=Potential Oil Production from the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Updated Assessment|publisher=US DOE|accessdate=2009-03-14}}</ref>  The controversy surrounds [[Oil well|drilling for oil]] in this area of ANWR.
+The reason for the maintenance is because numerous articles, including this one, are believed to contain false information.
-Much of the debate over whether to drill in ANWR rests on the amount of economically recoverable oil, as it relates to world oil markets, weighed against the potential harm [[Hydrocarbon exploration|oil exploration]] might have upon the [[National Wildlife Refuge|natural wildlife]], in particular the calving ground of the [[Porcupine caribou]].<ref name=natgeo>Mitchell, John. [http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/data/2001/08/01/html/ft_20010801.3.html "Oil Field or Sanctuary?"] ''National Geographic'' 1 Aug. 2001.</ref>
-==History==
-[[Image:Alaskaoildrilling.jpg|right|thumb|Mars Ice Island, a 60 day offshore exploratory well off Cape Halkett, over {{convert|30|mi|km}} from [[Nuiqsut, Alaska]].]]
-Before Alaska was granted statehood on January 3, 1959, virtually all {{convert|375000000|acre|km2}} of the Territory of Alaska was federal land and wilderness. The act granting statehood gave Alaska the right to select {{convert|103000000|acre|km2}} for use as an economic and tax base.<ref name="ANCSA">{{cite journal|last=Jones|first=R.S.|date=June 1, 1981|title=ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT OF 1971 (PUBLIC LAW 92-203):HISTORY AND ANALYSIS TOGETHER WITH SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS|publisher=Government Division|issue=Report No. 81-127 GOV}}</ref> In 1966, Alaska Natives protested a Federal oil and gas lease sale of lands on the North Slope which were claimed by Natives. Late that year Secretary Udall ordered the lease sale suspended, and shortly thereafter announced a 'freeze' on the disposition of all Federal land in Alaska, pending Congressional settlement of Native land claims. <ref name="ANCSA" /><ref>[http://select.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=F40D1EFA3D5B107B93C3A8178DD85F438685F9 "Alaskans Dispute 'Freeze' on Land; Udall in Controversy Over State's Choice of Acreage."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 11 June 1967: 11.</ref>  These claims were settled in 1971 by the Alaska Native claims settlement act, which granted them {{convert|44000000|acre|km2}}.  The act also froze development on federal lands pending a final selection of parks, monuments, and refuges.  The law was set to expire in 1978. <ref>Kovach, Bill. [http://select.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=F70F17FE3A5513728DDDA00994DE405B888BF1D3 "Bill on Future of Federal Lands in Alaska Generates Bitter and Emotional Controversy."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 19 June 1978: B4.</ref>
-Toward the end of 1976, with the [[Trans-Alaska Pipeline System]] virtually complete, major conservation groups shifted their attention to how best to protect the hundreds of millions of acres of Alaskan wilderness unaffected by the pipeline.<ref>Rensberger, Boyce.  [http://select.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=F10E10F83E5D14768FDDA80B94D8415B868BF1D3 "Protection of Alaska's Wilderness New Priority of Conservationists."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 31 Oct. 1976.</ref> On May 16, 1979, the [[United States House of Representatives]] approved a conservationist-backed bill that would have protected more than {{convert|125000000|acre|km2}} of Federal lands in Alaska, including the calving ground of the nation's largest caribou herd.  Backed by President [[Jimmy Carter]], and sponsored by [[Mo Udall|Morris K. Udall]] and [[John B. Anderson]], the bill would have prohibited all commercial activity in {{convert|67000000|acre|km2}} designated as wilderness areas. The US senate had opposed similar legislation in the past and filibusters were threatened.<ref> [http://select.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=F00E10F83F5D12728DDDAE0994DD405B898BF1D3 "Alaskan Lands Bill Saing Vast Areas Approved by House."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 17 May 1979: A1.</ref> On December 2, 1980, Carter signed into law the [[Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act]], which created more than {{convert|104000000|acre|km2}} of national parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas from Federal holdings in that state.  The bill allowed drilling in ANWR, but not without prior approval from Congress.  Both sides of the controversy announced they would attempt to change it in the next session of Congress.<ref>King, Seth. [http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10712F73C5E12728DDDAA0894DA415B8084F1D3 "Carter Signs a Bill to Protect 104000000 Million acres in Alaska."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 3 Dec. 1980.</ref>.
