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]