Arctic Drilling 2

The Department of the Interior may have decided to exclude the Atlantic region from its upcoming five-year offshore leasing plan, but the existing lease sales in the Arctic should go forward as planned. As the public comment period for the proposed program closes today, it is essential that the federal government hear the voices articulating how the Arctic and the Atlantic present different challenges and opportunities for the country – and that continued Arctic oil and gas development will contribute uniquely and significantly to national security by shoring up infrastructure and capabilities in the Arctic region and fortifying America’s energy security for decades to come.

At the moment, America’s presence in the Arctic remains meager, even as other countries, including those not even considered official Arctic states, continue to ramp up activities – and military infrastructure – in the region. Just last week, Russia unveiled a brand new addition to its 41-strong icebreaker fleet. By contrast, the U.S. only has two that are operational: one that is “well beyond” its originally intended 30-year service life, and the other a medium icebreaker intended for scientific research.

Without boosting its presence in the region, America risks being dangerously unprepared for emergency situations – and ceding its leadership position in the Arctic to more active states.

The energy industry, by bringing its own icebreakers and Arctic-capable resources to support their activities, will bolster American infrastructure and capabilities across Alaska. For example, the Coast Guard has relied on the same oil and gas Arctic-class vessel for two rescue missions in recent years.

Arctic oil and gas development will also strengthen American leadership on the world stage both in the short run, by establishing our presence in the region, and in the long run, by ensuring that the country’s energy needs will continue to be met by our own homegrown resources.

With oil and gas production in the Lower 48 expected to decline in the coming decades, America risks renewed dependence on other countries for energy unless another major domestic resource – much like those in Arctic waters – is tapped. But if these resources are to be available when they are needed most, they have to be explored now, and companies have to be allowed to bid for that opportunity.

The merits of Arctic drilling are so plainly evident that those living in closest proximity to the proposed development support Arctic leasing: Alaska’s federal delegation – Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan and Rep. Don Young – as well asseveral Alaska Native corporations, representing more than 25,000 Native shareholders, have implored the Interior Department to hold new Arctic lease sales.

The case for Arctic leasing is strong on its own, but the argument is made even stronger when evaluated on the rationale used by the Interior Department to exclude the Atlantic region from the program.

Where the agency was concerned that oil and gas production off the coast of Virginia and North Carolina might be incompatible with military activities, development could actually serve military and law enforcement efforts in remote areas of America’s Arctic. As the National Petroleum Council, an advisory committee to the Secretary of Energy, has noted, “many synergies” exist between the infrastructural needs of Arctic oil and gas development and of local communities, the State of Alaska, and U.S. Armed Forces.

Where the Bureau of Ocean Management, in an assessment of undiscovered but technically and economically recoverable resources for the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), estimates that the Mid- and South Atlantic regions hold approximately 2.8 billion barrels of oil (bbo) and 26.4 trillion cubic feet of gas (tcfg), these resources represent a mere fraction of the Alaskan OCS’ 26.6 bbo and 131.4 tcfg.

Where the Interior Department noted the opposition of coastal communities near the Atlantic, it has received pleas from Alaska Native corporations, Alaska’s federal delegation, local elected officials, business leaders, trade unions, and chambers of commerce urging it to keep the Arctic in its proposed program.

The significance of giving industry the option to bid for the opportunity to explore the resource potential in the Arctic goes far beyond the logistics of leases and bids. Indeed, the security of our nation hangs in the balance, and keeping the door open for Arctic offshore oil and gas development will help keep America safe and secure today and for the generations to come.

Lucas Frances is a spokesperson for the Arctic Energy Center, a joint initiative of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association and the Independent Petroleum Association of America to further public understanding of the science, technology and opportunity associated with Arctic energy exploration and development.