Navigate

About

Profile
Astrology
Favorites
Likes & Dislikes

Collections

Books
Breyers
CDs
DVDs
MP3s

Creations

Art & Photos (DOWN)
Writing

Writing / Schoolwork

To Drill or Not to Drill: Oil in Alaska

November 2002
Com. 1
Term Paper
1116 words

To Drill or Not to Drill: Oil in Alaska

    In recent years there has been an ongoing debate concerning the presence of oil in the state of Alaska. Many argue that obtaining this oil would reduce the United States' dependency on oil from the Middle East. However, the amount of oil the United States would get out of Alaska is so small compared to the amount the country imports from the Middle East that drilling in Alaska is unnecessary and therefore should not take place.

    The territory of Alaska was originally owned by Russia. In 1867, it was bought by the United States of America for 7.2 million dollars and remained a territory until 1959, when it became the 49th state. Most of Alaska's non-native population came to the state during the great Klondike Gold Rush during the 1890s (Gislason 1). More people settled down in the state when oil was discovered. In 1917, the first national park in Alaska, Mount McKinley National Park, was created, and more parts soon followed (Melham 10). In 1980, Congress passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which created seven new national parks, enlarged Mount McKinley National Park by four million acres nand renamed the park Denali, and created ANWR (Heacox 47). Natives of ANWR are the Gwich'in, a group of people who rely on caribou for their survival. Their lives revolve around the Porcupine caribou herd, which use ANWR as their calving grounds (Gildart 1). The Gwich'in are strongly opposed to any drilling taking place on their ancestral hunting lands, and they should have a say-so in the decision of whether or not to drill, seeing as they have lived in the ANWR area for thousands of years, before any Europeans even thought about setting foot there.

    When oil was discovered in Alaska, the famous Trans-Alaskan Pipeline was built in order to carry the oil south. This pipe is settled in the midst of miles of beautiful landscapes, shattering what would be a spectacular view. The Inupiat people, natives of the Prudhoe Bay area, claim that the oil industry has done their area good. However, in this same area, there are records of "oil and chemical spills, overflowing waste pits, noise, pollution, and sprawl" (Satchel 1). And who can forget the terrible Exxon Valdez disaster, in which thousands of animals, including birds, whales, otters, seals, and fish, were killed when the oil tanker sunk, sending large quantities of oil out into the waters of Prince William Sound. According to Michael Satchel, there are only "3.7 billion to 16 billion barrels of oil -- from size months' to two years' supply" available in ANWR. Is a maximum of two years' supply of oil really worth the desecration of a pristine ecosystem? Although Alaskans once were all for drilling in their state, now most oppose it. In fact, Alaskans don't rely on oil as much as the people of the Lower Forty-Eight think. According to Kim Heacox in her article in a recent Wilderness magazine, "In Alaska six times more jobs rely on a healthy ecosystem than on oil and gas. In a recent poll by the Alaska Conservation Foundation, 92 percent of the respondents (Alaskans) said a healthy environment is necessary for a strong economy; 71 percent considered themselves conservationists" (Heacox 46).

    Rather than worrying about where to get more oil, the people of America should worry about how to reduce their reliance on oil. Although many people can't seem to grasp the concept, oil is exhaustible and will one day run out. If the American people continue with the same mindset they have now, when that day comes, a horrible crisis will ensue. Steps should be taken now in order to be ready for the end of oil. Other countries are doing so, and America should follow suit. Europe has implemented a tax on oil, increasing conservation (Cozic 19). Iceland has begun to run public buses on hydrogen power, which is more clean and efficient than oil. Many companies have begun to produce hybrid gasoline-electric powered cars. If America would catch on to this trend, its reliance on the Middle East for oil would be reduced in the process. Drilling for oil in Alaska is not the answer to America's problems.

    The natural environment is a precious commodity that most people today take for granted. The very existence of life on this planet relies on a healthy environment. Once the environment is ruined, there will be no way to return it to its previous state; it will be gone forever. Once this beautiful planet is ruined, there will be no way to get off. Alaska is one of the last pristine wildernesses in the world. There are places in Alaska where no human has set foot, and it should be kept that way. What is truly outrageous is the fact that the government is even considering drilling for oil in ANWR, a wildlife refuge, which was established to preserve a piece of beautiful Alaska. Citizens would be angry if Congress considered drilling for oil in Yellowstone National Park, for example, because it is a wonderful vacation destination, a piece of American history, and a fascinating experience. People don't seem to care so much about ANWR, an isolated, remote area located in the Arctic Circle, inhabited only by local natives. To most people, it doesn't matter. To them it is just a frozen wasteland which will never generate money from tourism. However, from a more conservationist point of view, this is a good thing. Yellowstone is indeed a wonderful place to visit, but all of the visitors are disturbing the delicate balance of nature. They line their cars in traffic jams, feed wild animals although specifically told not to, and get too close to animals while simple trying to take a photograph. If there are no visitors to ANWR, no harm can come to the environment. In fact, most of Alaska's National Parks, including Denali, the most visited, have forbidden private traffic, providing a bus system instead. The air and water is clean, the plants are healthy, and the animals behave in the manner that they were intended to. Why destroy such a wonderful setting by drilling for oil in it? The less people and industry that come to this area, the more it is preserved.

    The real national resources to be found in Alaska are its wildlife and scenery, which must be preserved for future generations. An acquaintance of author Tom Melham once wrote to him claiming that Alaska casts a spell on its visitors, adding that "the thought that someday it might no longer be able to is more than I can bear. Indeed, it must be preserved for all people, for all time" (Melham 18).

Works Cited

Cozic, Charles P., et al., ads. Opposing Viewpoints: Global Resources. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1998

Gildart, Bert. "Hunting for Their Future." National Wildlife. Oct./Nov. 1997: n.pag. WilsonSelectPlus. FirstSearch. 5 Nov. 2002 <http://www.linccweb.org/electronicinfo>

Gislason, Eric. A Brief History of Alaska Statehood (1867 - 1959). 21 Nov. 2002 <http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CAP/BARTLETT/49state.html>

Heacox, Kim. "Whale Dreams: The Gift of Alaska's National Parks." Wilderness 2002 - 2003: 42 - 47.

Melham, Tom, et al. Alaska's Magnificent Parklands. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 1984.

Satchel, Michael. "Gentler Footsteps on the Tundra." U.S. News and World Report. 25 Mar. 2002: n.pag. WilsonSelectPlus. FirstSearch. 5 Nov. 2002 <http://www.linccweb.org/electronicinfo>