Pro

Supporters argue that opening up ANWR to drilling for oil is a vital means to increase production of oil at home. Surveys from the U.S. Geological Survey show that there are 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil in ANWR. Opening up ANWR would bring other perks, including increased employment and cash from leasing federal land for drilling.

Con

Opponents say the environmental damage that would be inflicted on a fragile ecosystem would far outweigh the smallish benefits of drilling. They point out that, given the US's daily consumption of 20 million barrels of oil, the estimated recoverable amount of oil from ANWR, 10.4 billion barrels, would only be enough to satisfy domestic demand for approximately 18 months.

Pro

Supporters argue that releasing limited supplies of oil from the SPR, the federally-owned emergency supply of crude oil stored in underground salt caverns along the Gulf of Mexico, would ease the shock of rising oil prices by increasing the available supply of oil in the marketplace. Given that it was ordered filled to its capacity of 700 million barrels by President Bush in November 2001, a limited release could provide necessary price relief without compromising national security.

Con

Opponents argue that the oil in the SPR should only be released in the event of an emergency (such as during the Persian Gulf War of 1991 or after hurricane Katrina – the last two times oil from the SPR was released into the marketplace). They warn that releasing oil in response to political concerns would set a dangerous precedent and potentially expose the United States to a more dangerous oil emergency.

Pro

Supporters say increasing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards (government regulations requiring auto manufacturers to meet fuel efficiency standards and levels for their fleet of new cars and light trucks) would reduce the demand for gas and thus oil. They claim that by increasing the standard to 36 miles per gallon by 2015 up from the current 27.5 mpg, the United States would save more oil than it currently imports from the Persian Gulf.

Note: the 2007 energy bill increased average CAFE standards to 35 mpg by 2020.

Con

Opponents argue that raising the CAFE standards will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. They reason that having more cars with better gas mileage will only mean that people will drive more, canceling out any potential to lower our dependence on foreign oil. In addition, because vehicles weighing more than 8,500 pounds are exempt from the CAFE standards, any increase in the standards will have no impact upon the increasing amounts of trucks and full-size SUVs on the roads.