Oil drilling is an issue that needs more attention, attention to the destruction It is causing, attention to how it is impacting our environment. The accident in the gulf of Mexico should have opened up our eyes in how idiotic and dangerous oil drilling is that 's why we need to stop them. To narrow down where we should stop is Alaska. "In recent reports by the NRC ,confirms that oil drilling in the north slope of Alaska has had an environmental and economic effect in the last three decades." ("Save ANWR") and by continuing to take oil out of the ground there are now empty holes under ground, which means with one bad earthquake will cause a huge catastrophe in Alaska, making harder for animals and maybe humans to live there. By taking out and not replacing what we took is creating our own fates. It creates multiple problems. Ever since 1968 we have known the problems and the possible negative outcomes of drilling. Even though we make advancements into our technology doesn 't mean that they will all be gone there will be …show more content…
Just like the fish in the gulf of Mexico lost their home so will the animals of Alaska more specifically the area of the ANWR, it is the home of hundreds of bird species, bears, foxes, and multiple other animals. The 200 million gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf is proof that oil drilling is a serious threat to the environment. Thousands of animal species, including fish, birds, molluscs, reptiles, and mammals. each of these species homes have now been contaminated with oil. (“More Oil Drilling Not Worth the Risk”) which will stick to their skin and corrode on them. Alaska will have the same fatality that Mexico suffered maybe even worse. "report by the National Research Council (NRC) confirms that oil drilling in the North Slope of Alaska has had environmental and economic effects on the region" (“Economic Prosperity for
Also, drilling in Alaska will not harm the wildlife. Take Prudhoe Bay for example. The Central Arctic Caribou Herd that occupies Prudhoe Bay has grown from a population of 6000 in 1978 to 27000 today. This is a 450% growth over 26 years at an average of 17.3% growth per year. (Arctic Power) That’s quite an increase.
The environment needs protecting because even before the drilling started hunting was rapidly decreasing the amount of animals in the area. So if drilling occured in Alaska the animal count would go down even more. Drilling is gonna need space, and because Alaska is a mountained and woodland area they will have to make space by destroying trees etc. Destroying trees means destroying animals’ homes. According to document E ‘just look 60 miles west to Prudhoe bay- an oil complex that has turned 1,000 square miles of fragile tundra into a sprawling industrial zone containing, 1,500 miles of roads and pipes’. Also the document states that the would be
The debate on drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge is an intensely debated topic of America today. Proponents of the oil drilling believe that the oil in the refuge will solve the high prices of gasoline, but they don’t even know what amount of oil the refuge holds and the amount of oil that we use every year in the United States. The drilling in ANWR will severely damage the wildlife refuge and its environment. The oil would take years to access with drilling and so far there has been no proof that the drilling would actually produce enough oil to sustain our needs as a country. Also a reason to not drill in the refuge is because the reserve is being saved for when our country is in a national emergency, or until when there is no oil left because of its rapid decline in availability. How did you feel when just about a year ago there was the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? That event killed the environment in the Gulf and millions of innocent animals died to our screw up, if the drilling in ANWR is allowed we could be faced with these same exact circumstances again. These are the reasons that the oil drilling in the national refuge should not be allowed.
There is an abundance of oil underneath earth’s crust on land and in the water but getting to that oil can be proven as a challenge and a negative impact on the earth. Many of these oil reservoirs lie in federally protected land or water to minimize the negative impact on the earth. But should those restrictions be removed? Removing the restrictions can allow the US to tap into domestic reserves rather than rely on imported oil from the Middle East and Asia but tapping these reservoirs can also leave behind an impact that is harmful to this planet. “Critics oppose this move for fear that it will cause irreparable harm environmental harm. They point to the April 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico as evidence of the risks associated with offshore drilling” (SIRS).
Over the last thirty years the United States has been faced with the problem of dependence on foreign countries for oil and the tight control that these exercise on the energy policies and economics of America. Many of these instances include: the oil embargos of the 1970s, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 2001. Since the 1970s, one solution offered to reduce our nation's dependence on foreign countries for oil has been opening up drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Proponents say that drilling in ANWR would make the United States more self-sufficient in the area of energy, while at the same time not doing excessive damage to the environment of the area. Opponents of drilling in ANWR cite the environmental problems of off-shore drilling and maintain that this land should be left alone and allowed to stand as an environmental wonder. Given that some environmental groups do not mind allowing technology to invade the environment when it profits them and given the threats of global terror and the ever-increasing dependence our nation has on foreign oil, I believe it is in the best interests of the United States to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling.
...the action of drilling is going on because so that if the same incident ever happen again, their will be more men to take the first aid action in trying to stop the leak. Also maybe the company should change the type of pipe they are using to engage in transferring the drilled oil because it might be the material used to make the pipe that is weaken and ended up causing the oil company billions of dollars.
