Slope

ConocoPhillips's proposal for Willow includes hundreds of miles of roads and pipelines, airstrips, a gravel mine and a major new processing facility — all ...

It would also require the Interior Department to seek public comment on potential offshore wind lease sales there. Meanwhile, if the planet remains on its current track of warming by 2 degrees Celsius, the number of unsafe work days is expected to nearly double. The new standards could require companies to give workers water, shade and rest breaks, or set statewide maximum heat temperatures for workplaces. In reality, the company argues, the Willow project would have a modest environmental footprint in comparison to the nation's coal plants. According to a new analysis released Tuesday by the Center for American Progress, a preeminent liberal think tank, ConocoPhillips's Willow project would produce up to 287 million metric tons of carbon dioxide over the next 30 years. - ConocoPhillips argues that in this scenario, greenhouse gases would continue to be emitted because the market would substitute other energy supplies to meet demand. Instead, the center says, Interior has a duty to consider what might happen if the project moves forward. While the disagreement is complicated, it largely centers on a hypothetical situation in which the Willow project were not developed. The debate has enormous implications for President Biden's ambitious climate agenda, which calls for cutting U.S. emissions by at least 50 percent by 2030. - CAP argues that it's irrelevant to speculate about what might happen if Willow were not developed. The proposal specifically includes 30 miles of road, an airstrip approximately one mile long, and 90 miles of pipeline corridor. Jenny Rowland-Shea, CAP's director of public lands and the author of the new analysis, countered that Willow would be a “carbon bomb” at a time when “scientists and others are saying the U.S. urgently needs to move off fossil fuels” to meet global climate targets.