After reading the following paragraph 'Drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)' answer the 3 questions that follow. To help you form an educated opinion about this issue, find at least one article that supports your opinion to question 3 an at least one article that opposes your opinion to question 3.

Drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)

From 2001 to 2003 there was a proposal by the Bush administration to open the ANWR to oil exploration as part of the President's energy policy to promote less dependence on imported oil.

Environmentalists argue that opening up the refuge to oil exploration and drilling would damage the fragile arctic environment and possibly injure the diversity of arctic species.

The administration argued that there were an estimated 5.7 to 16 billion barrels of oil in the ANWR and that only a small amount of land the reserve would be used for drilling and damage to the environment and wildlife would be very small.

In early 2003 the congress defeated a bill that would have permitted oil exploration and development in the ANWR. For 40 years congress has been able to maintain the no drilling provision in Alaska's wildlife refuge. In March, 2005 the Senate, by a 51-49 vote overturned that provision to now open the refuge to oil drilling.

Number and answer the following questions clearly using a 12 point font size and double spacing. There should be about 2 pages worth of writing after all said and done.

1. What is the opportunity cost to the economy of the decision to develop the oil reserves in the ANWR? ( 3 to 4 lines)
2. Presidents since Bush have had different views on this issue. Where does the current administration stand on this issue compared to prior Presidents? (5 to 6 lines ).
3. Do you feel that congress should have passed the bill that would have permitted oil exploration and development in the ANWR? Why or why not? ( at least 10 lines).

Can you please do questions 1 and 2