How frustrating that we give in to industry and decide to explore wildlife refuges (aka "safe places") to fill the tanks of our SUVs. Don't people want to be able to give themselves a pat on the back for thinking creatively and finding/using alternative energy sources rather than getting so desperate that they have to drill the pristine boonies of ANWR?

Does anyone have information on why Hawaii's two Democratic Senators BOTH voted for oil drilling in ANWR?

Hawaii's Senators are buddies with Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and they won't cross him on this issue. But in public they say they are supporting the rights of the Kaktovic natives to drill in their lands (which are within the refuge and can't be developed unless the fed lands are developed) and earn money to improve their lives.

This is so sad and so frustrating. Once something is protected it should stay protected. A customer came into the natural food store where I work Tuesday and asked me what I thought about drilling in the Refuge. Naturally I told him I was opposed to it, and to drilling in any wilderness area regardless of where it was. "But we're running out of oil. What are we supposed to do?" he replied. "Conservation and alternatives to oil," was my response.  "Yes," he said, "But we're not there yet." And that's the crux of the problem. We aren't there yet. Never mind the fact that we'd be there now if the federal government hadn't removed tax breaks and subsidies from alternative development back in the 70s to support and subsidize big oil. Never mind the fact that there are more gas guzzlers on the road today than ever before. Never mind the fact that Americans, anyway, are building bigger houses, more roads, more malls, more of everything than ever before, all of which means more oil. The idea of "enough" hasn't yet made it into this culture's vocabulary. And so here it is over 30 years later and "we're not there yet". And so of course we must drill in the Refuge -- or anywhere. This is where most people in this country are at. In an ideal world, they oppose drilling, knowing it will destroy the environment. But since we "need" it, they latch onto so-called robotic exploration, buying into the argument that somehow our modern technololgy will make drilling in the Refuge cleaner, less destructive than, say, in Prudhoe Bay or any other Alaskan oil field. What lies. What deception!
   "We're not there yet" and certainly we couldn't be expected to make a few sacrifices, to curtail our driving, to switch to smaller cars, to use public transportation where it is available (unfortunately it isn't available at all where I live in rural Maine), to restore funding to Amtrack and public transportation, to stop building more roads, to find ways of helping homeowners add solar panels, wind mills, whatever makes sense given the specifics of place. And think of the jobs! But then these arguments have been made over and over. Unfortunately big oil benefits from none of this and so these options continue to be ignored.
   I feel like I'm living in an episode of the Twilight Zone. I pray the drilling idea goes no farther than the Senate vote. And what really needs to happen is permanent protection for the Refuge -- if we can keep it safe for the remainder of Bush's term.
   Another thing. When I was in Alaska about 15 years ago, I met with activists working to protect the Refuge. They told me that they made every effort to use the proper name -- the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge -- rather than ANWR. The whole name emphasizes what it is -- a wildlife refuge. It's easy to forget that when we say, or see, ANWR.
     

"Yes," he said, "But we're not there yet."

We're not "there yet" with ANWR drilling either -- it will be years before the first barrel of oil is produced.

Alaska and oil go hand in hand lately.  Oil prices are up so Alaska is looking good.  Well after the Valdez accident maybe not, but when lately have we heard about anything of that nature up there, lately.  Looking at records on wildlife up there seems to show an increase in Caribou herds not a decrese.  What are we to believe?  We can't all go up their to look around.  Maybe we need someone, lets say a fair minded group who can represent us their, who will look into things for us??  Well, there not being a truely fair and balanced opinion, then I guess we are at a loss as to who to believe?  The fact is we need the oil till someone finally pulls the head out and pushes Hydrogen as the true savior of the environment.  Grist, maybe you should wake up the world rather than poo-hoo about Caribou.  We will not save the world environment till someone takes the BULL (BS) by the horn.

You're right, absolutely. We won't be pumping Refuge gas into our cars any time soon, a fact that supporters of drilling fail to mention. They make it seem as though the drill goes in, the oil comes out and our problems are solved, just like that. It's all lies.
   Re: numbers of caribou. What's the point? If caribou numbers are up it's okay to drill? Talk about "BULL (BS)".  We do not "need" the oil. We have succumbed to a lifestyle that causes us to believe we need it. There are more gas guzzlers on the US roads now than ever before. More roads are being built and "improved" than  ever before. More mega commercial development than ever before, drawing people away from their town centers into the outlying areas (to which they need to drive) to buy ever-cheaper products made from and packaged in -- you guessed it -- petroleum products.
   I am always leery when someone claims they know the "true savior" of the environment, or anything else for that matter. There is no one solution, but many choices, all of which should be developed because some work best in certain places than others. Hydrogen may be part of the answer. But conservation is the biggest part which includes drastically increasing MPGs -- there's no good reason why the average US non-hybrid car shouldn't get upwards of 50 or more MPG. My 1996 Honda gets 35MPG right now. New construction should be tight and incorporate passive solar, heat sinks, etc. Existing buildings, including homes, should be retrofitted as much as possible and for folks who don't have the $ to pay for such improvements, there should be programs to help. Alternatives --  solar, wind, low-head hydro -- should receive top funding priority whether it benefits big oil or not. And with regard to electricity, I feel a regional energy grid as opposed to the increasingly complex national grid, makes more sense. Food systems need to be regionalized, too, which would minimize gas for trucking. This is not to say I'm opposed to all imports, but to be reliant on them in these times makes no sense.
   There is no excuse for drilling in the Refuge or in any other wilderness or wild or even just beautiful place. It is up to humans to rethink our "needs" and our expectations and downsize them, the material ones anyway, to fit reality. More caribou than reported? Wonderful! Let's keep it that way!