Our Dependence On Foreign Oil example essay topic

At the beginning of the 20th century Teddy Roosevelt Reminded us: "Neither man nor nation can prosper unless thought is steadily taken for the future". This is especially true regarding the coming energy crisis facing our nation. If we allow our country to remain dependant on oil as it's crutch we will continue to hobble until we fall over in the mud. Depending on oil is a step back, and drilling in Alaska would simply be stepping further backward. We don't need to pillage our nations wilderness to get oil -- we need to think of the future, and begin moving in that direction. The following reasons are why my partner and I negate the resolution: Contention I: Drilling would harm wildlife and a treasured Eco-system A. Drilling would leave a large mark on the wilderness.

John Ingle, LA Times, August 6th, 2001 The supporters of despoiling this virgin wilderness say that they would leave a "modest footprint" on the land. Modest footprint, indeed! Twenty-five thousand workers, or even a portion of that number, is a small city. Think of how many the barracks and mess halls this requires. And the loading docks and warehouses, the paths and roads required for all those trucks the teamsters want to drive. The garages, the repair shops, not to mention all the drilling platforms and pipelines. B. Eco-System in tundra fragile and easily damaged.

Bruce Forbes, University of Lapland. 7/25/01 (site on-line) New research shows that even small disturbances may permanently damage tundra. (like ANWR): For instance, the single pass of a heavy tank like vehicle can drain an arctic meadow. Dwarf shrubs can die, meadows can drain rapidly, and the permafrost that most arctic eco-systems depend on can melt. Winter traffic can be very damaging if the snow is thin. Similarly, pedestrian trampling can decrease plant bio-diversity, for example, favoring willows and rapidly growing grasses over most other plants; and flatten the hummocks and hollows that give bio-logical diversity. C. Drilling would harm caribou and restrict caribou migration Letter from 20 leading caribou scientists to president Clinton, 12/11/00 The porcupine caribou herd regularly forms aggregation of tens of thousands of caribou during the stressful insect season. Smaller aggregations of a few hundred to a few thousand have had trouble moving through the Prudohe Bay and Kuparuk oilfields.

Under conditions of oilfield development, we do not believe that large aggregations could continue to move across the coastal plain to take advantage of the new growth of important forage plants and to gain access to insect-relief sites on warm, calm days when the insects are most active. D. Majority of oil is in non-sensitive land. Mr. Simmons, Oil industry Expert, Before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. 4/03/2001 According to the USGS (who earlier said that ANWR was the best place to find oil, but has now found this not to be true) Lease sail 181, the eastern portion of the gulf of Mexico, is just as vital as ANWR, perhaps even more so. This Highly gas-prone area is over 100 miles west of Florida, at its closest point. But it is right next to the most efficient infrastructure to bring these reserves to where they can be consumed. The Department of the Interior is just beginning the critically important survey or inventory, of all the reserve prospects through the lower 48 states.

Contention II: More drilling undermines conservation. A. Plans for more drilling undermine conservation. Press Conference with Senators Dianne Feinstein, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins, May 1, 2001 Simply put, this is the single most effective action we can take to limit our dependence on foreign oil, to save consumers at the pump, and to reduce global warming. Today, we in America are 4 percent of the worlds population, and, as I think most people know, we " re energy gluttons. We utilize 25% of the worlds energy. So as the largest energy consumer, it's really our responsibility to do something about it. B. Oil companies receive subsidies that hurt alternative energy sources. Anne Pap mehl, Toronto Star, July 21, 2001 At present, however, many of these alternative fuel cells are far from cheap, though they could be if the playing field were more level.

"Producers of Solar and wind energy don't get the subsidies and low interest loans that the oil and gas companies do". Says Berger. C. Raising Fuel efficiency standards would save more oil than ANWR could ever produce. Foreign Affairs, 2001 If America raised fuel efficiency standards by only. 04%, we would save more oil than ANWR could ever produce! D. Alternative energy sources critical to solving possible energy crisis and global warming.

Ann R. Mesnikoff, Washington Representative, Sept. 21, 2000 Harnessing the clean, abundant energy of the sun and wind is critical to solving the global warming problem. Technological advances have brought the cost of electricity generated by the wind down 85% since 1981. Wind farms are now producing energy from coast to coast.

Solar energy has made remarkable progress, and today the costs of wind and solar power are approaching that of cheap dirty coal plants. E. Efficiency better than drilling. Foreign Affairs, 8/21/01 The Un-Tapped, inexpensive "reserves" of oil efficiency technology exceed by more than 50 times that average projection of what refuge drilling might yield. The existence of such alternatives makes drilling ever more economically risky. Contention : By drilling in ANWR we run the risk of harming relations with Canada. A. The U.S. has an agreement with Canada pertaining to trans-boundary wildlife. Albert Peter, chairman, Porcupine Caribou Management Board. Site On-line.

The 1980 ANIL CA bill required full consultation with Canada on matters affecting trans-boundary wildlife and in its response to the Department of the interiors 1987 resource assessment, Canada recommended full wilderness designation for the 1002 area. B. Canada does not want the U.S. to drill in ANWR Joel Connelly, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 11/22/01 Canada does not want the united states to drill for oil on the coastal plain of Alaska's ANWR and will oppose any action by the Bush administration to open the refuge to oil and gas leasing. C. The U.S. receives a significant amount of Oil from canada. Testimony before the senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee by Guy F. Caruso Director, Strategic Energy Initiative Center for Strategic and International Studies Washington D.C. The U.S. neighbor to the north, Canada, is our leading supplier of energy, surpassing all others. Last year our importers of Canadian oil averaged 1.7. b / d, accounting for 15.2% of all oil imports. Canada supplies most of the natural gas imported by the United States a bit more than 97% Contention IV: No need to drill in ANWR A. Amount of oil in ANWR insignificant Foreign Affairs July / August 2001 1.) We can only pump 290,000 barrels of oil per day down the Alaskan Pipeline... 290,000 barrels x 365 (days in a year) = 106,580,000 barrels per year. 2.) After the oil is refined we get 156,000 barrels per day.

We actually ONLY get 156,000 x 365 (days in a year) = 56,940,000 barrels per year. 3.) As a nation we consume 7 million barrels per year... so take 7,000,000,000 barrels per year divided by 56,940,000 barrels we get from ANWR = . 0081... or. 8% of what we consume yearly! 4.) It's totally POINTLESS to drill because we " re not getting hardly ANY oil, only.

8% from ANWR! In conclusion it would be ignorant to drill in Alaska. As said by Martin Veselich of the LA Times on August 6 this year, "an energy bill featuring increased Alaska drilling reveals the GOP to be the ecological equivalent of Stone Age man. They who hunted the wooly mammoth being the current oil supply to extinction, while ridiculing those who proposed using agriculture, or renewable resources for their sustenance. Like those misguided hunters, theses rightist stubbornly insist in depleting the planets resources with no thought of the future.

At least cavemen had ignorance as an excuse for destroying their own means of survival. But then again, it seems that many members of congress share that dubious distinction.