drilling in the Arctic,

While the explosion of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico off of the coast of Louisiana may be thousands of miles from the Arctic, the consequences will be felt in the frigid waters of the north. In Canada, industry observers have asked the National Energy Board to delay a hearing on drilling in the Arctic until more information has been gathered about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. They want the oil companies interested in drilling in the Arctic, which includes BP Canada, Imperial Oil, Shell Canada and ConocoPhillips, to obtain more data about the causes of the Deepwater Horizon disaster in order to apply them to offshore activities in the Arctic. A spokeswoman for the NEB, Sarah Kiley, said,

“Given this very tragic incident in the Gulf of Mexico, we’ve asked the parties, ’what do you think we should do about this proceeding?”

ConocoPhillips responded to the request in a formal letter, stating

“It is ConocoPhillips position that all stakeholders will benefit from investigation findings into the cause(s) of this incident as well as initial lessons learned from the incident response.

”Chevron, however, was less favorable towards postponing the hearings. The company wrote,

“The time required to attempt to gain a full understanding of the root causes behind the Deepwater Horizon incident will likely be considerable…Chevron is of the view that the scope of the broader (same-season relief well) capability policy review currently before the board is appropriate and should remain unchanged.”

Shell observed that it likely will not be able to comment on the possible consequences of the oil rig explosion in the Arctic until it has completed the clean-up in the Gulf, which could be a long way off. Shell is also determined to keep pursuing its offshore plans in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. Spokesman Curtis Smith said,

“We don’t have any reason to believe those outstanding permits will be impacted by recent events in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated that a similar explosion in the Arctic would be “unacceptable.” Canada has more stringent regulations on offshore oil drilling than the United States, including rules which force companies to drill relief wells at the same time as they drill initial wells as a preventative measure. Recently, companies have sought to overturn this regulation, saying it is costly and often difficult to do given the short drilling season in the Arctic. However, Harper was steadfast in his position, stating that Canada’s rules will not change. In fact, they are probably less likely to now than before. He added,

“As we have said before, the National Energy Board is clear. There is no drilling unless the environment is protected and unless workers are protected… This government will not tolerate the kind of situation we see in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Regardless of Canada’s tough rules, public opinion regarding offshore oil drilling could change, especially as the slick spreads and traps and engulfs more animals in its wake. Canadians may end up becoming more supportive of industries like oil sands, which have a reputation for being polluting. Yet accidents on land are easier to contain and clean up than those at sea.

“Shell’s drilling threatens to pollute the air we breathe, and EPA needs to regulate the emissions more strongly. The drilling also risks destroying our garden, the Arctic Ocean, which we rely upon for our way of life. Our hearts go out to the residents of the Gulf of Mexico – the spill there threatens to devastate their lives. A spill here, where it could be even harder to clean up, would devastate not only our lives but our culture. It’s just too risky to let Shell drill.”

Faith Gemmill, executive director of REDOIL, said: "REDOIL, Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Lands, supports the Inupiat in their ability to continue to live a subsistence way of life which is reliant on a healthy ecosystem. The burning of fossil fuels is the major human cause of emissions that are resulting in climate change. The current impacts of climate change on Alaska’s indigenous peoples are perpetuated by the incessant demand for energy to feed the high consumption appetite of America. Current energy policy disproportionately targets indigenous homelands and marine ecosystems and continually puts our subsistence way of life at risk. The Inupiat culture is imperiled by offshore development. This threat is compounded by climate change and vice versa. Any permit to streamline development in this fragile Arctic region should not go unchallenged, due to serious unacceptable risks associated with such projects.”

Alaska Natives and Alaska conservation groups yesterday appealed the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to issue Clean Air Act permits to Shell Oil for the company’s plans to drill exploration wells in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, off the north coast of Alaska, beginning in July. The permits allow Shell’s drill ship and support vessels to emit tons of air pollutants into the Arctic environment, potentially harming the Inupiat people and wildlife of the Arctic and contributing to climate change, which is rapidly melting the region.

Particularly in light of the tragic events unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico, the groups are calling on EPA to ensure that Shell takes every available precaution.

Shell’s permits are multiyear Prevention of Significant Deterioration permits and are the first EPA has issued for this type of operation in the Arctic. In addition to its drillship, Shell’s operations will require an associated fleet of support vessels including two icebreakers, an oil spill response fleet, and a supply ship.

More than 90 percent of the air pollution from Shell’s drilling operations would come from Shell’s icebreakers and other associated vessels. However, the permits challenged yesterday would only apply control technology limits to Shell’s drillship, a relatively minor source of pollution from Shell’s operations, and not to these associated vessels and icebreakers.

“The EPA must tell Shell to go back to the drawing board and come up with a way to use the best available technology to ensure that the health of the people of the Arctic slope and the wildlife they depend on is not further damaged by dangerous pollutants,” said David Dickson, Western Arctic and Oceans program director for Alaska Wilderness League. “What’s more, the Gulf spill has shown us that oil drilling is a dirty and dangerous business. Before any drilling plans can go forward, we must be sure that sufficient safeguards are in place to protect this pristine marine environment not only from pollution but also potential disaster.”

According to Eric F. Myers, policy director of Audubon Alaska: “The ongoing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico shows the need