Argument: Technology has substantially reduced the environmental 'footprint' or impact of arctic oil development

Jump to: navigation, search

Argument's parent debate(s)

ANWR.org "Top 10 Reasons to Support Development in ANWR" - "9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller." ANWR lists the following technologies that have achieved this]
The National Association of Manufacturers - "New technology offers ways of developing and producing oil without the web of roads now found on the North Slope. The greater reach of horizontal wells and the use of multilateral drilling both reduce the need for large pads. New technology allows extraction of oil from larger areas, reducing the number of pads needed to develop an oil field. Because the fields use more effective drilling and fewer wells, waste, mud and cuttings are less. Because fuel consumption is lower, there are fewer emissions."

3-D seismic methods: According to ANWR.org, "newer 3-D seismic methods have much less impact on the tundra than the older 2-D seismic tests."
Ice roads: Many new practices now replace gravel roads with ice roads as a means of access to isolated drilling locations, which has a lower impact on the environment.
Low ground-pressure vehicles: ANWR.org - "addresses potential problems associated with exploration drilling in areas with limited freshwater supply or shortened ice road seasons."
New Arctic drilling platforms could reduce or eliminate altogether the need for even the lower impact ice roads or ice pads.