Bush characterises Arctic drilling as barely noticeable incursion

Going against the recommendations of his own cabinet secretary on the environment, President Bush insisted his administration was committed to opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to energy exploration, describing the impact as no more than "a footprint amongst 19 mm acres".
The President risked the fury of environmentalists by characterising what would be a major assault on the tundra wetlands of the refuge's coastal plain as a barely noticeable incursion.
He also referred repeatedly to natural gas -­ presumably because it is cleaner and more efficient -­ when the main energy source of interest to drilling companies is actually oil. "We're talking about a 2,000-acre [810-hectare] area that will be accessible by ice roads, and actually which won't exist, obviously, when the ice melts," Mr Bush said. "The technologies are such that I'm confident, and a lot of other people are confident, that we can explore for natural gas in a way that will not harm the environment."
TheWhite House has, in fact, talked about opening up 1.5 mm acres -­ about 8 % of the refuge's total area. Environmentalists point to the impact of exploration on the adjacent North Slope, and say they have every reason to fear an environmental disaster for the habitat and for the rare species ­- notably caribou, musk oxen and more than 135 types of birds ­- living there.

The US Geological Survey has estimated the refuge contains some 3.2 bn barrels of oil that could be economically recovered and brought to market. However, it would take 50 years to extract, satisfying 1 % of projected domestic demand. It is not thought there is any more than residual natural gas.
Environmentalists say that if the President is really serious about addressing the current energy crunch, he could do far better by improving fuel efficiency standards. They also point out it would take six to 10 years to get the refuge's oil on tap, making it near-irrelevant to present market conditions. With such reservations weighing heavily on Congress, the cabinet-level head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Christie Todd Whitman, said that a special White House energy task force would not be specifically recommending exploration in the refuge when it presents its findings to the President next month.
She was contradicted by a White House spokesman within 24 hours -­ the second time in less than two months that her public statements have been quashed by her bosses. Previously, she had told America's European allies the administration was committed to cutting greenhouse gas emissions, only to have the White House announce that plans to cut emissions were being suspended because of rising fuel costs.

The White House has recently tempered some of its more radical attacks on the environmental agenda, saying it will, after all, tighten standards on arsenic in drinking water and maintain Clinton-era regulations on commercial development in wetlands and other sensitive areas.
But it has also talked about opening all public lands, including national wildlife monuments, to oil and gas exploration. The recently proposed budget contains a 7 % cut in spending on the environment. And it has rolled back several provisions approved under President Clinton.