Arctic Refuge

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: At Risk
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge located in northeastern Alaska covers an area of 18.9 million acres. Of critical importance to the refuge is its 1.5 million acre coastal plain, which is currently protected against oil exploration and development.

According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Refuge is the only conservation refuge of its kind. It is home to a vast array of arctic tundra and wildlife. The coastal plain is a significant breeding area for the Porcupine caribou herd and a central denning area for polar bears.

Damage from oil development would not be limited to wildlife alone It also threatens the Gwich’in and Inupiat communities which have relied for thousands of years on the sanctity of the Refuge and its wildlife for their own livelihoods.

BP, ChevronTexaco, and ExxonMobil are lobbying the U.S. federal government to revoke the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s protected status and expand oil development in the region. The oil companies have joined the Alaskan state government to fund Arctic Power, a lobbying organization devoted to opening up the Refuge for oil development.

BP and Northstar

Environmentalists are also concerned about BP’s Northstar project. Northstar is located on the man-made Seal Island in the Beaufort Sea off the northern coast of Alaska. The station is under construction with oil production slated to begin in late 2001.

BP insists the project is environmentally sound. However, according to environmental organizations, Northstar uses technology that is untested in the Arctic’s harsh environmental conditions. Arctic ecosystems are particularly vulnerable because they recover very slowly from oil spills and disturbance.

What We’re Doing About This Issue

Since 1997, Trillium Asset Management Corporation (“Trillium”) has worked closely with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) to file shareholder resolutions pressing ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil to abandon any plans to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Last spring, our resolutions at the oil companies gained enough votes to be re-filed at the companies’ next annual meetings in 2002.

In the fall of 1999, Trillium joined Greenpeace in filing a resolution at the London-based BP under the coalition BP Shareholders Against New Oil Exploration, or SANE BP. On January 26, 2000, Greenpeace members dressed as polar bears, paw-delivered the shareholder resolution to the company’s London headquarters.

The campaign focused on the inconsistency between BP’s acknowledgment of global warming on one hand and the company’s plans to expand its operations in environmentally sensitive regions. Specifically, the resolution asked BP to:

  • Cancel any plans for oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska,
  • Halt investment in Northstar, the first oil project in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Alaska, and
  • Redirect capital to BP Solarex, BP’s solar power subsidiary, to increase substantially its solar manufacturing capacity.

At BP’s April 13, 2000 annual meeting the resolution – in a virtually unprecedented revolt by shareholders of the UK company – gained 13% of the vote. Shaken by the high tally, BP later indicated that it would consider a massive expansion of its renewable energy program.

After the 2000 annual meeting, Trillium met with representatives of BP. We appreciated the company’s good faith dialogue but BP did not rule out drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In fact, BP continued to fund Arctic Power, a lobbying group dedicated to opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. Moreover, BP did not provide a clear transition plan for it planned to move “beyond petroleum” and become a sustainable energy company of the 21st Century.

Consequently, Trillium and U.S. PIRG filed resolutions for the 2001 annual meetings of BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil on the protection of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  Trillium also filed an additional resolution at BP written by Greenpeace asking the company to publish a report setting out its strategy for making the transition away from fossil fuels. This resolution also expressed opposition to BP’s plans to drill in the Arctic Refuge.

BP successfully used procedural and legal hurdles to block the resolution on the Arctic Refuge. However, at BP’s annual shareholder meeting on April 19, 2001, the resolution by Greenpeace on global climate change achieved over 7% of the vote. The resolution also attracted considerable press scrutiny of BP’s environmental record in the British media.

At Chevron’s annual meeting on April 25, 2001, we boosted the vote for our Arctic Refuge resolution from 7% to over 10%. This represents the highest vote at an American company in opposition to an oil company’s expansion into the Arctic Refuge. At ExxonMobil’s May 30, 2001, annual meeting, we achieved another steep increase in our vote for the Arctic Refuge resolution from 5.3% to 9.5%.

For the 2002 annual shareholder meeting, Trillium has taken part in the successful filings of Arctic Refuge resolutions at BP, ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil. We plan to keep up the pressure on these oil companies until they decide to leave the Arctic Refuge alone.