On Wednesday, the Biden administration announced a ban on new oil and gas development in a vast area of northern Alaska to address “the climate crisis”, five months after approving a hydrocarbon project in the same region.
A Key Climate Decision: Alaska Oil Ban
This new measure concerns more than four million hectares, an area comparable to that of Denmark, within the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPR-A), a vital natural area for populations of grizzly bears, polar bears, caribou and hundreds of thousands of migratory birds.
“Alaska is home to many of America’s most beautiful natural wonders,” said US President Joe Biden in a statement. “As the climate crisis warms the Arctic more than twice as fast as the rest of the globe, we have a responsibility to protect these precious regions for centuries to come,” he added.
The Department of the Interior, in charge of federal lands in the US, added that it had cancelled seven operating permits authorized under President Donald Trump in another protected area in northern Alaska. In March, the administration of the Democratic president was heavily criticized by environmentalists after its decision to authorize a vast oil project by US giant ConocoPhillips in the same national oil reserve.
The decision announced on Wednesday does not call into question this project, called Willow and authorized during Donald Trump’s term in office. Reduced to three drilling zones from the five initially requested by the company, the project will cost between $8 and $10 billion and is expected to result in the indirect emission of the equivalent of 239 million tonnes of CO2. Environmental groups condemned the move as a disaster for the climate, and some see Wednesday’s announcement as an attempt by the Biden administration to make up for lost time.
Opposition to the ban: Political and community reactions
The new plan announced on Wednesday also bans drilling in an area of over one million hectares in the Beaufort Sea, north of Alaska’s northern coast, and provides aid for local indigenous populations.
These measures “are illegal, ill-considered, defy common sense and are the latest evidence of the incoherence of President Biden’s energy policy”, reacted Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski in a statement, denouncing a lack of consultation with the native communities concerned.
Democrat Mary Peltola, who represents Alaska in the US House of Representatives, said she was “deeply frustrated”, criticizing the Biden administration for turning a deaf ear to public demands. Joe Biden also faced opposition from important members of local aboriginal communities, who deplored the economic impact of this measure on a depressed region.
“Our community fought hard to open up the coastal plain to oil and gas leasing,” said Annie Tikluk, mayor of the town of Kaktovik, referring to the seven licenses approved. “Our community is economically left behind. We are constantly looking for economic opportunities to ensure our long-term sustainability,” she continued.
The political and environmental context of Joe Biden’s actions
Some observers see Mr. Biden’s announcement as a way for the American president to restore his reputation on climate issues. During his campaign for the presidency, Mr. Biden had promised a freeze on oil permits, a promise that was not kept. Some point out that legal actions launched by Republican states have limited his room for maneuver on this issue.
Last year, the Democratic president also pushed through a huge $400 billion climate investment plan. According to a study published in July in the journal Science, it would reduce US greenhouse gas emissions by 43% to 48% by 2035 compared to 2005 levels, but would not enable the USA to halve its emissions by 2030.
Why does it matter?
From a business, financial and energy-market perspective, the Biden administration’s ban on oil development in Alaska has significant implications. This measure is part of the American president’s global strategy to combat climate change. It also reflects the constant challenge of reconciling economic and environmental interests. This decision will have an impact on the US energy industry and may influence future investment in fossil fuels. Future developments in the Biden administration’s energy policy will be closely monitored to assess their impact on the climate and the US economy.
