Doug, as it stands now, the petrol. companies are incapable of delivering/producing petroleum products without destroying the environment. Alaska would be totally devasted and probably beyond redemption.
It's not that they can't do it...it's that they won't. It might cost them a few cents more per barrel to protect and restore the environment and they aren't willing to give up a few cents clear profit.
Alaska is also different in that the tundra ecosystem is much more fragile than any other petroleum field thus far exploited on the planet. US developers seem to think that all fields are alike---Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Texas, Saudi, Kuwait, Alaska.....etc. and this is just not true.
Every localized ecosystem has its own requirements, and Alaska is very different from any of the others, unless oil has been discovered in Northern Siberia. If it has, Russia is keeping it quiet, for understandable reasons.