-Section 1002 of the act stated that a comprehensive inventory of fish and wildlife resources would be conducted on {{convert|1500000|acre|km2}} of the Arctic Refuge coastal plain (1002 Area). Potential petroleum reserves in the 1002 Area were to be evaluated from surface geological studies and seismic exploration surveys. No exploratory drilling was allowed. Results of these studies and recommendations for future management of the Arctic Refuge coastal plain were to be prepared in a report to Congress.
-In November 1986, a draft report by the [[United States Fish and Wildlife Service]] recommended that all of the coastal plain within the Artic National Wildlife Refuge be opened for oil and gas development.  It also proposed to trade the mineral rights of {{convert|166000|acre|km2}} in the refuge for surface rights to {{convert|896000|acre|km2}} owned by corporations of six Alaska native groups, including [[Aleut]]s, [[Eskimo]]s and [[Tlingit]]s.  The report argued that the [[oil]] and [[Natural gas|gas]] potentials of the coastal plain were needed for the country's economy and [[national security]]. [[Conservation biology|Conservationists]] argued that oil development would unnecessarily threaten the existence of the [[Porcupine caribou]] by cutting off the [[herd]] from calving areas. They also expressed concerns that oil operations would erode the fragile ecological systems that support wildlife on the tundra of the Arctic plain.  The proposal faced stiff opposition in the House of Representatives.  Morris Udall, chairman of the [[United States House Committee on Natural Resources|House Interior Committee]], said he would reintroduce legislation to turn the entire coastal plain into a wilderness area, effectively  giving the refuge permanent protection from development.<ref>Shabecoff, Philip. [http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F50717FE3F580C768EDDA80994DE484D81 "U.S. Proposing Drilling for Oil in Arctic Refuge."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 25 Nov. 1986.</ref>
-[[Image:Anwr.jpg|left|thumb|Typical view of the ANWR 1002 area coastal plain]]
-On July 17, 1987 the United States and the [[Canada|Canadian]] government signed the "Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd"<ref name=untreaty>[[United Nations]]. ''[http://untreaty.un.org/unts/144078_158780/16/2/7177.pdf Agreement Between the Government of the United States and the government of Canada on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd]'' New York: UNU. 1987.[http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/ANWR/anwrint-agreement.html]</ref> a treaty which was designed to protect the species from damage to its habitat and migration routes.  Canada has special interest in the region because its [[Ivvavik National Park]] and [[Vuntut National Park]] borders the refuge. The treaty required an impact assessment and required that where activity in one country is "likely to cause significant long-term adverse impact on the Porcupine Caribou Herd or its habitat, the other Party will be notified and given an opportunity to consult prior to final decision."<ref name=untreaty />
-In March 1989 a bill permitting drilling in the reserve was "sailing through the Senate and had been expected to come up for a vote"<ref>Dionne, E. J. Jr. [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEFDB1639F930A35757C0A96F948260&scp=19&sq=+Arctic+Refuge+drill&st=nyt "Big Oil Spill Leaves Its Mark On Politics of Environment."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 3 Apr. 1989.</ref> when the [[Exxon Valdez oil spill]] delayed and ultimately derailed the process.<ref> [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE4DE103AF931A25757C0A96F948260&scp=15&sq=arctic+refuge+spill&st=nyt "Reaction to Alaska Spill Derails Bill to Allow Oil Drilling in Refuge."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 12 Apr. 1989.</ref>
-<!-- Energy Bill authorized drilling in ANWR, but a [[filibuster]] by Senate Democrats kept the measure from coming to a vote. In 1995, Republicans prepared to take up the battle again and included a provision for ANWR in the federal budget. President [[Bill Clinton]] vetoed the entire budget and expressed his intention to [[veto]] any other bill that would open ANWR to drilling. -->
-In 1996 the Republican-majority House and Senate voted to allow drilling in ANWR, but this legislation was [[veto]]ed by [[President of the United States|President]] [[Bill Clinton]]. Toward the end of his presidential term [[Environmentalism|environmentalists]] pressed Clinton to declare the Arctic Refuge a [[U.S. National Monument]]. Doing so would have permanently closed the area to oil exploration. While Clinton did create several refuge monuments, the Arctic Refuge was not among them.
