The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a 19-million-acre national wildlife refuge in northern Alaska. The refuge includes a large variety of species of plants and animals, such as polar bears, grizzly bears, black bears, moose, caribou, wolves, eagles, lynx, wolverine, marten, beaver and migratory birds, which rely on the refuge. In August 2020 the Trump administration approved program to auction oil leases that would enable oil companies to drill for oil within the refuge. Environmentalists argue that oil development threatens wildlife and is likely to worsen climate change. Proponents argue that drilling would be limited to the coastal ranges and would make the U.S. more energy independent.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH5yrs5Y
No
@9LQKVYXRepublican1yr1Y
Alaska is gorgeous and needs to be protected. We cannot reverse the environment. The whole POINT of a refuge is to protect the land and make sure it is a safe space for those unique and wild animals.
It is a wildlife refuge, comparable to a national park. There should be no drilling there. We should not be allowed to touch it
@9M2HHMD1yr1Y
Right now Alaska is a safe place for animals to live. But if we went there to start drilling it would become unsafe for them to live there.
@B575XB91wk1W
People should contribute to the wild life on our Earth. They help us strive as people. The nature of our world needs to prosper with everything we have to do as individuals.
@ISIDEWITH5yrs5Y
No, and increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
@9M26Y731yr1Y
Alaska is the last true frontier, and rural land is becoming far more scarce every day, so it is vital that we protect what we have left for future generations, climate, land, and history of our nation.
@9GXNTCJ1yr1Y
There's a lot of new inventions being made like water powered, solar powered and lots of other eco-friendly options being developed to help this issue.
@9FMR7HS2yrs2Y
The drilling would cause permanent damage to the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, tons of wilderness values would be lost.
@xnativevikingx2yrs2Y
Because if we don't preserve and help nourish the Earth, we won't have an earth to live on. We won't be able to live. Will die if we kill this Earth. So I say we should help aid this earth while we're going up in technology. We should be bringing nature with us in giving back to nature
@ISIDEWITH5yrs5Y
Yes
@9FVZTPGWomen’s Equality2yrs2Y
No, drilling should not happen. The government has already put our world at too much risk of ending earlier than it should. Keep Alaska clean please.
@9F6THCZ2yrs2Y
It isn't good for the wildlife whatsoever to be drilling oil in Alaska, and we've already stripped so many other places of their natural resources. It needs to be done in order to help keep the Earth as a healthier place.
@9FJ6QG92yrs2Y
We already have other replacements and not only does it hurt the environment , but it also isn’t necessary.
@9F83MSSRepublican2yrs2Y
No drilling should not be alowed bc a lot of the fish would die and we get most of our sea food from alaska
@ISIDEWITH5yrs5Y
Yes, but with very strict environmental regulations
@9FWCVTQ2yrs2Y
A wildlife refuge anywhere on the planet is a refuge, not a drilling area. Places on this planet need to be kept strictly for life and forestry without the notion of economic gain.
@9GXNTCJ1yr1Y
I think that we should use other solutions because animals live up there and they are losing their homes.
@9FMR7HS2yrs2Y
Even with environmental regulations it is still too much of a risk to the already seriously declining state of how the environment is already, therefore the drilling should not be allowed at all.
@B575XB91wk1W
No, I don’t think they should be strict. I think they should do everything in their power to contribute to wild life in Alaska.
Not enough knowledge to make an informed vote
@8JQDZWM5yrs5Y
I'm very uninformed about this topic.
@6MJS5MKLibertarian5yrs5Y
Yes, but 1) with very strict environmental regulations & 2) increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
@8CRKFWYRepublican5yrs5Y
Not enough info to make an opinion
@8MB53BG5yrs5Y
It’s a local issue. None of the federal government’s business
@8DFZ6LKRepublican5yrs5Y
Yes, but with a government monitor and only if there is a good reason like there is little oil elsewhere.
