The Biden Administration recently canceled seven oil and gas leases in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The state of Alaska is rich in oil- it contains 6 of the 100 largest oil fields in the United States. This makes Alaska extremely valuable for oil and gas companies that would love to acquire these leases which would give them the right to extract oil or gas from the area. By canceling these leases, the Biden Administration has made it harder to generate fossil fuel-based energy and also acts as a push for their pro-climate-change policy agenda. Furthermore, these gas leases were introduced by the Trump Administration, an example of the Biden Administration undoing some of the "achievements" that the previous presidency made.
This has angered critics, mostly on the other side of the political aisle as well as some democrats, who question Biden's decision and his supposed hypocrisy on issues of climate change. For example, the Republican governor of Alaska condemned Biden's move and even threatened to sue the administration. Moreover, democrats in the area are also frustrated with the decision since it removes job opportunities for indigenous people who don't have as many job opportunities and rely on jobs provided by oil and gas companies. Democrat US Representative Mary Pelota, "I am deeply frustrated by the reversal of these leases in ANWR... this administration is incapable of listening to Alaskans." Biden and others have defended the decision, stating that his actions "meet the urgency of the climate crisis" and also protect the nature and landscape of Alaska. Many also question Biden's decision to approve the Willow Project, an extremely large pro-fossil fuel commission.
On March 13, 2023, Biden approved the Willow Project, a massive oil-drilling project on Alaska's North Slope. The area is planned to hold up to 600 million barrels of oil. ConocoPhillips, an energy company based in Houston, proposed the project and was approved by the Trump Administration. The Biden Administration felt constrained that if they declined the proposal, they could get into a legal dilemma with the company, and thus gave it the green light. To this day, individuals, environmentalist groups, and politicians are in disagreement and protesting the decision to approve the Willow Project. Not only is it perplexing for Biden to pass it, but his administration promised more green energy alternatives and less reliance on fossil fuels from the start.
The back-and-forth between parties about the oil and gas lease cancellations in Alaska highlights a general theme throughout American politics on the government's power over individuals and corporations. In Biden's point of view, he believes that the government should exert its power to regulate individuals and corporations that would act in their own selfish interest of gaining profit and selling natural gas despite its effects on the environment, whereas others generally on the right do not agree with this sentiment and that the government should stay out of these affairs more often and let the free-market act on their own will as it will bolster economic growth and provide other benefits. However, Biden's approval of the Willow Project, while hypocritical to his policy agenda, also serves as an example of the influence that interest groups have on the government's will, a possible example of hyperpluralism. ConocoPhillips and other fossil fuel companies are a coalition that is interested in furthering the development of fossil fuel energy, and their combined influence had enough sway over Biden's decision to go back on his pro-climate-change agenda that the administration had been pushing.
-Nolan S
Sources:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-cancels-last-oil-and-gas-leases-in-alaskas-arctic-refuge-overturns-sales-held-by-trump
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-did-the-biden-administration-approve-the-willow-project
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/politics/willow-project-oil-alaska-explained-climate/index.html#:~:text=An%20exploratory%20drilling%20camp%20at,project%20on%20Alaska's%20North%20Slope.&text=On%20March%2013%2C%20the%20Biden,controversial%20Willow%20Project%20in%20Alaska.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-cancels-anwr-oil-drilling-leases-deb-haaland-energy-russia-24a5c647
9 comments:
Losing jobs will remain a problem when fighting this climate crisis. Involving the shut down of any sort of major mining company, a number of angry voices will be heard from the smaller minority. Though job opportunities will be closing, it will still remain more important to protect the ecosystem and the respect towards nature. If the climate crisis was continued to be ignored, there will be more severe weather events in addition to more species extinctions. In regards to Biden's conflicting political agenda, in order to not further divide the nation and recieve less criticism, Biden has to hold a strong stand against the climate crisis. In the end, the conflict stemming from the climate crisis will always be prominent as there will always remain to be one side benefiting whereas the other is left short-handed.
I agree, I believe the protection of our Earth against rapidly rising climate changes greatly outweighs the anger caused by Job loss as a result of these efforts to reduced Fossil Fuel production. However, this raises the question -in a economy like that of Alaska, these Oil and Gas production jobs could play a key role in the stability of economy- How will Alaska react to this economic change? To address Biden's contradicting political Agenda, while I do realize that the Biden Administration made contradicting decisions between the Willow Project and now these Oil and Gas leases, the hypocrisy of decisions create even more criticism of the administration as a whole. In an effort to avoid criticism and conflict through the passing of the Willow Project, the Biden administration has created more conflict in a political aspect. At the end of the day, In my opinion the decisions made by the Biden administration to prioritize the health of our Earth through the cancellation of Oil and gas leases in addition to the passing of the Willow Project both have multiples layers of complexity that are extremely hard to avoid.
