Drilling in ANWR not a cure-all

Surprise, surprise! The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a hot topic again in Washington, D.C.

At stake is the health of one of the one of the nation’s purest and most remote wildlife areas, including a massive caribou herd genetically programmed to migrate hundreds of miles to have their calves in the very area where oil drilling is proposed.

Faced with mounting pressure over high gas prices, President Bush on April 25 said gas prices would not be as high if Arctic Refuge drilling had been approved 10 years ago.

Technically, that’s not true, according to several government sources that say it would take up to 20 years for oil development to be at peak production and affecting the oil market.

Even if ANWR oil were to start flowing in a pipeline, the impact on domestic gasoline prices would not be significant, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Drilling in the entire 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of ANWR the Arctic Refuge would affect prices at the pump by about 1 cent per gallon or possibly up to 3 cents per gallon at peak production, according to agency reports.

However, the amount of oil thought to be in ANWR oil deposits is dwarfed by the high rate of U.S. oil consumption. If it were possible to pump out all of ANWR’s recoverable oil at once, Americans would consume it all in less than a year, according to U.S. Geological Survey estimates.

Meanwhile, energy conservation measures and building more fuel-efficient vehicles would save more oil than ANWR could produce, experts say.

Alaska is pushing for developing ANWR to bolster petroleum royalties that are dwindling quickly in the Prudhoe Bay region. The state has announced a controversial plan to pay an aggressive Oregon-based PR firm $3 million to try to win national approval for ANWR drilling.

The Alaska Daily News, which supports ANWR drilling, opposed the plan to hire Pac/West Communications in an editorial that made several points on where Alaska stands in the debate. In the paper’s words:

•”Let’s be honest here. Alaska wants to open ANWR to drilling primarily for the benefit of Alaskans.”

•”ANWR development would have nothing to do with gasoline supplies for at least the next 10 years and would make the United States only marginally less dependent on foreign oil …”

•”Why do we think Pac/West can do what a decade and $11 million worth of Arctic Power lobbying and the tremendous clout of Sen. Ted Stevens have been unable to do?”

•”The last thing Alaska needs is more bad national press.”

•”Alaska’s case for ANWR would be strengthened if the state’s congressional delegation was a stronger force for energy conservation and research and development to help lead the nation to more efficient use of fossil fuels and alternative fuels.”