What we should be doing is reducing our dependence on fossil fuels but nobody gets rich that way. Mines (including oil wells) are incredible wealth concentrators eg [1]. Also, nobody goes to war over a solar panel [2] and weapons are the ultimate product. They get used once and need to be replaced.

But there's a lot of fearmongering and misinformation here. For one thing, it's been nearly 20 years since drilling has been allowed in ANWR and, to date, zero commercial drilling has taken place. In fact, the only exploratory drilling I'm aware of is Chevron's KIC-1 effort in 1986 [3] and the results of that have been kept secret.

Now, if the results were spectacular, wouldn't you think Chevron would've started drilling? Even if there are, there are lots of reasons why it wouldn't happen.

First, just look at a map. Look at where the highways end. Depending on what you count as a road, that's either Fairbanks, Alaska (in the middle of the state) or Delta Junction (SE of Fairbanks). You would need to build massive road infrastructure all the way to ANWR. It can't be done any other way. This is above the Arctic Circle and only usable several months of the year. I've seen estimates that this alone is like $5-10 billion in investment.

Second, you need to house a lot of people up there and get them in and out. All of this is expensive. Building anything up there is expensive. You need workers for that. Those workers need housing. Everybody needs to be fed. Food needs to get in. You need water. It goes on and on and on. This is likely a $10-20 billion project (complete guess).

Third, you actually have to drill up there. In West Texas, it goes ~$8 million to drill a well [4]. How much does it cost in Alaska? Well, we have some comparative data, namely the Willow Project [5]. The costs for this are spiralling. We don't seem to have individual well costs but they say 150 wells and $9 billion. If that's true, it's $60 million per well.

As further evidence, there was an auction for ANWR leases and nobody bid [6].

You need to recover that extra cost and the only way to do it is scale so there needs to be a massive amount of oil and it's unclear if that's the case.

My point here is not that expanded drilling can't happen in Alaska. Instead it's that there are significant economic barriers to such a project and it's not as inevitable as any president just signing an executive order.

[1]: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4111

[2]: https://www.theenergymix.com/no-one-goes-to-war-over-a-solar...

[3]: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-apr-29-me-56952...

[4]: https://incorrys.com/energy/energy-cost/well-costs-by-play-b...

[5]: https://www.upstreamonline.com/field-development/conocophill...

[6]: https://environmentamerica.org/center/articles/why-no-one-bi...