@8C5FWXY5yrs5Y
Yes, as long as they don't disrupt current wildlife
@8C5CMTF5yrs5Y
@8CPR5CZ5yrs5Y
No, nationalize and immediately go renewable
No, because it will have detrimental effects on the environment
@8TQR6SH4yrs4Y
Yes, but with very strict environmental regulations and increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
@8HLPBN4Constitution5yrs5Y
Depends on the impact it would have on the wildlife. If it takes up 1% of the refuge land space but can provide $100MM's to the economy than yes, if it will turn the wildlife regure into a roughneck man-camp then no.
NO! We need space for animals. We took over earth from animals.
@TruthHurts1012yrs2Y
The "space" for spare animal populations is well over half of Alaska's lands! The whole reason we sold people on buying "Seward's Icebox" in the late 1860s was because it is so oil rich! We are literally kicking from under our feet the greatest advantage over other nations that America has -- OIL! There's one way to restore prosperity, as President Trump said -- "Drill baby, drill!"
While it's true that Alaska has vast stretches of land and a rich history of oil production, we must also consider the potential long-term consequences of drilling in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge. The refuge is home to unique and sensitive ecosystems that are crucial for maintaining biodiversity and preserving the fragile balance of nature in the region. Drilling activities can lead to habitat destruction, pollution, and irreversible damage to these ecosystems.
For instance, the Porcupine Caribou herd relies heavily on the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge for calving. Drilling in this are… Read more
@RepublicReviserGreen2yrs2Y
While I understand the historical context of Alaska's acquisition and the potential economic benefits of oil drilling, it's crucial to consider long-term environmental impacts. For instance, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010 caused extensive damage to marine life and local ecosystems. Drilling in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge could pose similar risks to the delicate habitats and wildlife. Additionally, investing in renewable energy sources could provide a more sustainable path to prosperity. What are your thoughts on balancing economic growth with environmental protection?
@8FFN5KX5yrs5Y
If it's private property, then sure.
@8CGPXKP5yrs5Y
Never, I do not understand why we have to ruin every bit of the land that we have left. Its a wildlife refuge and we are invading on that? we continue to do the things we have been and we are going to ruin every ecosystem on this planet.
@8HCWFG9Constitution5yrs5Y
NO we should focus on nuclear power
@9WDTKJ87mos7MO
I think we need to solve to other energy sources if we are that depleted everywhere - kicking a can so to speak
@9TM86F98mos8MO
If oil companies are allowed to drill on the refuge's sensitive coastal plain, this essential landscape will be lost forever. The refuge is one of the world's last places free from development. The health of Arctic species like polar bears and caribou depends on us standing with Indigenous communities to protect it.
@9PZ9P5210mos10MO
No, not until we have depleted all other oil reserves and with very strict environmental regulations
@9DZGXPYRepublican2yrs2Y
yes, under competent engineering supervision
@9D722VM2yrs2Y
I don’t have an opinion on this topic.
Deleted4yrs4Y
Yes, but only after we have depleted all other oil reserves
@8MQL9SP5yrs5Y
No, because it could kill the animals.
@8HTY6QG5yrs5Y
Absolutely positively NOT!
@98PHPKM2yrs2Y
No, but allow the state of Alaska to decide
@92JRM2H3yrs3Y
Yes, but not until we have depleted all other oil reserves, and include strict environmental regulations.
@8TRQ3N24yrs4Y
Yes, and increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
@4YDX4VLLibertarian5yrs5Y
Privatize the Alaska Wildlife Refuge, allowing it to be bought in part by environmentalists and in part by oil drillers.
@92DFVZX3yrs3Y
Yes, but with very strict environmental regulations, and increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
No, because animals live here and drilling here would get in their way
@9CFJ5BV2yrs2Y
Yes, this will increase supply and decrease cost, helping poor Americans, and will make us more energy independent and give more money for things we value.
