Environmental Problems, Their Causes, and Sustainability 1

Oil (million barrels per day)12010080604020OilTotalHistoryDevelopedDevelopingYearProjections01970 1980 1990 2000 20102020Figure 17-13 Oil consumption globally and in developedand developing regions, 1970–2003, with projections to 2020.In order, the world’s three largest consumers of oil are theUnited States, China, and Japan—all with limited domestic oilsupplies. China imports about a third of its oil and could be importing50% by 2010. (U.S. Department of Energy, Annual EnergyReview, 2003 and 2004)consume. Maybe this will help. Stretched end to end, thenumber of barrels of oil the world used in 2004 would wraparound the earth’s equator 636 times, and projected oil usein 2020 would circle the equator 913 times!Suppose we continue to use oil at the current ratewith no increase in oil consumption—a highly unlikelyassumption. Even under this conservative nogrowthestimate:■ Saudi Arabia, with the world’s largest crude oil reserves,could supply world oil needs for about 10 years.■ The estimated reserves under Alaska’s NorthSlope—the largest ever found in North America—would meet current world demand for only 6 monthsor U.S. demand for 3 years.■ The estimated reserves in Alaska’s Arctic NationalWildlife Refuge would meet the world’s current oildemand for only 1–5 months or U.S. oil demand for7–24 months (see the Case Study, at right).Thus for the world just to keep using conventionaloil at the current rate, we must discover reserves equivalentto a new Saudi Arabian supply every 10 years.According to most geologists, this is highly unlikely.And many developing countries such as Chinaand India are rapidly expanding their use of oil. By2005 China could be using as much oil as the UnitedStates and the two countries would be competing toimport dwindling supplies of increasingly expensiveoil. Indeed, if everyone in the world consumed asmuch oil as the average American, the world’s provenoil reserves would be gone in a decade. Exponentialgrowth is an incredibly powerful force.Case Study: Should Oil and Gas DevelopmentBe Allowed in the Arctic National WildlifeRefuge? To Drill or Not to DrillThere is controversy between oil companies andenvironmentalists over whether to drill for oil andnatural gas in Alaska’s Arctic National WildlifeRefuge.The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) onAlaska’s North Slope (Figure 17-9) contains more thanone-fifth of all land in the U.S. National WildlifeRefuge System. The refuge’s coastal plain is the onlystretch of Alaska’s arctic coastline not open to oil andgas development.This tundra biome is home to a diverse communityof species, including polar bears, arctic foxes,musk oxen, and peregrine falcons. During the briefarctic summer it serves as a nesting ground for millionsof tundra swans, snow geese and other migratorybirds, and as a calving ground for a herd of about130,000 caribou. Partly because of its harsh climate,this is an extremely fragile ecosystem.Since 1980, U.S. oil companies have been lobbyingCongress for permission to carry out exploratorydrilling in the coastal plain because they believe itmight contain oil and natural gas deposits. Alaska’selected representatives in Congress strongly supportsuch drilling because the state uses revenue from oilproduction to finance most of its budget and to provideannual dividends to citizens. Environmentalistsand conservationist strongly oppose drilling in thisarea. These polarized positions are summarized inFigure 17-14 (p. 360). Study this figure carefully.According to drilling opponents, the potential ecologicalrisks are not worth the estimated one-in-fivechance of finding enough oil to meet all of the country’sneeds for only 7–24 months. They point out that improvingmotor vehicle fuel efficiency is a much faster,cheaper, cleaner, and more secure way to increase futureoil supplies. For example, improving fuel efficiencyby just 0.4 kilometer per liter (1 mile per gallon)for new cars, SUVs, and light trucks in the UnitedStates would save more oil than is ever likely to be producedfrom the ANWR. In addition, it would becheaper for the United States to join with Canada inbuilding a pipeline to import some of its potentiallyabundant oil produced from its oil sands.In their efforts to either use or protect ANWR, bothsides have probably exaggerated their positions. Butthis issue is symbolic of the fundamental clash betweenpeople with different environmental world views.xHOW WOULD YOU VOTE? Do you support opening upAlaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil development?Cast your vote online at http://biology.brookscole.com/miller14.http://biology.brookscole.com/miller14359