Should We Drill in ANWR?
If Not ANWR Then What?
Fig 1. Demand Options for Reducing Oil Imports: Increased Miles Per Gallon, Compressed Natural Gass and Reduced Miles Traveled (Fairey, 2009).
Undoubtedly, we need a solution and soon. But to find a solution, we need to agree on what the problem is. Cleveland and Kauffmann put it this way, “It is not our dependence on imported oil per se that makes the economy vulnerable to price swings, but the dependence on oil itself" (Cleveland and Kauffmann 2003, 488). To which we couldn't agree more, but would add that the environment is also vulnerable to our dependence on oil and that the environment, which the entire world must share, is even more important than any one countries economy. Our interests to eliminate our dependence on oil are greater than national or economic, they are global and very much a matter of life and death.
So, any energy alternative must be developed with this in mind. Much ink and money has been spent in discussions of “new technologies,” and we hear nice-sounding things like “clean coal,” of which no such thing exist. We hear of shale oil in the Midwest, and the possibilities of running our cars on ethanol. All of these potential energy sources will have CO2 emissions, albeit ethanol is likely to have much less than the other two. These potential energy sources are also likely to get much more attention in coming years as the US has vast capabilities of producing all three, and our dependence on foreign oil is only going to increase.
It is therefore more important than ever to get the message out about CO2 emissions, before we continue down a another path of unsustainable energy consumption. We are much better off focusing our time, attention and money researching and developing new technologies in wind, solar, and hydro energy than trying to find a new fuel to burn, or simply trying to find more of the one we already use (see the above discussion on the Hubbert Peak to see why this is a fools errand).
Perhaps most importantly, there are existing technologies that we can all use right now, that could significantly reduce carbon emissions. For example, there is no reason for there not to be a law that mandates that any car sold in the US must reach a certain threshold of effeciency. But perhaps more importantly, there is no reason for any of us to buy a car that isn't fuel efficient. We sometimes forget that we have enormous power as consumers, and in this way we can use capitalism as a technology to create greener transportation. And for those of us who must settle for the gas-guzzlers we already own, simply checking your air pressure regularly would save you more money in a year than drilling in ANWR would at its production peak.
There are other, less obvious ways to reduce emissions too, for example, a nation-wide campaign that provided incentives, tax or otherwise, to those who took a bicycle or mass-transit to work would promote the use of greener transportation (that in the case of a bicycle has zero carbon emissions). But even without governmental incentives, riding a bike or using mass-transit saves people money.
In conclusion, drilling in ANWR isn't the solution. It won't solve our dependence on oil, it won't lower prices of oil and it won't help the environment, essentially it just gives billions to oil companies. Indeed the world's dependence on oil is decidedly unsustainable, but the silver lining here is that there are easy things we can do, even if we are not scientists developing an alternative fuel or policy makers working for a diplomatic solution, to significantly reduce our carbon emissions every day.
So, any energy alternative must be developed with this in mind. Much ink and money has been spent in discussions of “new technologies,” and we hear nice-sounding things like “clean coal,” of which no such thing exist. We hear of shale oil in the Midwest, and the possibilities of running our cars on ethanol. All of these potential energy sources will have CO2 emissions, albeit ethanol is likely to have much less than the other two. These potential energy sources are also likely to get much more attention in coming years as the US has vast capabilities of producing all three, and our dependence on foreign oil is only going to increase.
It is therefore more important than ever to get the message out about CO2 emissions, before we continue down a another path of unsustainable energy consumption. We are much better off focusing our time, attention and money researching and developing new technologies in wind, solar, and hydro energy than trying to find a new fuel to burn, or simply trying to find more of the one we already use (see the above discussion on the Hubbert Peak to see why this is a fools errand).
Perhaps most importantly, there are existing technologies that we can all use right now, that could significantly reduce carbon emissions. For example, there is no reason for there not to be a law that mandates that any car sold in the US must reach a certain threshold of effeciency. But perhaps more importantly, there is no reason for any of us to buy a car that isn't fuel efficient. We sometimes forget that we have enormous power as consumers, and in this way we can use capitalism as a technology to create greener transportation. And for those of us who must settle for the gas-guzzlers we already own, simply checking your air pressure regularly would save you more money in a year than drilling in ANWR would at its production peak.
There are other, less obvious ways to reduce emissions too, for example, a nation-wide campaign that provided incentives, tax or otherwise, to those who took a bicycle or mass-transit to work would promote the use of greener transportation (that in the case of a bicycle has zero carbon emissions). But even without governmental incentives, riding a bike or using mass-transit saves people money.
In conclusion, drilling in ANWR isn't the solution. It won't solve our dependence on oil, it won't lower prices of oil and it won't help the environment, essentially it just gives billions to oil companies. Indeed the world's dependence on oil is decidedly unsustainable, but the silver lining here is that there are easy things we can do, even if we are not scientists developing an alternative fuel or policy makers working for a diplomatic solution, to significantly reduce our carbon emissions every day.
