UPDATED: New Focus on Alaskan Resources

The New York Times ran a page-one story today on the renewed focus on Alaskan oil. The story points out, as we did in our April cover story on Seattle’s Alaska Connection, that Shell will begin drilling in northern Alaska in July, “opening a new frontier in domestic oil exploration.” (The print version of the page one New York Times story shows a Shell oil rig against the Seattle skyline as did our story.)The move promises reduced U.S. dependence on foreign oil. But it also raises a host of questions about the environmental impact of such drilling. One major concern that our reporter, Sarah Dewey, pointed out in our cover story, is the lack of support facilities in Alaska in the event of an oil spill. Dewey also pointed out that Seattle’s economy benefits heavily from Alaska’s economy, and that the boom in the price of commodities worldwide is driving a huge increase in efforts to tap Alaskan resources that could further benefit this region. Our story reports on concerns that efforts to tap Alaskan resources could have dire consequences. Several new gold and copper mines now in the planning stages would be among the largest such mines in the world. Many fear that runoff from such mines could pollute surrounding seas and hurt Alaska’s profitable fishery.

Among those wary of new mines, such as the Pebble Mine project, is Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington state. She has expressed her support of the EPAs recent watershed assessments of the project as well as her concern for the state of Alaskan fisheries, since many fleets are based in Washington.
While the Puget Sound region and Alaska benefit from Alaskas resources, unknown impacts from resource development projects place regional leaders on opposite sides of the conversation. Alaskan senator Lisa Murkowski, for example, has questioned whether the Pebble Mine would have greater environmental impact than any other development project.
These conversations have grown in scope in the last few years. Americas participation in the international conversation on Arctic governance was ramped up with Secretary of State Hillary Clintons trip to Nuuk, Greenland for last years Ministerial Meeting of the Arctic Council. This was the seventh such meeting of the Council, which is composed of the eight circumpolar nations and serves as a policy advising body to their respective governments.
At the meeting, Clinton signed the Arctic Search and Rescue Agreement, a commitment of the Arctic Council nations to a shared rescue network in the northern regions.
This agreement is the first step towards improving sparse rescue infrastructure, something that will become more necessary as the Arctic sees more ship traffic and as oil extraction begins. Like search and rescue, the cleanup of oil on ice is still a little-refined process. Many leaders oppose the drilling because of its potential harmful environmental impact; many more oppose the drilling because the potential scale of that impact is unknown.
Shells drilling plan is unquestionably contentious, but leaders on both local and national levels are beginning to work to clarify the unknowns; business and political leaders in Washington state have already participated extensively in conversations about the Arctic environment, and will likely continue to do so because of the states investment in the northern region.