I live in Alaska but like most of us have not seen the ANWR. Again, like most of us, I have done a lot of reading about it- and ended up being against the drilling. It seems like a low reward at a high cost- and even higher risk.

However, if they DO drill there I hope they find enough oil to make it worthwhile- and by means of their vaunted technology - avoid spills, avoid ruining the fragile environment and have minimal impact on the wildlife there and on the people who depend on that wildlife.

I do think that Stevens is somewhat disingenuous in saying this (from the link) :
"America needs this American oil," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska. He called opposition to pumping the refuge's oil "ostrich-like" and said the refuge's reserves are "crucial to the nation's attempt to achieve energy independence." He KNOWS that this will not bring about energy independence.

I think there's a whole lot more truth to this:

Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, who led the effort to continue the ban, called drilling in the refuge a gimmick that will have little impact on oil or gasoline prices, or U.S. energy security.

"Using backdoor tactics to destroy America's last great wild frontier will not solve our nation's energy problems and will do nothing to lower skyrocketing gas prices," Cantwell argued."