Environmentalists fear oil drilling could harm ANWR habitat
Copyright 2000 by United Press International
September 29, 2000
By HIL ANDERSON, UPI Chief Energy Correspondent
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 29 (UPI) -- Shortly after George W. Bush announced that his energy platform would include opening part of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration, critics fired back with their side of what has become a long-running political debate between environmentalists and the energy industry.
The ANWR was established as a wildlife refuge in 1960 by President Eisenhower and expanded in 1980 to its current size of 19 million acres. Allowing drilling on 8 percent of the reserve, as Bush proposed, would open around 1.5 million acres.
Oilmen and their supporters on Capitol Hill have argued for the need to find more oil on U.S. soil, and that technological advances in recent years make it possible for drilling rigs to peacefully co-exist with the bountiful wildlife that calls the coastal plain region of the sprawling ANWR home.
"We can do both -- take out energy and leave only footprints," Bush said Friday in a speech outlining his energy plan. "Critics of increased exploration and production ignore the remarkable technological advances in the last 10 years that have dramatically decreased the environmental impact of oil and gas exploration."
While the ANWR holds promise of significant oil and gas reserves -- possibly on a scale with the state's massive Prudhoe Bay field - environmentalists are aghast that the notion of a "clean" oil drilling operation would be taken seriously; they see the entire prospect as an oxymoron.
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be as foolhardy as damming the Grand Canyon for hydroelectric power," said Sierra Club spokeswoman Melanie Griffin said "America cannot drill its way to energy independence.
The Sierra Club refers to the ANWR as the "crown jewel" of U.S. wildlife sanctuaries due to its abundance and variety of wildlife. The coastal plain area of the reserve, however, has geological formations similar to Prudhoe Bay, a mere 65 miles to the west, which is why it is so coveted by oil interests along with a number of Alaskan politicians eager to keep the state's oil business thriving in coming years.
Richard Fineberg, a consultant on oil and environmental issues in Alaska, said studies have not proven that major reserves, estimated at more than 3 billion barrels, even exist in the first place, and doubted that oil production would not have an impact on wildlife.
"The long-term effects on wildlife are real," Fineberg told United Press International in a telephone interview on Friday. "Exactly what those effects will be is difficult to say, but it is impossible to argue that oil is good for them."
Fineberg said leaks from oil pipelines and wells, along with fumes from the flaring of gas and other emissions, posed threats to the pristine environment of the ANWR.
The coastal region of the ANWR may be rich in petroleum, but it is also a breeding ground for polar bears, numerous species of birds and the Porcupine caribou, a herd that numbers some 150,000 animals and is considered a prime food source by local Native Americans who have lived in the region for generations.
Since caribou travel in herds led by animals that serve as scouts, it is feared that coming upon new roads, drilling rigs or humans in the isolated region could spook the scout animals and send the herd off its historic course, or even disrupt the calving season.
"They come through every year from Canada," Fineberg said. "The coastal plain is their calving grounds and it (oil development) would certainly stress the herd."