Introduction
Oil and gas resources, like fossil fuels, have become one of the modern societies’ most expendable and most sought-after resources that gives convenience to society. Global economies have become reliant on the means to get oil and gas resources in that it makes the global market processes. In this way, the Middle East, which was the main source of fossil fuels mainly of oil and gas, has prospered over the years. However, due to scientific advancements and other means it has become possible to find new sources and new locations where oil and gas resources can be drilled and taken from (Roe Utvik and Nilsen 2).
The Arctic, which is located at the northern pole, has become a target for oil and gas resource exploration for the United States, Canada, Russia, and Norway. The action has caused debates regarding the impacts it may cause not only to not only to the federal ruling regarding explorations on unchartered areas, as well as how the countries will create a new global competitor in the resource market (Roe Utvik and Nilsen 3). Moreover, the environmental impacts of the exploration and the actual extraction of oil and gas within the Arctic has also been debated which includes the possible pollution, climate change, changes in the migration patterns of animals, and the contamination of new plants among the indigenous plants found only in that area (Greenpeace 1). Furthermore, the possibility of building development structures such as military camps and bases, as well as the construction of permanent areas for habitats has been a concern regarding the exploration.
This paper will discuss the explorations of Arctic oil drilling by various countries, the U.S.A.’s federal rules regarding oil drilling in the area, and the possible environmental impacts it can cause. A discussion regarding the possibility of constructing military defense camps as well as permanent habitats in the Arctic will also be explored as part of defining the perspectives and the consequences of Arctic oil drilling for the needs of the continually developing and continually modernizing society.
What is Arctic Oil Drilling?
By definition, oil drilling is the process of exploring an area where there is a possible resource for fossil fuels, mainly oil and gas. Arctic oil drilling is the exploration, drilling, and extraction of these resources by different countries which are attempting to have new sets of locations which can provide the growing need for such resources. Arctic oil drilling entails big fossil fuel companies setting its site in the Arctic, wherein it was found that oil reserves lie deep in its waters (Greenpeace 1).
It was noted that the Arctic is very tricky in terms of its weather patterns and conditions and this can make possible oil spillage probable. It was noted that the long history of oil spills around the world, which is basically due to the extraction of the fuel deep in the ocean, has caused several recriminations to the environment (Greenpeace 1).
Oil and Gas Resources
As major fossil fuels, oil and gas reserves are sought after because of the stronghold that the Middle East suppliers have with the global market. Major contenders such as the U.S.A, Canada, Russia, and Norway has been exhibiting interest in drilling the oil reserves found deep in the Arctic ocean, and it is noted that several years have passed since the introduction of the possibility of countering the command and manipulation of the Middle East in the oil and gas supply in the global market if the Arctic is drilled and is used as another area for fossil fuel resource (Hulse 1). In this perspective, it is apparent that oil and gas resources are major elements that can drive not only the economic schemes in the global market but also the industrial world. Oil and gas resources are mainly used for almost all industrial operations, and the need for it is in higher demand than ever due to the accumulation of machinery which need such fuels to make it work (Hulse 1). In this way, oil and gas resources – which are fossil fuel reserves – serve as a very significant element that perpetuates the global economy and industry of the world’s businesses.
Overview of Petroleum Exploration in the Arctic
The following discussion provides an overview of Arctic explorations done by several countries with the aim to find and extract oil and gas resources within the area’s ocean floor.
The United States of America
Prudhoe Bay in Alaska’s North Slope was drilled by ARCO and Standard Oil Company in 1968. Since then, the Prudhoe Bay oil market has become a unit of America’s ambitious exploration and extraction of fossil fuel in the area, and this extended towards the Arctic region. In 2012, plans of drilling the ice in the Arctic region for its possibility of extracting more oil and gas resources, mainly by the oil company, Shell. In 2016, Caelus Energy Alaska has discovered that the Smith Bay area has the potential to produce 200,000 barrels of mobile oil and the plans for extraction continue. Exploration in the Arctic for the United States acts as a gateway for becoming free from the Middle East supplier for oil and gas, wherein they can contend with the competitive prices in the global market (Bishop, Bremner, Laake, Strobbia, Parno, and Utskot 36-37).
Canada
Drilling in the Canadian Arctic in the Seventies and Eighties have been extensive wherein oil and gas were found. It was also found that drilling in the areas is dangerous because of its complex geology and that it is costly for developers. Moreover, the area has more production of gas rather than oil, and the resource areas have cracks created by the tectonic plates which make it apparent that oil and natural gas drilling will leak (Bishop et al. 35).
