Film7

1. Title, director and release year? “Oil On Ice” was directed and produced by Dale Djerassi and Bo Boudart, and released in May 2004.

2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The central argument of the file is that the United States should not drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

3. Who are the key social actors and stakeholders in the film? The key actors are Native Alaskan people who live off the land for food. Also, artists, authors, and other activists who visit the pristine land of the ANWR. 4. What does the film convey about the matrix of factors that contribute to our dependence on oil? We need to tap more oil reserves because we need energy for transportation to get from one place to another. Our government supports drilling and keeping oil prices down. The US Geological Survey did an analysis of how much oil there is in the ANWR. It is approximately 3.5 billion barrels of oil. People don’t care until it is a problem in their own back yard. Thus, most people are willing to drill in Alaska due to the lack of people there. With the Trans Alaskan pipeline already installed, it is unlikely that we will be moving away from drilling for oil in the foreseeable future.

5. What does the film convey about the matrix of problems caused by our dependence on oil? Most of the Alaskan coastline has oil wells and oil pipelines running through it. The ANWR is the only part of the coast in Alaska that is protected. The tanker, Exxon Valdez, spilled oil in Prince William Sound causing environmental and financial issues. Most of people affected by the spill have not seen the same economic livelihood since before the spill. The herring population was crippled with 40 species of birds and other animals that rely on this food. So if there is to be a recovery, there must be a recovery in the herring population first. A fisherman has not fished for herring since the spill. Thus, Prince William Sound is not back to where it was prior to the spill. Hydrocarbons or PAHs are not benign and cause much damage to the environment. With more of these hydrocarbons going to be used, the more likely that the environment will be hurting for years to come. The wildlife of Alaska is dependent on the coastal plain where many of the new wells would potentially be built. When drilling for oil more CO2 will be put into the air.

6. What does the film convey about the matrix of affects that would be mobilized by a shift away from oil? As long as the oil companies bring in the majority of the revenue to the government of Alaska, the less likely there is going to be a change to an alternative fuel. Also, oil helps the economy. It provides opportunities that were not present before, such as jobs. Politicians are arguing to keep drilling for oil and say that it will not cause much environmental damage even though the world burns a cubic mile of oil every year. America burns 10,000 gallons of oil a second.

7. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? There are 80 species of birds bred in the ANWR. The Caribou travel 1600 miles each year through Alaska and Canada. Without the ANWR, these Caribou would not be as prevalent in the world. Only part of the coastline in Alaska is protected. I never knew the actual geographical region. Senator John Kerry wants to be independent of oil but he supports the major oil companies. Eighty-five percent of the revenue for the state comes from oil companies. So basically without oil companies Alaska would be extremely bad off. Exxon has yet to pay 100% the damages from its oil spill in 1989. Many of the people in Alaska only work a few weeks a year in construction. Most of the jobs pay a little over 20 dollars per hour but that is not enough. You need to find a way to feed your family. It is sad that people are living below the poverty line. For a country like ours, that is so wealthy in terms of GDP per capita, we should be doing more for these people.

8. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? If you are making $20 an hour, you would be able to save enough money to get through the summer. There are people that need to make sure things are going smoothly at the oil wells; yet there are still oil spills. Also the Caribou will change feeding patterns if there is going to be drilling in ANWR. Thus, they will not die. Oil in Alaska is owned by Chevron which is the same as in Saudi Arabia. I think the only difference is the rules and regulation for drilling in both countries.

9. What kinds of corrective action are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.

One corrective suggestion that the film makes is that the automobile industry should use modern technology which would make each car get more miles to the gallon. As of the moment, these auto manufacturers are milking profits which does not add any value to society. There were federal mandates during 1977-1985 when the US economy grew to 20% oil and imports fell by half. We still can do the same thing today. Average fuel efficiency has been declining since the late 70s. The United States need to accept the Kyoto Agreement. Other countries are developing more green technology. Hydrogen fuel cells with wind power to extract it would make it possible to run every vehicle in our country at a reasonable price. Currently the United States spends 60 to 70 billion dollars per year in peace time intervention in the Persian Gulf. This money could be spent on an alternative fuel.

10. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references, explaining what your learned from each reference.) This film made me look at the Kyoto Agreement. It was formed in 1997 in Kyoto Japan as a means to lower emissions. China has begun to enforce the Kyoto Agreement but the United States has not taken any measures to enforce it. It is important that huge countries like China keep emissions low. [] This film also made me want to see what the population of the caribou is today. The film made it sound like the Caribou population was dying out. I found that the oil pipes actually help the Caribou because it provides heat for vegetation to grow and a source of food for the caribou to eat. The population is now 32,000. []