If you are hocking your granny's ring to buy 100 lotto tickets that's one thing.

If your kids need shoes it's another.

The utility of the oil balanced against the willingness to conserve will make the difference. If we as a country are trying to suck another billion barrels out of the land to prop up $2 gasoline for tax-supported Hummers, then I subscribe to Ron's position. If we are trying to achieve a more responsible use of energy, and heat our homes in the winter, there is an argument to be made to proceed with ANWR.

Carol: Your repetition of your existing quote for emphasis merely highlighted a speculative opinion not supported by any facts that I'm aware of. No one expects the Porcupine Herd to be severely depopulated. There exists a possibility that its nomadic route might vary.

As for who profits from domestic oil, I would add that the oil companies in Alaska of any size are publicly traded, that domestic oil defrays a severe imbalance of trade in the United States, and whether or not oil is developed in time to supplement energy technology transfer or not is speculative. You sound more like our president who maintained that the US would transfer to a hydrogen economy without mentioning that right now hydrogen fuel comes mostly from natural gas, another likely product of ANWR.