-[[Image:Anwr marsh creek.jpg|right|thumb|Photograph of oil-stained sandstone near crest of Marsh Creek anticline, 1002 area]]
-A 1998 report by the [[United States Geological Survey|U.S. Geological Survey]] estimated that there was between {{convert|5.7|Goilbbl|m3}} and {{convert|16.0|Goilbbl|m3}} of technically recoverable oil in the designated 1002 area, and that most of the oil would be found west of the [[List of rivers of Alaska|Marsh Creek]] [[anticline]]. <ref name="USGS">United States Geological Survey. ''[http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.pdf Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 1002 Area, Petroleum Assessment 1998, Including Economic Analysis.]'' USGS Fact Sheet FS-028-01, Apr. 2001.</ref> When Non-Federal and Native areas are excluded, the estimated amounts of technically recoverable oil are reduced to {{convert|4.3|Goilbbl|m3}} and {{convert|11.8|Goilbbl|m3}}. These figures differed from an earlier 1987 USGS report which estimated less quantities of oil and that it would be found in the southern and eastern parts of the 1002 area. However the 1998 report warned that the "estimates cannot be compared directly because different methods were used in preparing those parts of the 1987 Report to Congress."<ref>''Ibid'', p. 6.</ref>
-In the 2000s, votes about the status of the refuge occurred repeatedly in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate. President [[George W. Bush]] pushed to perform exploratory drilling for [[crude oil]] and [[natural gas]] in and around the refuge. The [[United States House of Representatives|House of Representatives]] voted in mid-2000 to allow drilling. In April 2002 the [[United States Senate|Senate]] rejected it.
-Arctic Refuge drilling was again approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives as part of the Energy Bill on April 21, 2005,<ref>United States. House of Representatives. [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.6: Bill Number H.R.6 for the 109th Congress.] Washington, DC: Library of Congress. 2005.</ref> but the Arctic Refuge provision was later removed by the House-Senate [[United States Congress Conference committee|conference committee]].  The Republican-controlled Senate passed Arctic Refuge drilling on March 16, 2005 as part of the federal budget resolution for fiscal year 2006.<ref>United States. ''[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:sc18pcs.txt.pdf The Congressional Budget for the United States Government for Fiscal Year 2006]''. Washington, DC: GPO. 2006.</ref> That Arctic Refuge provision was removed during the reconciliation process, due to Democrats in the House of Representatives who signed a letter stating they would oppose any version of the budget that had Arctic Refuge drilling in it.<ref>Taylor, Andrew. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/09/AR2005110902029.html "House Drops Arctic Drilling From Bill."] ''[[Washington Post]]'' 10 Nov. 2005.</ref>
-On December 15, 2005 Senator [[Ted Stevens]], a Republican from Alaska, attached an Arctic Refuge drilling amendment to the annual defense appropriations bill. A group of Democratic Senators led a successful [[filibuster]] of the bill on December 21, and the language was subsequently removed.<ref>Coile, Zachary. [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/22/ANWR.TMP&type=printable "Senate blocks oil drilling push for Arctic refuge."] ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' 22 Dec. 2005.</ref>
-On June 18, 2008 President George W. Bush pressed Congress to reverse the ban on offshore drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in addition to approving the extraction of oil from [[shale]] on federal lands. Despite his previous stance on the issue, President Bush cited the growing [[energy crisis]] as a major factor for reversing the presidential executive order issued by President George H. W. Bush in 1990, which banned coastal oil exploration and oil and gas leasing on most of the outer [[continental shelf]]. In conjunction with the presidential order, the Congressional moratorium banning drilling was first enacted in 1982 and has been renewed annually.<ref>Stolbert, Sheryl. [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/washington/19drill.html?partner=rssnyt "Bush Calls for End to Ban on Offshore Oil Drilling."] ''[[New York Times]]'' 19 June 2008.</ref>
-==Department of Energy projections and estimates==
-===Estimates of oil reserves===
-[[Image:2 USGA ANWR Oil.png|right|thumb|250px|Projected levels of increased oil production from ANWR to mean Alaskan production volumes. [[Energy Information Administration]], 2008.]]
