Please call Senators Grassley and Harkin on Monday or Tuesday.
Jane Clark

The direct line to Senator Grassley is (202) 224-3744 and the direct line to
Senator Harkin is (202) 224-3254.  These calls don't cost much and are more
effective than an e-mail.

Inhofe Amendment continues to  be a threat!

THREAT TO ARCTIC REFUGE CONTINUES

In the past few days, the situation in Washington, DC has been changing
practically hourly.  This may continue to be the case in the week or weeks
ahead.  However, here is the situation as it stands now.

The Defense Authorization bill has not yet come to a vote.  While the Senate
is currently in recess in honor of Yum Kippur, the defense bill is expected
to be brought up again once they reconvene early next week.

***Senator Inhofe continues to threaten to attach an amendment to the
defense bill mandating drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and
other sweeping energy policy changes***

PLEASE HELP KEEP INHOFE'S AMENDMENTS FROM BEING ATTACHED TO THE DEFENSE
BILL

The Defense bill will be brought back up sometime early next week.  That
means there's still time to CALL or FAX your Senator and urge them to block
Senator Inhofe's amendments.  Let them know that Arctic Refuge drilling as
well as the other components of a comprehensive energy policy must be given
full consideration, discussion and proper procedure prior to being brought
to a vote - not simply tacked on to other legislation with absolutely no
opportunity for input.

To contact your Senators: Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121
and ask to be connected to your Senator's or go online to
http://www.northern.org/arctic/anwr.htm and click on "Washington, DC,
contact information for Senate."  (Please do not rely on email as many
Senators ignore email message or give them little credibility.)

TALKING POINTS

· America cannot drill its way to energy independence.  The U.S. has at
most 2-3% of the world's oil reserves while accounting for 25% of the
world's
oil consumption.  It is simply not possible to produce our way to oil
independence, even if we sacrifice all of our wilderness, parks, refuges,
and coastlines.  The only way to reduce dependence on foreign oil is
through conservation and alternative energy supplies.

· The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that oil recovered from the Arctic
Refuge would amount to less than a six month supply for American consumers.
At no time would oil from the refuge be expected to amount to more than
about 2 percent of US demand. We would still need to import over half of
our oil from foreign countries.

· Under any circumstances, Arctic drilling cannot respond to our immediate
or near term needs for national security.  It would take seven to ten years
to bring Arctic Refuge oil to market.  There is no justification whatsoever
for "rushing to judgment" on the Arctic Refuge in response to the terrorist
attacks.

· Conservation, increasing fuel efficiency and alternative energy are much
better national security measures than drilling in the Arctic Refuge.
Terrorists cannot bomb the sun, or stop the wind. Alternative energy
facilities can be smaller, dispersed and easily rebuildable.

·  The energy bill supposedly limits the area available for drilling to
2,000 acres - implying a small concentrated spot on the coastal plain.
However, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, oil under the Arctic
Refuge coastal plain would not be concentrated in one large reserve but
rather would be spread out in numerous small deposits -requiring multiple
interconnected oil fields stretching across the coastal plain.  In
addition, the "2,000 acres" only refers to places where the infrastructure
makes
ACTUAL PHYSICAL CONTACT with the tundra (i.e. instead of including the
entire length of a pipeline, it would only include the upright supports).
Plus the "2,000 acres" DOES NOT INCLUDE GRAVEL MINES OR GRAVEL ROADS - both
of which would disturb considerable areas of tundra and add to the vast
spider web of infrastructure across the entire coastal plain.

·  Recent emphasis has been placed on the number of jobs that would be
generated by drilling in the Arctic Refuge coastal plain.  Unfortunately,
the numbers touted by those in favor of drilling (750,000 jobs) come from
a flawed 1990 study commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute
(API). A 1994 study by the Economic Policy Institute concluded that the
total number of jobs generated by drilling in the refuge would be fewer
than 8 percent of what the API study predicted, and even those would last
only five years. Meanwhile, a 1993 study, conducted by the Tellus Institute
for The Wilderness Society, concluded that initiatives to improve vehicle
fuel efficiency and non-transport energy efficiency would result in nearly
10 times as many jobs as drilling in the Arctic Refuge.

·  Oil development cannot be done in an "environmentally sensitive" manner.
Since 1996, the Prudhoe Bay oil fields and Trans-Alaska Pipeline have
caused an average of approximately 400 spills annually on the North Slope -
most
commonly spills of diesel and crude oil.  The Arctic Refuge coastal plain
is too precious to risk from an accident or faulty maintenance.

(From Northern Alaska Environmental Center Arctic Action
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001
- - - - -
Vicky Hoover
Sierra Club Alaska Task Force
(415)977-5527
[log in to unmask]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]