I think that a large problem, first and foremost, is that our planet is dying. I am extremely aware of the horrible lasting damage that oil and gas extraction has on the environment. Large amounts of pollutants are released into the atmosphere, the destruction of natural habitats, and the lives of the animals living in those areas are disturbed. I personally think that Biden's decision to cancel the extractions was the right one. The issue of climate change is one that has been pushed to the side and placed second to economic issues way too many times. If we continue to go the way we have been going, the earth go to a place of no return, where no matter how large our efforts become, the health of the earth will never be able to be restored to where it was. We still have time now, steps like these are steps in the right direction, and the extreme danger that our climate crisis poses is undoubtedly more important than outrage over job loss. I did already know about the Willow Project decision, and I can see this decision being his political move to try and "please" the environmentalists after the anger caused by his approving of the Willow Project, but I think no matter the intentions, it is a step in the right direction. I am still outraged by his decision to approve the Willow project despite all the outcry from Native Alaskans and people all over the country, and that is an issue that still needs to be addressed. He also doesn't get a "pass" for the Willow decision simply because he decided to cancel a few gas extractions. In general, although I believe this decision (the one to cancel gas and oil extractions) was 100% the right one, the issue surrounding his controversy isn't so black and white because he has made a few other questionable decisions that cannot be canceled out by this one.
I like how you described the Biden administration's approach to these leases and the Willow project. They have the most significant impact on the local economies, which are most affected by changes to the job market, especially in places with jobs and businesses as scarce as Alaska. However, in the broader scope, oil and gas fields play a large role in America's dominance and interests in the global economy. For years many of our decisions were based upon oil (Iraq), jokes about this are a dime a dozen, not taking advantage of these geopolitical resources is a step in the right direction for global climate change efforts, but one that diminishes power globally. Russian oil has been mostly stripped from Western markets. New oil could stabilize the U.S.'s inflated market for oil, and the effects from that are far beyond my understanding, but I have to assume they would be good for our economy. Despite this, overall, I believe the move to not renew the leases is a great step in the right direction for climate action. Not only does it greatly benefit our environment, but when oil is more expensive, markets look for cheaper alternatives, which are most often renewable resources that will further progress our fight against climate change.
Throughout his presidency, Biden has made questionable decisions that are incongruent with the promises he made at the beginning of his term. As you mentioned, he approved the Willow Project despite being outwardly supportive of fighting climate change. Obviously, the circumstances behind his decision are quite nuanced, but so is every other climate change policy. Once Biden's term ends and the 2024 election starts, if a Democratic candidate does not win, and Congress becomes majority Republican, all these climate change efforts will be reversed again. When Obama finished his term and Trump took the helm, tons of the Obama administration's climate change policies were heavily weakened. We can only fight climate change if our government remains majority Democrat with a Democratic president, or else this cycle of progress and the reversing of that progress will remain.
I really enjoyed reading the last paragraph of this blog post; your connections to Biden's interest as well as the other side's were very well put. Additionally, a couple of sentences in I was thinking about how this contradicts the Biden Administration's approval of the Willow Project, and now learning more by what you wrote, I'm interested in learning more about the indigenous and Alaskan opinions on these policies. I heard earlier on that the Alaskan indigenous community was in agreeance with the Willow Project, and I find it interesting that despite my initial assumption that they would be more towards climate conservation, the prospects of jobs mean more. I guess that makes sense, though, seeing as that is their means of survival.
However, I'm a bit confused about the title of your blog post, do you mean "Partisanship?" seeing as your post talks about the continuing tensions/ disagreement on climate change policy?
I really enjoyed the post and find the the hypocrisy of both Biden and his administration to cancelling multiple gas leases within Alaska very interesting. Additionally, I appreciated how you highlighted how American politics have heavily played into Biden's actions, as he worked to undo the "achievements" of previous administrations. This being said, I wonder if a trend of rapidly undoing policy change will even further develop if Republican and Democrat candidates regularly struggle to hold administration, as despite this being apparent in the past, actions such as these and trumps ending of certain Obama policies seem to point to that happening. Personally, I believe this trend will unfortunately become realized in coming decades, which will likely lead to an inability to properly fight large issues such as climate change as candidates work rapidly to do, or undo, important policies.
In this case, it seems impossible to please everybody since limiting energy production from fossil fuels will always take jobs away and possibly hurt the economy. However, I believe taking steps towards saving the environment is a price worth paying. I appreciate you mentioning the Willow project, and I feel Biden should probably take a stronger stance in saving the environment rather than trying to be moderate and please everybody.
It's sad to hear these actions hurt the local communities, and I wonder what alternatives can be considered to help the native people.
Post a Comment