Project Willow garners criticism

Oil drilling in Alaska escalates

ANJALI DALAL-WHELAN / ASST. NEWS EDITOR / THE USD VISTA

In a controversial move on March 13, President Biden approved the Willow Oil drilling project on Alaska’s North Slope. This project by the exploration and production company ConocoPhillips is currently the largest oil project in consideration in the U.S., according to the Washington Post, making it the center of discussion on fossil fuels in recent months. The Willow Project was first approved by the Trump Administration in 2020.  

According to CNN, “ConocoPhillips was initially approved to construct five drill pads, which the Biden administration ultimately reduced to three. Three pads will allow the company to drill about 90% of the oil they are pursuing.” Although the Biden administration reduced the number of drill pads, the approval of the Willow project directly counters Biden’s campaign promise of “banning new oil and gas leasing on public lands and waters,” from Joe Biden’s campaign website.  

Environmentalists are calling for a stop to Willow because of its expected impacts on the environment. 

USD Professor Dr. Dan Cartamil in the Environmental & Ocean Sciences department explained some consequences of the oil project. 

“These [impacts] include primarily the input of enormous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, at a time when we should be reducing such inputs. Additionally, there are impacts to the natural ecology of the landscape, damage to the ecosystem, disruption of migratory patterns and devastating impacts to local Indigenous communities, who depend upon the landscape to provide resources for survival,” Cartamil said. “Finally, the long-term impacts will be felt disproportionately by Indigenous peoples, and inhabitants of the near-polar regions in general, as these regions are warming much faster than the rest of the planet.” 

Proponents of Willow, including all three of Alaska’s congressional representatives, say that Willow would be beneficial for Alaska’s economy by creating jobs. Supporters also argue that it would lessen the U.S.’ dependence on other countries for oil production. 

USD first-year Jordene Garcia is from Alaska and does not support Willow, because it could impact her hometown. 

“Coming from Alaska, specifically one of the islands, it makes me think most of how it’ll affect my hometown. I think we rely a lot on nature, not just economically but recreationally, too. The Willow Project brings up concerns about how drilling for oil and gas in Alaska will release even more harmful emissions as well as exploit our limited natural resources,” Garcia said.

She also acknowledged the benefits of the project, but said they didn’t justify the impacts. 

“The resulting amount of emissions and such human intervention in nature could produce even more long-term consequences that could create a cycle of harm by negatively affecting our natural resources, which could only harm us later on as well. It really brings to question if short-term economic profit is enough to negate long-term consequences, especially when we’re already dealing with climate change and struggling to come up with sufficient solutions.”

Indigenous Alaskans are divided on the issue. The Indigenous advocacy group Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat strongly supports Willow, because of the benefits they believe it would provide for Indigenous communities. However, other Indigenous communities — especially those that live close to the extraction sites — have concerns over health and environmental impacts. 

[Photo 2 of boats]

Another Alaskan USD student, senior David Columbus, spoke on the benefits of Willow for Indigenous communities. 

“It is great the Iñupiat Native People of the North Slope will be able to benefit from this project. They live in an area that is only accessible by air and has almost no economic opportunity for the people who live there,” Columbus said. “So it is great to hear that they will be able to capitalize on this oil resource on their land and be able to improve schools and other public services.”

Despite the benefits, Columbus voiced concerns about the environmental impact. 

“It is also very worrying to see that there is not a stronger emphasis on switching to renewable energies when now it is absolutely the critical time to do so. Hopefully, some of this money can be reinvested into clean energy, so the beautiful Alaska I grew up with can be preserved for future generations, and the Native culture and people can thrive.”

Online activism has increased on the issue, as people have taken to social media sites such as TikTok and Instagram to bring awareness to Willow, advertising a Change.org petition against the project, which now has nearly five million signatures.  Quannah Chasinghorse, an Indigenous Alaskan model has been using her social media presence to bring attention to the issue. Chasinghorse wrote in an Instagram caption, “we HAVE to LISTEN to indigenous voices as we have knowledge that holds solutions to many of todays problems. We have been failed AGAIN AND AGAIN! Our youth and future generations will now be sending our years trying to fix and make our Mother Earth livable and sustainable again.”

Alaskans are not new to climate debates. In January, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stopped the Pebble Mine project in Southwest Alaska. This decision ended a 10-year-long battle Indigenous groups fought to protect wild salmon. 

There is still a possibility that the Willow project will not be built. The environmentalist group Earthjustice filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Land Management on March 15. This lawsuit could potentially delay the construction for up to a year.