-In 1998, the USGS estimated that between 5.7 and {{convert|16.0|Goilbbl|m3}} of technically recoverable crude oil and natural gas liquids are in the coastal plain area of ANWR, with a mean estimate of {{convert|10.4|Goilbbl|m3}}, of which {{convert|7.7|Goilbbl|m3}} lie within the Federal portion of the ANWR 1002 Area.<ref name="USGS"/> In comparison, the estimated volume of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in the rest of the United States is about {{convert|120|Goilbbl|m3}}. <ref name=doeeia>United States. Department of Energy. Energy Information Administration. ''[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/ Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.]'' SR/OIAF/2008-03. Washington, DC: GPO. 2008.</ref> The ANWR and undiscovered estimates are categorized as [[Oil_reserves#Resources|prospective resources]] and therefore, not [[Oil_reserves#Proved_reserves|proved]]. The United States Department of Energy (DOE) reports US proved reserves are roughly {{convert|29|Goilbbl|m3}} of crude and natural gas liquids, of which {{convert|21|Goilbbl|m3}} are crude.<ref>United States. Department of Energy. Energy Information Administration. [http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/data_publications/crude_oil_natural_gas_reserves/current/pdf/ch3.pdf ''U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves Report]'' Washington, DC: GPO. 2007.</ref> A variety of sources compiled by the DOE estimate world proved oil and gas condensate reserves to range from 1.1 to {{convert|1.3|Toilbbl|km3}}.<ref>United States. Department of Energy. Energy Information Administration. "Table of World Proved Oil and Natural Gas Reserves." Doe.gov. <http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html>. Retrieved on 2008-8-10.</ref>
-The DOE reports there is uncertainty about the underlying resource base in ANWR. “The USGS oil resource estimates are based largely on the oil productivity of geologic formations that exist in the neighboring State lands and which continue into ANWR. Consequently, there is considerable uncertainty regarding both the size and quality of the oil resources that exist in ANWR. Thus, the potential ultimate oil recovery and potential yearly production are highly uncertain.” <ref name=doeeia />
-The opening of the ANWR 1002 Area to oil and natural gas development is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018. In the mean ANWR oil resource case, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR reaches {{convert|780000|oilbbl/d|m3/d}} in 2027 and then declines to {{convert|710000|oilbbl/d|m3/d}} in 2030. In the low and high ANWR oil resource cases, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR peaks in 2028 at 510,000 and {{convert|1.45|Moilbbl/d|m3/d}}, respectively. Between 2018 and 2030, cumulative additional oil production is {{convert|2.6|Goilbbl|m3}} for the mean oil resource case, while the low and high resource cases project a cumulative additional oil production of 1.9 and {{convert|4.3|Goilbbl|m3}}, respectively.<ref name=doeeia /> In 2007, the United States consumed 20.68 m bbls of petroleum products per day. It produced roughly {{convert|5|Moilbbl/d|m3/d}} of crude oil, and imported {{convert|10|Moilbbl/d|m3/d}} of crude and {{convert|3.5|Moilbbl/d|m3/d}} of petroleum products.<ref>United States. Department of Energy. Energy Information Administration. "Petroleum Basic Statistics." <http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html> Retrieved on 2008-8-10.</ref>
-===Projected impact on global price===
