ANWR LOCKUP BILLS TOO COSTLY FOR U.S.

Lawmakers have again introduced bills in the U.S. House and Senate to make the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge an untouchable wilderness. For the first time in years, the legislation stands a chance of becoming law.

Feb. 16, 1993

3 min read

Fortunately, prospects for ANWR wilderness designation this session of Congress look slim. The mood on Capitol Hill seems to be that the issue can wait. Reauthorization bills for the Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act crowd the environmental agenda. Alaska's senators would filibuster an ANWR wilderness bill, which means a nasty fight for 60 cloture votes. With ANWR oil and gas leasing impossible without congressional approval anyway, there's no rush for a permanent lockup.

Unfortunately for the oil and gas industry, Capitol Hill moods can change.

TESTING PRIORITIES

Oil and gas leasing on ANWR's Coastal Plain-the area of interest to the oil industry-has been portrayed as an issue of importance only to the large companies that might seek leases there. That's wrong. In its handling of ANWR, the federal government must arbitrate environmentalist claims and economic interests of national proportion. The issue thus tests the government's sense of priority.

Environmental objections to ANWR oil and gas leasing have reached ludicrous extremes. Environmentalist propaganda cites ANWR's pristine mountain ranges as the landscape "threatened" by leasing and drilling. Yet it's the Coastal Plain, a flat, arctic swamp, that holds oil and gas potential. What's more, modern drilling and production activities threaten little other than the overwrought notion that economic and natural values inherently conflict.

The environmental assertions that have so far driven the ANWR debate-and determined its outcome-thus deserve a fresh look. If intellectual integrity isn't reason enough to undertake such a reassessment, U.S. economic imperatives certainly are.

A year ago, American Petroleum Institute cited WEFA Group estimates that ANWR development at its peak could create 735,000 jobs across the U.S. and increase gross national product by $50 billion/year. Direct investment in exploration, development, and facility and pipeline construction could reach $35 billion. According to a Department of Energy estimate cited by API, ANWR development could produce $150 billion in royalty and tax revenues to Alaska and the federal government during field life. And if ANWR holds 9.2 billion bbl of oil, the high end of Department of Interior's estimated range, and if oil sells for an average of $20/bbl, production from the area would reduce the U.S. oil import bill-and thus help trade balances-by a total of $184 billion.

REAL GROWTH

These are world class numbers representing real economic growth. They make the borrowed $30 billion worth of government work projects under discussion look pale. And official refusal to take advantage of opportunities at hand-manifest in support for ANWR wilderness designation-makes talk about "sacrifice" and another tax increase sound scandalous.

The ANWR issue involves more than the exploratory programs and potential profits of a few oil companies-much more. It cuts to the core of U.S. seriousness about economic growth and deficit reduction. Economic benefits always require the expenditure of something. In ANWR, the only public expenditure would be indulgence in harmless surface disturbance of less than 1% of the Coastal Plain's 1.5 million acres. For the boost that ANWR could give national economic interests, the U.S. government should be able to invest this much.