August 18, 2016

The Arctic: A Key Intersection of National and Energy Security

A few weeks ago, the Energy Institute’s president and CEO, Karen Harbert visited with business and industry leaders in Alaska. Her message was loud and clear: Alaska and the Arctic are an important part of America’s energy future.

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration doesn’t seem to agree. The Department of Interior is considering changes in the federal oil and gas lease program for offshore areas on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), which could capitulate to “keep it in the ground” activists by removing available areas in the U.S. Arctic for leasing for oil and gas development.

That would mark a change from the current Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Management (BOEM) plan which includes three lease sales in Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf in its proposed plans for 2017 through 2022.  

Last week, BOEM Director Abigail Ross Harper was in Alaska to visit to offshore oil fields and meet with state and industry officials. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) used the opportunity to stress to Harper, "Offshore development is one of the best ways we can create jobs, generate revenues for our state treasury, refill our Trans-Alaska Pipeline, and protect our nation's long-term energy security."

There are warning signs that the Administration is not listening. Last fall the Obama Administration cancelled two planned lease sales for Arctic drilling rights and denied the requests of two oil companies’ to extend the time on leases they held in the region. There hasn’t been a lease sale for the Arctic since 2008.

According the U.S. government’s own Energy Information Agency, the Arctic holds at least 22 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil and gas resources. This resource rich area has tremendous potential. Many nations including Russia and China are already developing the mineral and oil and gas supplies and the race is on to explore ways to expand and acquire more resources.

The battle to keep areas of the U.S. Arctic open for safe oil and gas development has broad implications. Last year, the National Petroleum Council’s report on the development of U.S. Arctic oil and gas resources found that “Facilitating exploration and development in the U.S. Arctic would enhance national, economic, and energy security, and benefit the people of the north and the U.S. as a whole, and position the U.S. to exercise global leadership.”

Earlier this summer, 16 high ranking former military officials sent a letter to President Obama requesting that Arctic oil and gas leases be kept as part of the next lease plan for the OCS for national security reasons. They wrote: “As foreign policy and national security specialists, we support retaining the two Arctic leasing areas when the Program is finalized. The strategic significance of the Arctic is growing due to rapid change in the physical and geopolitical environments. Excluding the Arctic from the Program would harm our ability to protect our interests and to promote cooperation in the region.”

Both the NPC study and the letter from former military officials stress the important co-benefits that Arctic oil and gas drilling would bring by boosting infrastructure and improving America’s national security. The NPC study notes, “There are many synergies between the types of infrastructure that would facilitate Arctic oil and gas exploration and development and the infrastructure needs of local communities, the state of Alaska, and elements of the U.S. Armed Forces such as the Coast Guard and Navy.”

The military leaders make the same point. They wrote: “The White House, Defense Department and Coast Guard strategies for the Arctic depend on government and private sector cooperation, including private investments in Arctic infrastructure to provide presence and to share costs, resources and expertise. Excluding the Arctic from the Program would signal retreat, needlessly reducing U.S. flexibility for promoting our national interests and our ability to ensure international cooperation, including ensuring best practices in Arctic drilling, in this sensitive and increasingly strategic region.”

In a recent editorial, General James Jones, former national security advisor to President Obama and Supreme Allied Commander for NATO in Europe and General Joseph Ralston, former vice chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff also former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO in Europe wrote, “As two former Commanders of NATO militaries, let us be clear: removing Arctic lease sales will only further signal a strategic withdrawal from the region. This decision will have a profound effect on our ability to project presence and maintain U.S. interests in the Arctic. Energy and natural resources have long provided the lifeblood for economic investment and growth, buoying the local economy, supporting communities on the North Slope, and providing a foundation for continued military investment.”

Preventing Arctic leasing, removing federal on-shore and off-shore areas from resource development, and giving in to the “keep it in the ground” movement threatens our national interests. Allowing for continued oil and gas exploration in the Arctic will bring tremendous benefits to the economic and energy security of our nation, and will allow the U.S. to take advantage of private sector investment in infrastructure that will assist with preserving and protecting our national security for decades in the future.