-The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.<ref name=doeeia /> Furthermore, the [[Energy Information Administration]] does not feel ANWR will affect the global price of oil when past behaviors of the oil market are considered. "The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows: a reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case."<ref name=doeeia /> "Assuming that world oil markets continue to work as they do today, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could neutralize any potential price impact of ANWR oil production by reducing its oil exports by an equal amount."<ref name=doeeia />
-==Supporting views==
-Former [[President of the United States|President]] [[George W. Bush]] and his [[Presidency of George W. Bush|administration]] supported drilling in the Arctic Refuge, contending that it could "keep [America]'s economy growing by creating jobs and ensuring that businesses can expand [a]nd it will make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy,"<ref>United States. White House. "President Applauds House Vote Approving Energy Exploration in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge." 25 May 2006. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060525-11.html>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-and that "scientists have developed innovative techniques to reach ANWR's oil with virtually no impact on the land or local wildlife."<ref>Bush, George W.  "Energy for America's Future." Whitehouse.gov <http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-[[Sarah Palin]],  governor of Alaska and former Republican vice-presidential nominee in the 2008 United States presidential election, supports drilling.  She has said "Of the {{convert|20|e6acre|km2}} up there, we're looking at {{convert|2000|acre|km2}} as a footprint, smaller than LAX ([[Los Angeles International Airport]]). With new technology, with directional drilling, maybe that footprint [will] shrink even more."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=770489|title=Energy Mom|last=Corcoran|first=Terence|date=September 5, 2008|publisher=National Post|accessdate=2008-09-06}}</ref>  Arctic power, a lobbying group which supports drilling in ANWR,  points out that while ANWR is over {{convert|19000000|acre|km2}}, only {{convert|1500000|acre|km2}}, or 8% of the total, would be available for exploration.  In addition, less than {{convert|2000|acre|km2}}, would be occupied by drilling platforms.<ref name=anwrorg>Artic Power. "Top ten reasons to support ANWR development." <http://www.anwr.org/ANWR-Basics/Top-ten-reasons-to-support-ANWR-development.php>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-A June 29, 2008 Pew Research Poll reported that 50% of Americans favor drilling of oil and gas in ANWR while 43% oppose (compared to 42% in favor and 50% opposed in February of the same year). <ref name=pollreport /> A CNN opinion poll conducted in August 31, 2008 reported 59% favor drilling for oil in ANWR, while 39%  oppose it.<ref name=pollreport />  A large majority of Alaskans support drilling in ANWR, including every governor, senator, representative, and legislature for the past 25 years.<ref name=anwrorg /> In the state of Alaska, residents receive annual dividends from oil-lease revenues. In 2000 the dividend came to $1,964 per resident.<ref name=natgeo />
-The United States Department of Energy estimates that ANWR oil production between 2018 and 2030 would reduce the cumulative net expenditures on imported crude oil and liquid fuels by an estimated $135 to $327 billion (2006 dollars),reducing the foreign trade deficit.
