From Catherine's link:
Drilling proponents argue that modern technology can limit the footprint on the coastal tundra and develop the oil without disturbing the wildlife.
Bush, who called for opening the refuge during his 2000 presidential campaign, repeatedly has said its environment can be protected alongside oil rigs. He views the refuge's oil as essential to lessening America's dependence on foreign energy sources.
NO. The technology isn't going to limit the footprint. Only backers of drilling 'point out' how small that footprint is going to be. Of course they do that with generous use of twisted 'facts', amounting to a huge lie.
Cute things like, 'no bigger than a football field'. Alright, divide that football field into tiny pieces and spread those pieces over a huge area and you have the actual footprint. GIGANTIC!
The backers of drilling only count pieces of land where there is actual contact with the ground, like the feet of the pipeline are counted but the pipeline isn't. It isn't touching the ground.
And roads and airfields are not counted. Nor are the buildings that house equipment or people.
If this country really cares about becomming energy independent, why did the 109th Congress vote down CAFE standards which would save far more oil than we can drill in ANWR? Why didn't it explore renewable energy resources rather than depending on same ol' same ol' polluting oil and coal?
Maybe the 110th Congress can do better.