Should The United States Suspend Arctic Offshore Drilling?

America shouldn’t drill in Alaska because it doesn’t really help our economy. In document B it states that “ If oil is discovered less than 2,000 acres of the 150 million acres of the coastal plain would be affected.” The oil from the ANWR possibly created up to 735,000 jobs because they are building a new oil refinery and they need places to get

The world, as we know it, is in the midst of having an oil crisis. Our nation starves and bends at the will of this dreadful calamity. Our deprivation for this atrocious corruption has led us to look for oil deposits in the Alaskan Wilderness. The US needs oil and by drilling for oil on our own land, we would help our economy, but in doing so would destroy the beauty of the wilderness and harm many others. The matter on hand is that should we drill for oil in Alaska’s wilderness? My opinion and answer to this question would simply be no. The United States of America should not drill for oil in the Alaskan wilderness.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has been the center of a strident controversy and national debate that has raged for over 40 years. The question raising so much contention is whether the federal government should allow drilling for oil and natural gas with the levels of contention paralleling the rise and fall of gas prices. The National Democratic and Republican Parties have taken opposing positions in their national political platforms, with the debate emerging and re-emerging in Congress as a significant issue. The Republican are proponents of drilling whereas the Democrats are opposed. With Sen. Lisa Murkowski ascending to the top post of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee many observers believe that the Republicans will renew their push for drilling in the ANWR in the upcoming 114th Congress. This paper will explore the different arguments that are used to oppose drilling to protect the ANWR followed by arguments that are in support of drilling. As a result of a preliminary review of current literature outlining the pros and cons surrounding drilling, it is the thesis of this paper that drilling in the ANWR is unnecessary based on (1) the potential to cause irreversible damage to a very unique ecosystem that has not been adequately studied by scientists; and (2) the limited impact that drilling in the region will have on overall market prices and supplies due to the estimated small size of the ANWR’s oil and gas reserves. A brief history of the

Senator Everett Dirksen once noted “The oilcan is mightier than the sword”. In today’s world, it is easy to see why oil can be considered the most important resource to hold. Without oil, many of the common day occurrences we take for granted would be impossible. Oil is used for almost everything; from the fuel used to drive our vehicles, to the plastics used in every facet of life, and providing the heat needed to live through the winter. In fact, the United States depends so much on oil that as a nation it uses over 20 million barrels a day. Importing oil increases the total costs because of the need to transport it from around the world. It is estimated

Oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a very controversial topic. On one end you have the people who want to drill for oil to help out our economy, and on the other end there are the environmentalists and the Alaskan natives who do not want their land destroyed. Our economy needs help; oil prices keep rising, gas prices have reached an all time high, and America is depending too much on foreign trade. Drilling for oil in Alaska will solve these problems. There are ways of drilling without disturbing the environment and keeping the animals in their original habitat.

The question is should we drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. While there are downfalls to drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, the benefits to the country and to Alaska far outweigh them. These benefits include lower gas prices, more jobs, energy independence.

Drilling oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is a serious issue for environmentalists and for the future of the United States. Should the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge be opened to oil drilling? This paper will debate whether or not we should allow Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to be opened to oil drilling. This will also show the impact it has on the environment, and I will show a critical analysis of the current issue of whether or not to drill.

Evidence: According to the U.S. Geological Survey they have estimated that there are 16 billion barrels of oil available for drilling, and would be sufficient enough to replace all of America’s imports from Saudi Arabia for

Many advocates of oil exploration promote the merits that come with it, mainly in economy. Carter addresses these, but urges his audience to "look beyond the alleged benefits of a short-term economic gain and focus on what is really at stake" (Carter 7). He hypothesizes that any oil extracted would only cover perhaps 2 percent of oil the nation consumes in a single day. However, his alternative is to conserve this with fuel efficient vehicles. Carter insists that instead of destroying a natural habitat for more resources, we should use the resources we currently have

Another reason against drilling much research has shown that all the oil that will be produced will only last for about six months. The fact that the British Petroleum has greater potential to produce more oil and natural gasses (Markey 2004) than ANWR so why bother with it , supporting the case that drilling is pointless. Then there is the percentage that after oil production of ANWR, the foreign oil dependency will only drop from 56% to 50% (Markey 2004).Then the oil produced would reach the market ten years later after it was produced, leaving the gas price decrease to one percent(Lamar and Markey 12). There was also the reality of natural gases. ANWR does not confirm any sign of them, when President Bush ordered exploration for natural gasses (Klyza and Ford-Martin 1).Again proving drilling pointless.

America should drill in Alaska for oil because it's good for the economy. Document C says the United States uses more oil than it could find domestically, even if we were to drill on all public lands. The United States uses 25% to 30% of the oil produced

America must wean itself off of dependence on foreign oil, and one valid solution to this problem is offshore oil drilling and production. America’s economy is heavily based on petroleum, as though it is the nation’s blood; a necessity for survival. About 25% of oil produced in the U.S. comes from offshore rigs. Most of the U.S. coastline has been off limits for oil drilling since the early 1980s. Due to environmental concerns after an oil spill off the coast of California in 1969, an offshore drilling moratorium was imposed. Since then, the U.S. has amplified its energy consumption to where it uses nearly 25% of the world's oil. Meanwhile, the U.S. produces about 10% of the world's oil. That has made the U.S. heavily reliant on imported

This quote is significant because there is fear that if too much oil spills they won't be able to save all of the

These are amongst the cycles and roots recollected by Yergin within a work, which deserves to be the standard manuscript on oil history. Half energy expert and half historian, Yergin, the president and confounder of Cambridge

A lot Scientists and oil field experts have been collecting facts and scientific evidences to try to predict the period at which peak oil will occur. Two of the scientists working toward this discovery are Colin J. Campbell and Jean H laherre. Those two scientists wrote an article about the aftermath s of the 1970 's oil embargo sppured reachees over the decline of oil, which resulted in erroneous conclusions due to various factors (78). In order to truly cast light on the issue of oil decline, Campbell and Laherrère merged a variety of techniques which comprise the examination of “the decline of aging fields” and “the diminishing returns on exploration in larger regions”, the extrapolation of the size