-Arctic Power cites a  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report which states that 77 of the 567 wildlife refuges in 22 states had oil and gas activities. Louisiana had the most with 19 units followed by Texas which had 11 units. Furthermore, oil or gas was produced in 45 of the 567 units located in 15 states. The number of producing wells in each unit ranged from one to more than 300 in the Upper Ouachita National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana. <ref>United States. U.S. General Accounting Office. [http://www.stormingmedia.us/09/0946/A094693.html "U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Information on Oil and Gas Activities in the National Wildlife Refuge System."] RN. A094693. 31 Oct. 2001.</ref> Arctic Power also claims support from the chiefly [[Inupiat Eskimo]] residents of the village of [[Kaktovik, Alaska|Kaktovik]], located in area 1002. <ref>Artic Power. "Residents of ANWR Support ANWR Drilling." <http://www.anwr.org/People/Residents-of-ANWR-Support.php>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> Sixty-eight villagers responded to a 2000 survey paid for by the state of Alaska with a $25,000 grant to educate the town on ANWR, fifty-three of whom strongly agreed or agreed that "The coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge should be open to oil and gas exploration."<ref>Artic Power. "City of Kaktovik ANWR Survey January, 2000." <http://www.anwr.org/features/kaktovik.htm> Retrieved 07-31-08. [Many of the percentages fail to add up correctly. Eds.]</ref>
-==Opposing Views==
-President [[Barack Obama]] opposes drilling in the Arctic Refuge.<ref>Kluger, Jeffrey. [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1680173,00.html "Going Green: The Eco Vote."] ''Time'' 2 Nov. 2007: 123.</ref> In a [[League of Conservation Voters]] questionnaire, Obama said, "I strongly reject drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge because it would irreversibly damage a protected national wildlife refuge without creating sufficient oil supplies to meaningfully affect the global market price or have a discernible impact on US energy security." Senator John McCain, while running for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, said, "As far as ANWR is concerned, I don’t want to drill in the [[Grand Canyon]], and I don't want to drill in the [[Everglades]]. This is one of the most pristine and beautiful parts of the world."<ref>Geraghty, Jim. [http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDVhYThkMTIzNmY3ZTdmYTkyNmVhNjg0NDEzYWM2NDc= "The Campaign Spot: John McCain interview."] ''National Review'' 16 Jan. 2008. </ref>
-In 2008, the [[United States Department of Energy|U.S. Department of Energy]] reported uncertainties about the USGS oil estimates for ANWR and the projected effects on oil price and supplies. “ There is little direct knowledge regarding the petroleum geology of the ANWR region.... ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.... Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United States. <ref name=doeeia />”
-The DOE reported that annual United States consumption of crude oil and petroleum products was {{convert|7.55|Goilbbl|m3}} in 2006 and again in 2007, totaling {{convert|15.1|Goilbbl|m3}}. <ref>United States. Department of Energy. Energy Information Administration. [http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_psup_dc_nus_mbbl_a.htm]''<http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_psup_dc_nus_mbbl_a.htm>Washington, DC: GPO. 2008.</ref> In comparison, the USGS estimated that the ANWR reserve contains {{convert|10.4|Goilbbl|m3}}.  Although, only 7.7 billion barrels are within the proposed drilling region. <ref name="USGS"/>
-"Environmentalists and most congressional Democrats have resisted drilling in the area because the required network of oil platforms, pipelines, roads and support facilities, not to mention the threat of foul spills, would play havoc on wildlife. The coastal plain, for example, is a calving home for some 129,000 caribou."   <ref>Waller, Douglas. [http://www.time.com/time/columnist/waller/article/0,9565,170983,00.html "Some Shaky Figures on ANWR Drilling."] ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' 13 Aug. 2001.</ref>
