Skip to main content
Climate
Search

Main navigation

  • Climate 101
    • What We Know
    • What Can Be Done
    • Climate Primer
  • Explore
    • Podcast
    • Explainers
    • Climate Questions
    • For Educators
  • MIT Action
    • News
    • Events
    • Resources
  • Search
MIT

Main navigation

  • Climate 101
    • What We Know
    • What Can Be Done
    • Climate Primer
  • Explore
    • Podcast
    • Explainers
    • Climate Questions
    • For Educators
  • MIT Action
    • News
    • Events
    • Resources
  • Search
PostNovember 30, 2017

A case for Arctic drilling?  Where’s the limit? [Hint: We're there already]

Buried in pending massive US federal tax legislation is a Senate provision to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas exploration and extraction. (see New York Times, 29 November 2017)  Aside from the devious use of what is supposed to be “reform” of the American tax system, this move brings into sharp relief differences in how the almost 20 million acres is viewed.  On the one hand, indigenous Gwich’in Nation people who see it as sacred are joined by scientists who see it as “a biological nursery of global significance.” (see for example, long-time observer Subhankar Banerjee’s writing)  On the other hand are those who see it as a “frozen wasteland” to be exploited for its estimated $1b oil and gas revenues over a decade. (see here or here) 

Why do I post this on a “climate” website?  Beyond the widely reported significant risks of oil spills in or near the ANWR comes the urgent message from the recent COP23 talks in Bonn.  We are still not close to having enough specific actions in place to achieve a 2C degree maximum rise in global average temperature by 2050.  Many believe that maximum needs to be 1.5C or lower to avert long-term climate chaos.

For me “Keep it in the Ground!” has become a slogan more of us need to apply to specific instances - such as drilling in the ANWR - if we really do want a habitable planet for future generations.  Sure, some would get slightly cheaper fossil fuels and less dependence on foreign sources, but at what price?  It’s time to draw lines in the sand.

by Dave Damm-Luhr
Topics
Arctic & Antarctic
Energy
Finance & Economics
Government & Policy

Related Posts

PodcastMarch 26, 2026

E5: The (micro)grid of the future

Ask MIT Climate Podcast
Ask MIT Climate
PostMarch 18, 2026

Sustaining diplomacy amid competition in US-China relations

MIT Energy Initiative
Nicholas Burns, former U.S. ambassador to the People’s Republic of China, emphasized the impact that the two countries have on the global order, and how that influence could be directed toward addressing climate change.
PostMarch 18, 2026

Turning extreme heat into large-scale energy storage

MIT News
In Fourth Power’s thermal battery, thermophotovoltaic (TPV) power sticks can be moved in and out of the light, which allows the system to respond quickly and flexibly to grid needs.
PostMarch 4, 2026

Renewables and Electricity Affordability: Untangling Correlation from Causa...

MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research
People reviewing their electricity bills

MIT Climate Knowledge in Your Inbox

 
 

MIT Groups Log In

Log In

Footer

  • About
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility
  • Contact
MIT Climate Project
MIT
  • Instagram
  • TikTok
  • YouTube
  • Simplecast
Communicator Award Winner
Communicator Award Winner