Senior Ecology StudentAmerican Governments Since 1980, regulations placed on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in Alaska have protected ecologically important plants, animals and natural resources from becoming exploited or otherwise damaged by human development [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, N.D.]. These regulations have been opposed by oil companies, Republican politicians, and most Alaskan citizens, who argue that harvesting oil and gas resources from protected territories is crucial for meeting the growing energy demands of the United States. However, as global climate change continues to stress delicate tundra ecosystems, conservationists and environmental organizations warn that development could cause irreparable damage to habitats and the species that utilize them.
Shortly after President Trump took office, his administration passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which included legislation permitting the leasing of land for drilling projects in Arctic reserves [Congressional Research Service, 2017]. In December of 2018, the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released a statement that of the 19.3 million acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve today, 1.5 million acres of Alaskan coastline are planned to be sold to bidders like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and BP [Muffson, 2018]. The BLM is also responsible for conducting environmental risk assessments to determine if drilling is safe; however, there is evidence that these efforts are being illegally rushed such that drilling can begin before President Trump exits office in 2020. If these drilling projects are to proceed, organizations like the Wilderness Society urge that biodiversity, aboriginal peoples, and arctic habitats will be placed at risk [The Wilderness Society, 2019]. Before the first drops of crude oil are ever harvested, natural landscapes must be cleared and then developed to accommodate the demands of drilling projects. For instance, trees, grasslands and coastal habitats may be destroyed to make way for airports, roads, and shelters used in transporting the supplies and heavy machinery required for drilling. The noise pollution from construction work alone can kill fishes and other aquatic animals, disrupt seasonal migration in birds and mammals, and alter the behaviors and mating habits of many animals. Construction may also demolish key foraging, nesting and mating habitats, decreasing resource availability for many species. Among the 270 plant and animal species that would be impacted by oil drilling projects in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, the Porcupine Caribou may be one of the most susceptible. This large, bulky relative of the reindeer undergoes seasonal migration directly through coastal habitats, where it feeds on grasses mushrooms and pine needles. During the Summer months, it rears its young in these regions; if the Trump Administration leases this land off to oil companies, it is likely that there would not be enough quality food to support a robust population. Regulations that would limit land development, exploration and drilling during the Summer months are currently being considered, but it is unclear if there exists sufficient support for them in Congress. While purchasing plots of land from the Arctic Wildlife Reserve may seem unambiguously advantageous for oil companies, it may pose serious risks. The resources required to purchase land, search for potential drilling locations, and develop plots are not insignificant financial investments—especially when considering that the land may not be as fruitful as expected or as advertised. Oil companies will have to weigh the risks of drilling, including: the costs of development, the costs of shipping equipment to and from remote locations in Alaska, the possibility of unproductive sites, and the consequences of irreversible ecosystem damage with the potential economic benefits. Furthermore, the enthusiasm and sense of urgency displayed by the Trump Administration and potential buyers in seems misplaced when considering another risk—global energy trends. In particular, the United States’ energy demands are projected to move away from fossil fuels like coal and oil, and instead move toward renewable, sustainable sources like wind and solar energy. Because of this, the future rewards that can be expected of oil drilling operations may begin to diminish while the risks remain the same. I argue that the long-term risks and consequences of the Trump Administration leasing territory from National Arctic Wildlife Reserves to oil companies far exceeds any short-term economic benefits from oil harvests. Tags: Donald Trump, David Bernhardt, Brian Steed, Bureau of Land Management
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorUndergraduate student generated content. Blog posting and updating done by Kristina Flores Victor, Assistant Professor of Political Science at CSUS Archives
March 2020
Categories
All
|