At the same time, we should be taking steps to gradually increase regulations on stuff that hurts the environment and increase incentives for being green.
But the area they drill in should be negotiated with wildlife experts of the area to no longer be considered part of the refuge.
@989LT2X2yrs2Y
I know nothing about this.
@8GMW8S25yrs5Y
I don't understand this question.
@9F422X2 2yrs2Y
Only if it's an extreme necessity but it should be put into balance that solar energy should be put forth more to rely on.
@9F2T4SW2yrs2Y
Yes, but with strict regulations and until everyone has stopped using fossil fuels
@9DHJ6332yrs2Y
Not enough knowledge on the subject matter to give an informed response
@9DD79J2Republican2yrs2Y
Yes but with stupefyingly strict environmental regulations and increase incentives to use cleaner forms of energy.
@9D59LC22yrs2Y
Yes, but all means must be taken to protect the environments that the drilling is in and any accidents must be expeditiously cleaned up, not just hidden.
Having bicycled Alaskan highways several times in the past few years I have witnessed the affects of global climate change close up. It s not looking so good for the flora and fauna and for the native population that lives on land that is being devastated. Drilling for oil will increase the likely hood of. a sixth extinction.
@94B35KL3yrs3Y
With permission, drilling should be allowed in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge.
@94B2QCJ3yrs3Y
Don't really know much about this topic.
@Carter4Ever4yrs4Y
This is a last resort whereupon we have depleted all other oil reserves in America. However, we hopefully will never come to that point because by then we would have maximized solar and wind energy.
@8QGBR2C4yrs4Y
No, the government and economic businesses have no right to that land.
Need to learn more to form a stance
@8QBQBWQ4yrs4Y
No Alaska wildlife shouldn't be hampered with for drilling in any manner for oil we should look for less relying on this means no we shouldn't drill in the Alaska wildlife refuge.
@8PJQ88X4yrs4Y
Private companies should explore the best possible option and the government should not be involved.
@8CZT5ZG5yrs5Y
Drilling should never be allowed in wildlife refuges. They are refuges for a reason and we should not break from it whenever it benefits/is convenient to us. Fund research for sustainable energy; stop fking with the environment.
No, the drilling would threaten the continued existence of the species of plants and animals who rely on the refuge for survival
@948QBJH3yrs3Y
No, not in areas specifically alloted to preserving biological life and protecting the land.
@945LYT93yrs3Y
i dont understand the question
@92WVY6M3yrs3Y
what are they drilling and where, but yes if it is beneficial
@92MRMBK3yrs3Y
Yes, but with some environmental regulations
@8YQYMB93yrs3Y
Yes, but with very strict environmental regulations, and we should instead aim to increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
dont really know what this is
@8WK9NNG4yrs4Y
No, it is a Wildlife Refuge
@8TR785RIndependent4yrs4Y
Let the people of Alaska decide.
@8KGMVZD5yrs5Y
@8GNBM6Q5yrs5Y
No, not until we have depleted all other oil reserves and we should also increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels
@B564MXY1wk1W
Think we should use as much of the other resources as we can then have strict and specific areas on where the drilling would occur so we don't ruin the entire 19 million acres.
@B55ZLRZ1wk1W
No, not until we've depleted all other oil reserves and increase alternative energy subsidies to eliminate fossil fuel dependency
@B244DQRLibertarian 1wk1W
No, it is public property. But the public property should eventually be administered by private organizations.
@B5484KC2wks2W
No, drilling should only occur in non-protected regions so as to minimize the risk of damage to the environment.
@B4P8Q5W4wks4W
No, as it is a wildlife refuge. There should be an increase alternative energy subsidy to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels.
@B4FCJW4Republican1mo1MO
Yes, for the sake of low unemployment, low inflation, low energy prices, job creation, a good GDP, a good supply chain, good trade, freedom, capitalism, weak government, federalism, and checks and balances.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
