The Arctic is an area particularly coveted by oil companies: it is estimated to hold at least 13 per cent of the world's still-unexplored crude oil reserves. Hydrocarbon extraction in an ecosystem heavily threatened by climate change, such as the Arctic, would have particularly negative effects. Extraction activities would increase greenhouse gas emissions and endanger threatened species such as the polar bear (Ursus maritimus), the narwhal (Monodon monoceros) and the walrus (Odobenus rosmarus).

Likely oil spills would also contaminate the waters, harming wildlife and the local communities that depend on it. It was precisely to preserve the delicate Arctic ecosystem that, in 2015, former US president Barack Obama blocked drilling. In 2017, however, current president Donald Trump opened the door to oil exploration in Alaska, overturning his predecessor's decision. On 31 March last, however, Sharon Gleason, a judge at the United States District Court for the District of Alaska, reversed the decision once again, rejecting President Trump's executive order and reinstating the Obama-era restrictions.

Ruling in favour of the Arctic

The federal judge therefore blocked the plan to expand offshore drilling and reinstated the ban on drilling in vast stretches of the Arctic Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean. The current US president had exceeded his authority when he revoked the drilling bans. Federal law, judge Sharon Gleason explained, does not allow presidents to remove a ban previously put in place; only an act of Congress could repeal it.

Read also

• Gli Stati Uniti bloccano le trivellazioni nell'Artico
• Attivisti di Greenpeace salgono su una piattaforma di Shell per protestare contro la perforazione dell'Artico
• Obama vieta le trivellazioni petrolifere nell'Atlantico
• Stati Uniti: Trump apre alle esplorazioni petrolifere in Alaska, solo Eni risponde

The oil industry is not pleased

"In addition to ensuring affordable energy for decades to come, developing our abundant offshore resources can provide billions in government revenues, create thousands of jobs and also strengthen our national security," reads a statement issued by the American Petroleum Institute, which declared its opposition to the ruling. The US government, meanwhile, has yet to comment on the decision.

Environmentalists celebrate

The mood among the various environmental groups that had sued the Trump administration is, naturally, the polar opposite. "The ruling demonstrates that the president cannot simply trample the Constitution to carry out the orders of his cronies in the fossil fuel industry at the expense of our oceans, wildlife and climate," said Erik Grafe, a lawyer at Earthjustice, the non-profit organisation that represented the environmental groups in the legal battle.

A paradise worth protecting

Having established protection for the Arctic in 2015 with the aim of safeguarding wildlife and indigenous peoples, in 2016 Obama banned oil exploration across 15,377 square kilometres along the south-eastern coast of the Atlantic Ocean, in order to preserve life-rich habitats and protect beaches and coastal economies.