There are some people in the world who actually want to cherish and conserve our environment no matter what the cost. I have said in my past that I am a person who will not harm or destroy our environment in any way. I think taking oil and damaging our land is just slapping God in the face. But With price of fuel continuing to climb with no end in sight, arguments have re-surfaced for drilling off the coasts of Florida and California, on public lands, and in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.
Both presidential candidates are against drilling in the ANWR. Offshore drilling has been banned for the past 27 years. The big question is how valid are the arguments made in support of tapping into America’s oil reserves in order to lower our dependence on foreign oil with the intention of cutting down the price of oil? This heavily debated subject has legions of supporters and detractors, especially when the any discussion of even touching the ANWR comes up in conversation.
The YES proponents say: We need to drill for this oil. It will be years before any of the alternative fuels will be adapted to the present machines and automobiles. We need to break our dependence on foreign oil. The few remote species of wildlife that will be affected can’t be as important to our quality of life as the need for energy. Why should
we refuse to denigrate our wild lands for our insatiable needs? It will only in turn result in very low oil prices. There is only a slight bit of destruction that will effect the environment. We will never make the necessary move to alternate fuels unless we see the up-close-and-personal effects of destroying our own wildlife habitats, and polluting our own air, and water– then trying to justify our energy needs. Until alternative fuel sources have been developed we should tap into every available oil source at our disposal, including off-shore drilling.