Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Environmental Science None Provided3 None Provided3 Everyday we put tons of pollution into the air, water and ground. Our population is growing each day and in turn urbanization is expanding. Teddy Roosevelt, being an avid outdoorsmen, knew the importance of setting land aside for posterity sake and in doing do set a trend for later presidents. When Richard Nixon set land aside in Alaska, which became the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), he set it aside to be never tainted by industrialization. Today republicans and some democrats want to repeal the title of National Wildlife Refuge and drill there for oil. This could have adverse effects for wildlife and the Inuit natives that call the ANWR and surrounding area home. In this paper I will lay out my reasons for why we should not drill in the refuge. First of all, there is a drilling site in Alaska about 60 miles west of the ANWR. The big oil site has turned 1,000 square miles of tundra into a network of roads and pipelines (Sierra Club 1). It has turned it into what looks like an industrial park of a city. There are mounds of sewage sludge, scrap metal, garbage and waste sites that contain acids, lead, pesticides and diesel fuel. According to a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article there is an average of one, usually small, spill a day, but totally 1.5 million gallons since 1995 (1). The oil in the ANWR is not located in a concentrated spot but rather in 30 smaller deposits. This means there would have to be networks of roads and pipelines built, increasing the chance of a spill. If there is confusion of who spilled what, which happens 40% of the time, the clean up expense is put on the public (Sierra Club 1). The location of the ANWR would make clean up even harder because of the cold climate. Animal species that could be affected include polar bears, caribou, birds and fish. An interesting fact about this issue is that 95% of Alaska’s North Slope is open for exploration and development leaving the ANWR as the remaining 5%(Sierra Club 1). The ANWR was set aside for a reason, to be protected for later generations, so why drill in the protected site while 95% is open? An article off of sacbee.com talks about the Gwich’in people and their dependency on the ANWR. As well as animals being adversely affected the Gwich'in Inuit natives live there. They depend on the protection of the ANWR because their chief source of food is caribou. They use every part of the caribou for food, clothing, shelter and their cultural focus point. Repealing the status of a National Wildlife Refuge would hurt their way of life that they have preserved over the years. The site is being considered because the people who back this idea don’t want the USA being dependent on foreign oil. The fact is it would not make us less dependent on foreign oil, a 6-month supply over 50 years is not going to do that. They are also afraid of Saddam Hussien controlling the oil market, but economists say the world controls the prices. The oil they want to drill would be a very small amount only about 2% of our total reserves. If they started drilling in 2002 we would not see it until 2012, meaning we can not cure any problems that may occur before then. This graph shows the amount of oil the refuge would give us is only a small bump in the road. The estimated amount of 2%, or 3 to 6 billion barrels, we would see over a 50-year span, not all at once. The U.S. Geological Service, who is an agency of the Department of the Interior, came up with this estimation. The numbers estimated by the U.S. Geological Service are credible numbers. Decreasing consumption of oil is our main priority. USA is a small fraction of the world’s population yet we consume one fourth of oil (Sierra Club 1). We have the technology to produce cars that can get 40 miles to the gallon. We need to pass stricter laws to do away with SUVs that get 9 miles to the gallon. According to the Sierra Club, if we implemented this standard by 2012 we would save 15 times more oil than the wildlife refuge would produce over 50 years (1). An article off of protect the arctic website says the oil industry said that the price of oil in 2000 would be $58 per barrel but it was in the mid-to-high twenties about what it is at now (1). The article said that the oil industry is misleading Americans to back the drilling in the refuge. The article went on to say that the oil industry said drilling would lower the price of oil by 5%. If we see only 2% of our reserves that the refuge holds over a 50-year span it will not have that much of an affect. Even a 62% majority of the oil union supports protecting the refuge. I can’t believe that the oil industry would be able to lower prices of oil when the oil being recovered is tenths of percent compared to the world’s reserves. I believe if we practiced conserving oil the problem of running low would be at a lower risk. But of course money talks and oil industries want to make that money and for some without concern to the environment. The fact that it only holds 2% of our reserves and that it is in a pristine area tells me it is not a good idea. Some people are unaware of the environmental problems that are happening and how they will adversely affect our way of life even more in the future. We really have to consider that depleting our resources at such a rapid rate will only harm us. Drilling in a pristine protected area is not the answer to our problems only enforcing laws for better gas mileage and looking at different sources of energy is going to help us in the long run. If you want to be a part of the decision whether to drill or not you can write a letter or email your senator detailing your concerns you may have over drilling. “Arctic Facts.” 5 March 2002.” *www.sierraclub.org*. “Gwich’in Natives and ANWR.” 5 March 2002.” * www.sacbee.com*. “Oil Industry is Misleading Americans.” 6 March 2002.” *www.protectthearctic.com*. “Arctic Wildlife Refuge a Canvas for Ideological Debates.” JS Online 10 March 2002. Bibliography: Word Count: 1093
Copyright © 2005 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved.