[David E]

Why is the Exxon Valdez oil spill an argument against drilling in the US? Doesn't that mean we have to then receive oil on tankers which are prone to this? It's the opposite: there would be less chance of spills with domestic production/pipelines.

Environmental accidents are not even a good argument against the use of oil in general, any more than the possibility of car or bus accidents would prevent someone from riding one. There is a cost and a downside to anything in life; it's a matter of weighing it against the benefits. The impact on drilling in ANWR would be negligible: the area of development is tiny; and wildlife has thrived around the installations that are there.

Even worse is the aesthetic argument: it's pretty damn selfish for folks lucky enough to live by the beach to oppose the sight of drilling platforms when everyone in the country relies on oil for innumerable things we use from computer keyboards to shampoo.

Now, none of this means we don't pursue other sources - we can and should do both, especially more nuclear power generation, which would make plug-in cars truly green instead of shifting the emissions. The opposition to nuclear is nothing short of hysterical. There can be no other word to describe it, since it's not theoretical at all, France and Japan have been generating 80-90% of their power for 30 years; the tiny amount of waste has not been a problem since the re-processing type plants have come on line where 97% of energy remains in the waste that is re-used after the first cycle. This year, the president of the Sierra Club finally came out in favor of nuclear. But the years of opposition as well as the oil drilling ban have been the sad result of a mentality of hysterical intolerance for anything that might sully nature.