-The [[NRDC]] argues that drilling would not take place in a compact, {{convert|2000|acre|km2|sing=on}} space as proponents claim, but in fact, undertake "a spiderweb of industrial sprawl across the whole of the refuge's {{convert|1500000|acre|km2|sing=on}} coastal plain, including drill sites, airports and roads, and gravel mines, it would have a footprint of {{convert|12000|acre|km2}}, but actually spread across an area of more than {{convert|640000|acre|km2}}, or {{convert|1000|sqmi|km2}}. Additionally, drilling opponents warn of the danger of oil spills in the region.<ref>Pierce, Melinda. [http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2001/Mar/hour2_030201.html "Drilling in the ANWR."] ''Science Friday'' NPR. 2 Mar. 2001.</ref><ref>NRDC. [http://www.nrdc.org/land/wilderness/artech/farc2000.asp "Drilling in the Arctic Refuge: The 2,000-Acre Footprint Myth."] </ref>
-The [[United States Fish and Wildlife Service|US Fish and Wildlife Service]] has stated that the 1002 area has a "greater degree of ecological diversity than any other similar sized area of [[Alaska North Slope|Alaska's north slope]]." The FWS also states, "Those who campaigned to establish the Arctic Refuge recognized its wild qualities and the significance of these spatial relationships. Here lies an unusually diverse assemblage of large animals and smaller, less-appreciated life forms, tied to their physical environments and to each other by natural, undisturbed ecological and evolutionary processes."<ref>United States. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Wild Lands: Ecological Regions with a focus on the Coastal Plain and Foothills." 14 Feb. 2006 <http://arctic.fws.gov/ecoregions.htm>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-Prior to 2008, most residents of the United States<ref name=pollreport>CNN. "CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll." Pollingreport.com 29 July 2006.
-<http://www.pollingreport.com/energy.htm>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> and a majority of Canadians opposed drilling in the refuge.<ref>World Wildlife Fund, Canada. "Majority of Canadians Oppose Drilling in Artic National Wildlife Refuge." 25 July 2005. <http://www.wwf.ca/NewsAndFacts/NewsRoom/default.asp?section=archive&page=display&ID=1399>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-The Alaska Inter-Tribal Council, which represents 229 Native Alaskan tribes, officially opposes any development in ANWR.<ref>Alaska Inter-Tribal Council. "NCAI Resolution #BIS-02-056." 26 May 2005. <http://aitc.org/node/22>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> In March 2005 Luci Beach, <ref>Wilderness Society. "Faces of Conservation." Wilderness.org <http://www.wilderness.org/AboutUs/FacesOfConservation2005.cfm>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> the executive director of the steering committee for the Native Alaskan and Canadian [[Gwich’in]] tribe (a member of the AI-TC), during a trip to Washington D.C., while speaking for a unified group of 55 Alaskan and Canadian indigenous peoples, said that drilling in ANWR is "a human rights issue and it's a basic Aboriginal human rights issue."<ref>"Gwich'in leader blasts Senate vote on ANWR drilling." Indianz.com 18 Mar. 2005. <http://www.indianz.com/News/2005/007098.asp>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> She went on to say, "Sixty to 70 percent of our diet comes from the land and caribou is one of the primary animals that we depend on for sustenance." The Gwich'in tribe adamantly believes that drilling in ANWR would have serious negative effects on the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd that they partially rely on for food. <ref>Sands, Elizabeth and Stephanie Pahler. "Native Communities" Columbia University. <http://www.columbia.edu/~sp2023/scienceandsociety/web-pages/Native%20Communities.html>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref>
-A part of the [[Inupiat]] population of Kaktovik, and 5,000 to 7,000 Gwich’in peoples feel their lifestyle would be disrupted or destroyed by drilling.<ref>Gwich’in Steering Committee. "Gwichʼin Niintsyaa Resolution." 10 June 1988.
-<http://www.gwichinsteeringcommittee.org/gwichinniintsyaa.html>. Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> The Inupiat from [[Point Hope, Alaska]] recently passed resolutions <ref>Episcopal Public Policy Network. "FACTS: Native Opposition to Drilling." Episcopalchurch.org 15 Sep. 2005. <http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3654_67509_ENG_HTM.htm> Retrieved on 2008-8-01.</ref> recognizing that drilling in ANWR would allow resource exploitation in other wilderness areas. The Inupiat, Gwitch'in, and other tribes are calling for sustainable energy practices and policies. The Tanana Chiefs Conference (representing 42 Alaska Native villages from 37 tribes) opposes drilling, as do at least 90 Native American tribes. The [[National Congress of American Indians]] (representing 250 tribes), the [[Native American Rights Fund]] as well as some Canadian tribes also oppose drilling in the 1002 area.
