Reference no: EM13811488

The reasons for not drilling for oil in the Arctic is the remoteness, I remember in the news a few years ago about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and how hard it was to control and clear up it took several months. If  this was to occur off  Alaska instead of Louisiana just getting the ships and tools to the spill would become a task. Even though there is a safety plan in place with tugboats, helicopters and cleanup equipment, with the deep waters these things can fail and the plans can fall short. Another reason for not drilling is the slow ecological recovery. The Arctic Ocean has a low temperature and limited sunlight, this would make oil spill faster. A large spill would affect the fish, and marine mammals. The result could be a permanent reduction in certain population and for threatened and endangered species a spill could mean extinction. And most importantly with the low temperatures the oil could remain in the Arctic for decades. The reasons for drilling for oil would mean energy security benefits, the import of oil would limit the U.S. foreign policy options. This will also be a value to consumers by reducing gasoline prices. Even though the high gas prices are not a reason to drill for oil, but the effect will reduce prices because the prices are determined on the world oil market and the increase in supply would be small compared to the overall scale of the market. This will also help the social benefit to because the lower the prices and the higher the consumption is lessened because higher consumption causes more pollution and traffic congestion. I would have to say that the more persuasive side would be to drill. With benefits come chances and if you are going to benefit then the chances must be taken. The benefits are greater for the consumers and if it is done carefully and safely the chances of a problem are far more less likely.