This political year or next the Repos are gonna make a run at ANWR. The silly thing is that ANWR is just a symbol to both sides. There is an awful lot of territory up there both terrestrial and offshore, that hasn't been developed and is open for mineral development. ANWR is just easier to get to.

From the oil prospector's perspective, ANWR is cheaper and less risky to develop (risk in terms of both capital investment and in lives of derrick hands, etc). Also, the methods used now in AK have been proven through trial and error since AK oil was first developed. The footprint of the wells is about the size of an offshore system--a couple of acres with a ring levee to prevent spillage off-site and facilitate rehab after the well is spent. And with directional drilling multiple wells can be drilled from one site. Also, the pipeline intereference with migrating animals and melting permafrost has also been solved during the engineering of teh AK pipeline.

From the enviro perspective, it takes tundra forever to heal after disturbance. Scars of exploration and production will last centuries. An accidental release of oil, heated for pumping across the tundra, could cover a huge area in a congealed tar that may be impossible to ameliorate. The value of land is more than it's productive capacity. Folks who only see a dollar sign would clearcut MedMech's land and leave stumps just like they did 100 years ago. Cut-out and get-out. People who love the land value more than it's economic productive capacity and society has to balance that value against it's loss from development.

But I think the really interesting prospect is Siberia. If Russia can ever control its kleptocracy such that independent oil men can accurately assess their risk, that place will produce far more oil that AK and CA combined. Enough to offset OPEC, which would be really cool.