Defending the Arctic

FOR YEARS, the oil industry has been salivating over the prospect of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the protected home of polar and grizzly bears, caribou, wolves, and snow geese. The US Senate, recognizing the value of preserving America's Serengeti Plain of the North, has rejected efforts to open it to drilling rigs.

ADVERTISEMENT

Lacking the 60 votes needed to end the filibuster that defenders of the refuge have threatened to block ANWR drilling, the industry's allies in the Senate have in recent years sought a way to win with a simple majority. Citing possible revenues from oil operations, they now plan to include drilling in the budget bill, which cannot be filibustered. Senators should see this gimmick for the procedural end-run it is, and reject it. In 2003, the Senate did just that, on a 52-48 vote, but there are enough new senators to put the outcome this year in doubt.

The industry already has access to 95 percent of Alaska's Arctic coastal plain. The 5 percent that includes the ANWR would, according to estimates of the US Geological Survey, produce enough oil to supply the country for just six months. Any oil that it yields would not be available for 10 years, and would never amount to more than 2 percent of the country's demand.

This would come at the cost of hundreds of miles of roads and pipelines and recurring spills of oil and other substances that are harmful to the refuge's tundra and wetlands. Drillers would have to strip the coastal plain's streambeds of massive quantities of gravel to build roads, airstrips, and drill pads. The streambeds are a crucial and fragile element of the refuge, which is the migratory destination for millions of birds, from as far south as South America and the Chesapeake Bay.

The industry argues that drilling facilities would cover "just" 2,000 acres. But this ignores all the roads, pipelines, gravel mines, and other infrastructure required for the project. That is like saying a corporate boardroom table occupies just the 4 square inches the table legs cover. In a 2003 study, the National Academy of Sciences found that the negative effects of oil development on wildlife and the environment extend far beyond the immediate footprint of drilling operations.

Americans, most of whom will never set foot in the refuge, understand what is at stake and consistently say no to refuge drilling in opinion polls. In a December survey by Zogby International, 55 percent opposed drilling and 38 percent favored it. Those polled made this choice even though oil prices climbed steeply in 2004. The Senate should show the same good sense.