Call Girls In Karkardooma 83770 87607 Just-Dial Escorts Service 24X7 Avilable
ANWR - Oil or Wilderness?
1. 24 September 2012
Adelaide Group 2:
THIEN HUONG Do
MINH THUAN Nguyen
THI TAM Duong
2. OUTLINE
1. Executive summary
2. Summary of Decisions
3. Description of Context
4. Stakeholder Analysis
5. Decision Criteria and Metrics
6. Data/Facts/Modelling
7. Analysis of Alternatives
8. Recommendations
9. Sensitivity Analysis
3. "
Executive Summary"
• Background: The case represents the ANWR
dispute between natural resource development
advocates and proponents of wilderness
protection.
• Implication: The decision will have strong
impact on consumers’ behaviours and reduce
the oil consumption.
• Recommendations: Apply higher fuel efficiency
standards
5. Summary of Decisions
We stand on the position of environmentalists
• Drilling Proponents: Took advantage of Policy
Window, capitalized on focusing events, called for
drilling under the name of job creation and national
defence
• Drilling Opponents: Highlighted the self-interest
motives and disguided huge profits, re-estimated the
economic and security values and the catastrophic
ecological impact of oil development in the refuge.
• Congress: Integrated ANWR in legislation process
6. Description of Context
1980 1986 1987 1989 1990 1991 1995 1997 2003-2004 2005 2007
Congress enacted ANILCA which triggered the debate. GULF WAR
EIS was circulated by Interior Department
7 bills about ANWR development
Approved ANWR oil and gas leasing bill
1st Energy Crisis
Revised estimate of finding oil in ANWR; October: prohibit drilling
Opening refuge is assumed
Artic Power has contract with Washington D.C
Two sides rely on experts’ analysis
Policy window: Approval of ANWR
President Obama
approved an increase in
CAFE standard
2nd Energy Crisis
Year of big events
7. Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholders
Groups
Representa2ves
Goals
Drilling
opponents
• Alaska
Coali*on
• Conserve
the
wilderness
of
Alaska
• Environmental
groups
• Protect
environment
and
wildlife
• Supporters/
Allies
habitat
• Gwich’in
Eskimos
• Canadian
government
Drilling
proponents
• Oil
and
gas
companies
• Earn
more
profit
• Inupiat
Eskimos
• Preserve
na*onal
security
• Lobbying
organiza*ons
• Boost
economy
• Auto
industy
• Minimize
oil
reliance
• Electric
U*li*es
• New
jobs
crea*on
• Ease
federal
deficit
Governments
• State
government
• Generate
more
revenue
• Interior
Department
• Protect
environment
• Congress
• Stabilize
na*onal
energy
demand
and
supply
Americans
• American
consumers
• Low
prices
for
oil
and
gas
• Increase
fuel
efficiency
• Support
renewable
energy
8. Decision Criteria and Metrics
(Our analysis based on the following indices of performance)
Decision criteria
Justifications
Metrics
• Reserve the geographical diverse • Number of acres
of ANWR
• No. of wildlife animals
1.Environmental
• Reduce the impacts from oil • No. of affected trees and animals
conservation
exploitation and side-effects on • Environmental indexes (air,
nature
water…)
• Creating jobs
• No. of new jobs
• Increase domestic oil production
• Revenue streams
• Enhance national security
• Contribution to federal/state
2. Economic development
budget per year
• Oil gallon produced per year
• Oil gallon imported per year
• Conservation of ANWR would • No. of Senates approved
please those who advocate • No. of Senates disapproved
environment
3. Political dimensions
• Opening drilling would make those
who support oil companies happy
• Americans’ interests towards • No. of public polls
environmental issues and oil • Gallon of oil and gas consumed
4. Public attitudes
consumption
yearly
9. Data/Facts/Modelling
Environmental
We analyze the fact
conservation
based on
environmentalists'
viewpoints.
Determine Economic • P: Probability of
weight of development
Alternatives
factors for • U: Utility Value of
decision Alternative
making
• PnUn: Total sum of
Political multiple of utility
dimensions
value and probability
of each alternative
The best option will
Public attitudes
have the highest utility
values
10. Analysis of Alternatives
Alternative 1: Apply higher fuel efficiency standards
o Reduce the total gas consumption
o Change consumers’ behaviour to energy consumption
Alternative 2: Invest in renewable energy technologies
o Reduce the oil reliance on foreigners
o Reduce the burden on domestic oil exploitation
Alternative 3: Mobilize public participation about
environment
o Based on the major events and proactive media involvement
12. Recommendations
• We should apply higher fuel efficiency standards
(Alternative 1)
– Prepare strong back up by reliable and scientific data
– Before employing the new fuel efficiency standards, surveys about
possible reaction should be carried out.
– Campaigns to educate/change consumer behaviours should be made a
national focus and intensively involve media.
– It also needs supports and commitment from different government
levels.
13. Sensitivity Analysis
• Auto and Energy Industries might shake hand to fight against
unfavourable Industry standards (E.g: CAFE)
• American may strongly oppose to the new requirement about
fuel efficiency.
• The Utility Model based on the subjective approach from
environmentalists’ perspective. It may generate different
results from others’ point of views.
• The recommendation may be challenged if not being backed up
by scientific and reliable statistic data.