-In May 2006 a resolution was passed in the village of [[Kaktovik]] calling [[Shell Oil Company]] "a hostile and dangerous force" which authorized the mayor to take legal and other actions necessary to "defend the community."<ref>[http://www.kinyradio.com/juneaunews/archives/week_of_05-22-06/juneau_news_05-24-06.html "Kaktovik resolution blasts Shell Oil."] ''Juneau Daily News'' 24 May 2006.</ref> The resolution also calls on all North Slope communities to oppose Shell owned offshore leases unrelated to the ANWR controversy until the company becomes more respectful of the people.<ref name=petroleumnews>Ragsdale, Rose. [http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/349287231.shtml "Kaktovik accuses Shell of insincerity."] ''Petroleum News'' vol. 11 no. 21. 21 May 2006.</ref> Mayor Sonsalla says Shell has failed to work with the villagers on how the company would protect [[Bowhead Whale|bowhead whales]] which are part of Native culture, subsistence life, and diet.<ref name=petroleumnews />
-==See also==
-*[[National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska]]
-==References==
-<!-- Instructions for adding a footnote:
-   NOTE: Footnotes in this article use the Cites.php extension
-   *To add a new footnote, just put it in the appropriate location in the text, enclosed with<ref></ref> tags. It will automatically added to this section.
--->
-{{reflist}}
-==External links==
-{{Wikinews|US Senate blocks Alaska refuge drilling}}
-* [http://arctic.fws.gov/index.htm Official ANWR website, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service]
-* [http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/results.html, Energy Information Administration Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]
-* [http://www.anwr.org/ Pro-drilling advocacy organization, Arctic Power]
-*[http://www.sierraclubplus.org/arctic/maps/ Sierra Club Map for Google Earth of the Proposed Drilling]
-* [http://www.alaskaaction.org/ A meeting place for Alaska Advocates]
-* [http://www.oilonice.org/ ''Oil on Ice'', an award winning anti-drilling documentary]
-* [http://www.asrc.com/splash.asp Website of Arctic Slope Regional Corp, Regional Corporation of Alaska's North Slope Inupiat people]
-* [http://www.finebergresearch.com Information and research site created by Alaska oil expert Richard Fineberg]
-* [http://www.aitc.org/ Alaska Inter-Tribal Council]
-* [http://www.canadianembassy.org/environment/development-en.asp Canadian embassy website describing Canadian government's position opposing ANWR oil development]
-* [http://www.beingcaribou.com/ BEING CARIBOU THE FILM]
-* [http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/index.htm USGS caribou research related to ANWR]
-* [http://www.appstate.edu/~jh60405 Anthropology and the ANWR drilling controversy]
-* [http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=3012 Fact and Fiction about Gasoline Prices] - [[Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C.|Capitol Hill]] briefing by [[Jerry Taylor]]
-* [http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html Energy Information Administration – Petroleum Basic Statistics]
-* [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#Econ CIA – The World Factbook]
-* [http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html Energy Information Administration – World Proved Reserves of Oil and Natural Gas]
-*[http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2005/092105o.htm International Monetary Fund - Oil Market Structure and High Prices]
-{{Peak oil}}
-{{Energy in the USA}}
-[[Category:Energy in the United States]]
-[[Category:Environmental controversies]]
-[[Category:Environment of Alaska]]
-[[Category:National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska]]
-[[Category:North Slope Borough, Alaska]]
-[[Category:Petroleum]]
-[[Category:Political controversies]]
-[[Category:Industry in the Arctic]]
-[[Category:Environmental issues in the United States]]