Jacob Jenkins Professor Baals English 1302 October 30, 2012 ANWR: Should we drill? George F. Will article, “Being green at Ben and Jerry’s” is in a conversational manner and throughout stays that way and uses witty metaphors and sarcastic remarks throughout while poking fun at how he feels about environmentalists and are just plain mistaken when against drilling. He also finds area to state what he believes and reasons why we are not drilling and the reasons why we should be drilling.
He breaks sentences down in a descriptive but a simple way of understanding just the importance of the topic and makes it seem like a beneficial opportunity but one that is being wasted. Will feels the size of the area being drilled is minuscule like a “dime” on a edge of the average table but the amount of oil we gain is worth it. He points out that we would not lean on other countries for our oil and would help the economy abundantly by saving money. Another reason is it is insurance for if they are uncertainties with foreign countries that supply our oil. Hill states, that environmentalist are “self-indulgent” with this issue.
He feels as if they are not open-minded and ignorant to the fact of the benefits. This next article that I chose is against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Titled: “Drilling ANWR is not the answer to US energy challenges” and is written by Dan Ritzman. The main arguments Ritzman captures is the environment. He claims due to the oil spills that oil industries have covered up it has harm the land, wildlife, and is polluting the airways. He uses the area, Prudhoe Bay as an example which is “100 miles west” of ANWR. This gives the environmentalist point of view that was missing from Hill’s article whose was more one-sided.
He tries use emotional value with his experience of why not to drill and states the place is to “special. ” “I have experienced first-hand the harshness and fragility of this special place which is unlike any other. I’ve watched walrus gather on ice floes, puffins “fly” through the water, and polar bears prowl the ice edge. While watching more than 100,000 caribou move across the tundra followed by wolves and grizzly bears I experienced an inkling of what Lewis and Clark must have felt as they encountered the large bison herds in the Great Plains.
I have traveled with Alaska Native people, who have lived on these lands and waters for hundreds of generations, and listened as they describe their connections to this land and the importance of these animals to their culture and subsistence. Some places are too special to drill and the Arctic Refuge is one of them. ” (Ritzman, line 47) He lastly closes with that financially it is insufficient along with the revenue being of no profit and that drilling is to much a risk. He feels a better option congress should use is focusing on improving transportation by making cars more cleaner, efficient, and more transportation options.
I feel he did not give enough evidence even though his reasons were heartfelt. The evidence I wished he would conveyed is the actual damage drilling was causing and the cost of drilling really accounts to. Overall, I was not intrigued or captured and I feel that Hill was right about the self-indulgence of the environmentalist because I feel Ritzman is as well. The next article supports drilling in ANWR and it is written by Doc Hastings and the article title is, “Forget 10 Years–Drilling ANWR Would Pay Off Right Away. ” Right away, Doc goes for the struggles of the economy.
He mentions the debt and the unemployment rate. He attacks Obama with not doing the right thing to help the economy but the best solution is through drilling in ANWR. He states it as a golden opportunity that should be “harnessed. ” He talks about that the argument for years has been just simply the cost of drilling but he positions the advancement in technology and the economy issue that this is a great option. Now the article starts giving off statistical information about the benefits of drilling. “It will create tens f thousands of American jobs and, according to estimates, could generate approximately $150 billion to $296 billion in federal revenue over the life of production. ” He states financially the beneficial of the drilling could “could produce up to 1. 45 million barrels of oil per day—more than the United States currently imports daily from Saudi Arabia. ” He uses more statistical information to show that this will help our struggle economy and uses resources as well, “According to the Energy Information Administration, for each barrel of oil produced in ANWR, U.
S. imports will decline by one barrel—insulating ourselves from the unstable global market. ” Hastings is able to capture a new and positive light on this solution and does it in decent manner. Throughout the article, Hastings is stating facts, pointing out both sides, addressing each concern, and shows that the America needs this and that the arguments are just “illogical. ” The ending was wrapped with such grace of going back to his thesis is using the word “harness” as a focal point that we should not miss this opportunity.