ment 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 Gwichin 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 dont 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 worlds 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 t...
