Anna Eshoo: “once again, we have before us legislation to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling. My question…”

“once again, we have before us legislation to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling. My question is: What problem are we trying to solve? If this is an attempt to lower gas prices, then this bill won't do the job. According to a July 2005 report of the non-partisan Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy, Arctic oil will reduce the price of a gallon of gas by less than a penny. If this is an attempt to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, then this bill is not the solution. Whether we drill in the Arctic or not, U.S. dependence on foreign oil is projected to grow. The simple fact is that the U.S. has less than 3 percent of the world's oil reserves yet our country is responsible for 25 percent of the world's annual petroleum consumption. This bill will rip apart a 1.5-million-acre wildlife refuge for a 6 month supply of oil. The proponents claim that the drilling will be limited to a mere 2,000 acre area. As a point of comparison, the 100-mile-long, 12-lane New Jersey turnpike covers 1,800 acres. That limitation applies only to where the drilling will occur, not to supporting infrastructure, including roads. In addition, no requirement exists for the 2,000 acres to be contiguous. Drilling stations can be spread throughout the refuge, dotting the landscape. Mr. Speaker, we have other choices. Choices that will preserve sensitive wilderness areas, reduce air pollution, and end our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.…”