The United States relies on imports for about forty percent of its crude oil, which is the lowest rate of dependency since 1991 according to the U.S Energy Information Administration. Today our country is trying to keep on track in becoming less and less dependent. When it comes to the topic of the future ways the United States will get its fuel, most of us readily agree that the United States should become more independent by using natural gas that is already here on our land. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of the consequences drilling for natural gas brings. Whereas some are convinced drilling is safe, others maintain that it is actually in fact dangerous. Hydraulic fracturing or "fracking", the terms for drilling for natural gas, is dangerous to our public health and to the environment because of the water contamination it causes. Therefore, it is not something that should become a project for alternative fuel used by the United States.
Some ask, Why should we be moving crude oil by pipeline instead of the railway? We have had many of the trains explode or even derail in the recent years. This isn’t a case of operation error though, many of the trains were going under the speed limit set for trains at 80 mph. We have had over 400 crashed or spilled oil in the U.S. in the past five years. This has cost $45 million dollars in damages, but if a pipeline leaks it will pour more oil into the ecosystem. Although it is less likely to explode, this is not good for our water and environment in any way. Moving oil by a pipeline is about $30 cheaper than the railway’s price for shipping the crude oil, but the estimated amount of deaths caused by rails every year is 94, and the pipelines’ is 2. Through all of this we have to consider the Native American protesters’ view on this.
Drilling for oil in Alaska may affect the wildlife, but it is a good thing to do because our government well make money and get out of depth. Are you tired of paying high gas prices every time you got to fill the tank? Do you know if the U.S would let shell oil company drill for oil in Alaska you could kiss those high gas prices good byes? The resin they say we cannot drill there is because it would affect the wild life. But in my view the wild life that lives there has plenty of land to move to once they started to drill.
Hydraulic fracturing, commonly referred to as fracking, is a widespread practice in the United States. Fracking is a method used to extract oil and natural gas. Scientists and citizens report detrimental side effects of hydraulic drilling. New York and Vermont have banned fracking statewide. Maryland has set a two year moratorium on fracking, so that more research can be done to show the impacts of fracking on the environment. Nationwide, many other cities and counties have banned fracking as well. All states should look into finding alternative sources of energy, instead of using devastating practices like fracking to extract non-renewable resources.
Drilling for oil has many benefits, but it can also cause many problems. There is no clear answer to the question on offshore drilling, because both sides have strong arguments. Because we are so dependent on oil, we need to get it from somewhere, and economically speaking, offshore drilling makes more sense. However, we also need to take the environment into consideration. This is why I strongly believe should utilize the precautionary principle and analyze the possible consequences on the environment before starting any new drilling sites. What also needs to happen is for people to become less dependent on oil, by developing alternative fuel sources and using more sustainable transportation methods.
The first reason why offshore drilling should be stopped is because of how harmful it is to the environment. One way this is hurting the environment is because of a term called fracking, fracking is when a pressurized liquid fractures a rock. This method is all too common when these oilrigs are drilling into the seabed; they have been known to cause small earthquakes. This happens when wastewater from the oil operations is injected into saltwater disposal wells. Saltwater disposal wells manage the saltwater that accompanies the oil to the surface as it is being pumped out. In managing that it injects the saltwater back into the rock formations below sea level. As of right now the earthquakes are not big enough to hurt people; it is destroying our underwater ecosystem. Another way the drilling is hurting the environment is because of the oil spills and leaks, which happen deep below the surface. When an oilrig spills or leaks it pollutes and contaminates the water all around, and it is known to spread very quickly. The oil clings to everything it touches; including rocks, sand, plants, and even grasses. Once the oil takes over the area, it makes the land unsuitable for living. One common argument for why it should not be banne...
Imagine having a loved one with cancer, organ damage, nervous system disorders, or your child having birth defects. Imagine running out of clean water because the only water available is capable of catching fire. Imagine oil in rivers and animals losing their homes. See yourself caught in an earthquake where there should not be one. All of this is increased by fracking and can be prevented. The question is should fracking continue or should it be banned.
Fracking is a highly controversial practice that utilizes the injection of water, chemicals and abrasives to extract relatively inaccessible pockets of natural resources. Although fracking has the potential to benefit the economy, it may also pose a significant impact on the environment, the ecosystem and safety.
The environmental danger taken by offshore drilling is very straight forward, made clear by oil spills such as the recent BP oil spill and the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 off the shore of Alaska. In the circumstances of the Exxon Valdez spill up to 250,000 sea birds died, over 2,800 sea otters and thousands of other animals], (figures from the BP oil spill are not yet concluded), having had a heavy strike on the regional wildlife and directing to a ban on all offshore drilling in America, until George Bush overturned it in 2008 to this repeal was a misjudgment because two years later there was the Deepwater Horizon spill. In this way, offshore drilling ruins ecosystems and fish supplies which creates a wasteland of a shoreline among southern USA.