Russia
Russia created the expedition Arktika 2007 to explore underwater the eastern Arctic Ocean and Ellesmere Island. They have found that their area in the Arctic has gas and oil deposits, which has made the 2012 plans for the commercial oil rig for oil drilling within the Arctic possible (Bishop 38).
Norway
Both Rosneft and Statoil have made explorations in the Arctic with the intention to find oil and gas resources. In this way, both companies made an agreement with other oil companies such as Enri and Exxon Mobil in a joint partnership to find and explore more areas within the Arctic to drill for the resources (Bishop 39).
U.S. Federal Laws About Arctic Offshore Oil Drilling
There are a decades-long debate and argument for and against oil drilling within the 1.5 million acres of ocean land within the Arctic in the various U.S. administrations. During the Eisenhower administration, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has been installed and expanded wherein lawmakers carved a spot of 1.5 million-acre region within Northern Alaska with the purpose of potential oil development (Henry 1).
From this start, the ANWR has been eyed as a potential location for drilling the resources which are desperately needed by Americans in order to finally be free from the Middle East suppliers. The complexity of the project is based on the war between politicians and the environmentalists regarding the drilling. For instance, the Senate made a resolution that directs the Energy and the Natural Resources Committee to raise $1 billion to ensure the savings and profit for the government in the next decade (Henry 1). However, environmentalist strongly oppose the drilling as it has various consequences that may alter the climate, endanger the natural environment, and possibly destroy the natural processes that are evident in the Arctic.
Recently, the Trump administration has endorsed the drilling in ANWR, and the projected revenue by 2018 is raised up to $1.8 billion (Henry 1). When this was approved in November 2017, the administration granted Eni’s request to explore the oil in Alaskan waters, and the possible development of an offshore oil rig within the Arctic (Chow 1). It was the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement that gave Eni the permit needed to drill exploratory wells within the Beaufort Sea. It was also in 2017 where President Trump signed the executive order wherein new offshore oil and gas leasing in the Arctic Ocean is made possible (Chow 1).
The drilling will take place on Spy Island. Eni, which has been leasing on areas within the Beaufort Sea for more than a decade, explained that the region produces 20,000 barrels of oil per day (Chow 1). This indicates that the Trump administration’s permission to drill oil in the Arctic Ocean floor can provide profits that the country can use for its various purposes, as well as understand the importance of the reservoirs hidden underneath the ocean floor and the possible competition that American can have with Middle Eastern oil and natural gas suppliers. Thus, the federal law has come to terms with the myriad possibilities of offshore oil drilling and the American economy and practical uses of such resources for the convenience of the average American (Percival, Schroeder, Miller, and Leape 35).
Impacts on the Environment and Its Concerns
Water Pollution
Many environmentalists have voiced out their concern and their opposition to the Arctic oil drilling mainly because of its devastating effects and risky consequences on the advent of the natural environment. Possible water pollution, for instance, it targeted as one risk that may become inevitable as explosions and other accidents may happen during the experimental oil drilling and even during the exploration. Mud from oil drilling, for example, is noted as a means that can pollute the water and can possibly destroy the natural balance within the Arctic Ocean (Godo, Klungsoyr, Meier, Tenningen, Purser, and Thomsen 238). Moreover, water pollution due to the inevitable oil spill is one of the most significant risks which is identified with the oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean (Greenpeace 1). From this perspective, the concern for possible damages due to the oil drilling may affect the natural ecosystem which is apparent in the Arctic.
Possible Climate Change
Changes in the ocean currents due to the drilling can cause possible climate change as it may alter the wind patterns. Gulas, Downton, D’Souza, Hayden, and Walker asserted that the possibility of climate change due to the oil drilling activities is inevitable as it may change currents and wind patterns, and activities on the ocean floor can also change the temperature in the waters (59). This may cause breakage and even melt of the glaciers, which can then promote changes in the weather patterns not only in the Arctic Circle but also around the world. Moreover, the way that drilling can cause significant effects on the ocean floor and water currents can indicate that climate change can happen as glaciers and ice caps have the propensity to alter climate patterns as it melts. In this way, the possibility of climate change is inevitable, and it can only promote drastic alterations in the global weather patterns.
Flora and Fauna
Biodiversity is definitely affected because the changes which the Arctic oil drilling has been more definite on the environmental impacts that it can cause. For instance, the movement of the migration patterns of birds is changed as the effect of gas flaring within Arctic Alaska, as found in Day, Rose, Prichard, and Streever (375). Changes in the migration patterns can cause changes not only in the fauna but also in the flora diversity in the Arctic as well as its nearby locations. Because the geographical patterns of migration can also affect the distribution of flora, as animals often carry seeds that are distributed towards different lands, the changes can make the habituation of animals as well as the dispersal of plants to be altered, and thus make the decline more probable.
Methane Emission
Arctic wells are notorious for methane emissions. The cement settings are accompanied by heat release in the hydration reactions of the cement components, and this exothermicity can lead to thawing the permafrost. It becomes unconsolidated because of its strength and thus makes the liquid water to form around the borehole. In this way, the hydrates can decompose and thus result in the release of methane in dangerous quantities. Methane emission of this kind can destroy whole ocean ecosystems around the emission area, and this can destroy – through methane poisoning – marine biodiversity around its area. More precisely, methane emission is one of the deadliest effects that oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean can do, as its effects are immense and its destruction so strong that it cannot be consolidated, and much more prevented if it has happened (Bishop, Bremner, Laake, Strobbia, Parno, and Parno 46). From small fauna to the necessary flora for the survival of ocean ecosystems, methane emission can create the destruction and possible irreversible damage to the natural environment.
Ozone Layer
It is also assessed that the changes in the climate and methane emission can fully transgress and progress into the thinning of the ozone layer. The industrial activities of oil drilling, such as flaring, fires, and methane emissions can release carbon dioxide and leave more carbon footprint which can inevitably make the ozone layer thinner (Bishop et al. 39). Moreover, the ozone layer is susceptible to thinning because of the heat that comes from the activities which use fire as a means to operate – such as drilling the underwater ocean floors, fire flares from the oil rigs, and so on. This determines how the ozone layer can be affected, and how it can change the way that the earth heats up or changes its temperature – which significantly changes the climate.
Global Warming
As relevant as methane emissions and the thinning of the ozone layer, as well as climate change, global warming is an inevitable effect that the oil drilling can promote as it changes weather patterns, melts the glaciers and ice caps due to exothermicity, and also thins the ozone layer. In its accumulated effects, global warming is inevitable. This also translates to the effects of oil drilling not only to the environment but also to the global societies which will be affected by the changes (Bishop et al. 45). Thus, the implied effects promote damages that are presented through the heavy carbon footprint, the methane emissions, and the industrial activities which are heavily tied to the operation of oil drilling. The possible pollution in water, air, and land can further promote global warming as the climate change is inevitable, and the melting of the glaciers is also inevitable.
Possible Construction of Military Camps and/or Bases
Contrary to common knowledge, the exploration and the actual process of oil drilling by different countries within their leased areas in the Arctic Circle can promote the construction of military camps and bases. As oil and natural gas resources are sought after and is a business, the need to protect the areas used for oil drilling is inevitable, and thus the construction of military camps and bases is also inevitable. Ayele, Barabadi, and Droguett asserted that Arctic drilling operations could promote more problems as it can create more disparity and divisions between the countries (5). The need to protect the areas which are rich in resources, for instance, is necessary as it produces the needs for resources.
It is also evident that the construction of military camps and bases provides opportunities for further pollution and creation of unnecessary structures which can also be abandoned after the resources are acquired. The possibility of the construction of military structures can serve as a warning sign that heavily armed forces will protect their designated areas according to their country of origins and this can make the problem more relevant. Aside from the environmental concerns that can exist after each country has set its oil rigs and drilling areas, the possibility of social issues pertaining to the problems that military construction can create further expands the problems that Arctic oil drilling may impose in the global society (Hulse 1).
In this manner, the issue becomes more apparent as the activities and the possible continued operations of Arctic oil drilling can formulate a generation of social issues if not given proper consideration. With the Trump administration giving the go-signal to operate and continue with the oil drills, countries which need the resource may also participate in the operation, and thus cause the construction of the military camps and bases.
Creation and Construction of Developmental Infrastructures, Traffic, and Permanent Areas for Inhabitants
The inevitability of building communities and habitat areas within the Arctic Circle due to the operations of sourcing oil and gas resources can promote the construction of infrastructures, traffic as well as permanent communities for workers. Just like in agricultural plantations and in mining areas, oil drilling in the Arctic can promote the creation of communities for the workers and the construction of infrastructures which are associated with the operations in oil drilling. Moreover, since there are many countries vying for geographical spots for oil drilling within the Arctic Circle, traffic is mostly inevitable. Big oil companies, such as Eni, Exxon Mobil, and Shell, have raised their interest in the Arctic as a means to produce oil. The operations of these companies can promote traffic in the waterways and in the ocean, and this can contribute to pollution in water, land, and sea (Ayele 46; Greenpeace 1).
Henry (1) further defined that the construction of developmental infrastructures, such as radio and communication structures, is possible because permanent areas for habitat for the workers is necessary for the continuation of the production and operations of the oil rigs from different companies. Thus, the inevitability of these constructions is possible that it also provides an indication of the possible effects it can cause to the natural ecosystems in the Arctic Circle.
Conclusion
In conclusion, oil drilling in the Arctic Circle has various effects that can affect the global economy, society, market, and the natural environment. The risks in the environment are heavily reliant on the operations and production byproducts such as water, land, and air pollution, methane emission, climate change, and global warming. On the other hand, the possibility of constructing military camps and bases as well as permanent habitats and developmental infrastructures make social issues a resounding problem that may change the course of world development.
Works Cited
Ayele, Y. Z., Barabadi, A., and Droguett, E. L. “Risk-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Waste Handling Practices in the Arctic Drilling Operation.” Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering138 (2016), 1-14.
Bishop, Andrew, Bremner, Chad, Laake, Andreas, Strobbia, Claudio, Parno, Patrick, and Utskot, Geir. “Petroleum Potential of the Arctic: Challenges and Solutions.” Oilfield Review 22.4 (2011), 36-49.
Chow, Lorraine. “Oil Exploration in Arctic Ocean Approved by Trump Administration as ANWR Drilling Bill Moves Forward.” EcoWatch, 2017 Nov. 29. https://www.ecowatch.com/arctic-oil-anwr-drilling-2513482646.html. 21 Jan. 2018.
Day, Robert H., Rose, John R., Prichard, Alexander K., and Streever, Bill. “Effects of Gas Flaring on the Behavior of Night-Migrating Birds at An Artificial Oil-Production island, Arctic Alaska.” Arctic 68 (2015), 367-379. doi: 10.14430/arctic-4507.
Utvik, Toril I. Roe. “The Importance of Early Identification of Safety and Sustainability Related Risks in Arctic Oil and Gas Operations.” SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Responsibility, 11-13 April, Stavanger, Norway. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2016. doi: 10.2118/179325.
Greenpeace. “Arctic Oil Drilling.” Greenpeace, 2017. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/arctic/issues/oil-drilling/. 18 Jan. 2018.
Godo, Olav Rune, Klungsoyr, Jarle, Meier, Sonnich, Tenningen, Eirik, Purser, Autuin, and Thomsen, Laurenz. “Real Time Observation System for Monitoring Environmental Impact On Marine Ecosystems from Oil Drilling Operations.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014), 236-250. doi: 10.1016/j.marpobull.2014.05.007.
Gulas, Sarah, Downton, Mitchell, D’Souza, Kareina, Hayden, Kelsey, and Walker, Tony R. “Declining Arctic Ocean Oil and Gas Developments: Opportunities to Improve Governance and Environmental Pollution Control.” Marine Policy 75 (2017), 53-61. doi: 10.1016/j,marpol.2016.10014.
Hulse, Carl. “How Arctic Drilling, Stymied for Decades, Made Surprise Return in Tax Bill.” The New York Times, 9 Dec. 2017. https://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj_p9b51ODYAhXDHZQKHdXnAY0QFggvMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F12%2F09%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Fartic-national-wildlife-refuge-drilling-tax-bill.html&usg=AOvVaw391-x-lwtHQgDRnDsRHI7I. 18 Jan. 2018.
Henry, Devin. “Everything You Need to Know About the Coming Trump Arctic Drilling Debate.” The Hill, 2017 Oct. 22. http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/356464-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-coming-trump-arctic-drilling. 18 Jan. 2018.
Percival, Robert V., Schroeder, Christopher H., Miller, Alan S., and Leape, James P. Environmental Regulation: Law, Science, and Policy. USA: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2015.
