Politics, News & Issues >
Energy Issues
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedWith gas prices at an all-time high, should the United States lift the ban on offshore drilling for oil?
Results so far:
| Yes | 56% | 94 votes | Total: 168 votes | |
| No | 44% | 74 votes |
Yes
by Jeffrey Graf
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThis has always been a difficult topic for me because in my heart, I do not believe it is necessary to compromise on environmental protection, for the sake of short term economic gains. I believe that the situation is now more complex, due to some recent articles published on the web site for the Woods Hole Oceanographic institute online Journal, Oceanus.
The specific article I am refering to, details areas of the continental shelf, where oil is naturally seeping into the marine environment. Specifically, the authors of this study natural oil seeps that occur of the coast of Santa Barbara. My first thought upon reading this article was, "why aren't we pumping that oil before it seeps into the ocean. The point of Christopher Reddy's article, is that a natural chain of biological and chemical events occurs. Large amounts of oil seep into the environment and the amount of oil we are speaking of is quite large.
In a related article, estimates of the amount of oil we are speaking of ranges from 8 to 80 times the size of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Although Dr. Reddy informs us that "microbes are astonishingly voracious little critters", I myself am actually less interested in the little bugs that eat the stuff and more interestd in why we are not drilling and pumping this naturally occuring toxic mess.
My position is this. We should be using all the knowledge we have at our disposal, to generate the greatest amount of oil production, with the least threat to ecologically sensitive areas. Since we have large deposits close to major markets, that is apparently leaking into the sea, I see no reason to block it's exploitation for the sake of idealogy.
On the other hand, oil under areas we regard as ecologically sensitive, should be maintained as future reserves. The specific location I am talking about is the 1002 region of the Arctic National Wildlive Area ( ANWR ). With apparently commercially viable amounts of oil bubbling into the sea off the coast of Southern Califonia, I see no reason to trouble caribou in one of the most remote regions of the Earth for their oil. I am speaking more on the grounds of economic feasibility than environmentalist ideology.
America did not get into this fantastic and cataclysmic economic cirisis by making a lot of rational and economically supportable decisions. If we ever intend to get out of this crisis, we must start making good economic decisions. ANWR is a great place for eco-tourism, large oil deposits that are seeping into the ocean and causing natural oil slicks are good candidates for motor fuel.
References
[1] Christopher Reddy
While Oil Gently Seeps from the Seafloor , Oceanus retreived from http://www.whoi.edu/ oceanus/viewArticle. do?id=57272
[2] Woods Hole Oceanographic : Natural Petroleum Seeps Release Equivalent of 8 - 80 Exxon Valdez Oil Spills
Study off Santa Barbara is first to quantify oil in sediments
Retreived from http://www.whoi.edu/ page.do?pid=7545& ;tid=282&cid=572 86&ct=162
Learn more about this author, Jeffrey Graf.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
As oil prices weigh like a yoke on the American economy, and we all feel the pain, it is very tempting to look for more oil closer to home, but this would be a very short-sighted and risky solution. From the water cooler to the dinner table, Americans have engaged this summer in a national debate about why the cost of gas is so high. People point to greedy oil companies, speculators, or the rising energy demands of developing nations, but little has been said about Peak Oil. Not only is oil running out, but we are wasting precious resources on finding more of it at a time when we have to find a way to use less if we are to avert planetary disater. As Al Gore recently stated in his challenge to America: "We borrow money from China, to buy oil from Saudi Arabia, that is poisoning our planet." The risks of offshore drilling for the health of our oceans and our planet are astronomical- ranging from poisoning ocean life and fish and contributing to the Climate Crisis.
Even if we just look at this issue from an economic perspective, seeking more fossil fuels, whether it is on the offshore continental shelf or in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), makes no sense. The oil in ANWR would last the United States at current consumption levels about 7 months, and it would take about 10 years to develop. It would be too little too late.
We have reached a plateau in global oil production since 2005, our clearest indicator yet that we are at or nearing Peak Oil. Peak Oil is the point in time when we reach maximum global oil production, after which production begins to decline. The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) predicted in their January 2008 newsletter that the peak in all oil (including non-conventional sources), would occur in 2010. ASPO Ireland in its May 2008 newsletter, number 89, advanced the date of the peak of overall liquids from 2010 to 2007. If they are correct, we have already reached the peak. The predicted consequences of Peak Oil range from skyrocketing fuel costs to global economic collapse, but the real consequences depend entirely on how quickly we curb demand through massive investment in alternative energy.
The upside is that higher oil prices actually make alternative energy production economically viable. This places the solution to the Climate Crisis within our reach. We have enough solar and wind energy in the West and Midwest to power our entire nation.
As a nation we need to invest in a massive program to harness this renewable energy, a program akin to JFK's investment in space that put man on the moon, a program that will also create thousands of new "green collar" jobs so that workers can afford the cars of the future. Finally, we need dramatic political mobilization to break through government inertia and red tape in order to rapidly accelerate from alternative energy baby steps to the next "giant leap" of humankind.
Learn more about this author, Celeste Froehlich.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Energy Issues
- Should the government stop providing subsidies to all energy sources, eg, coal, oil, solar and wind?
- Should the federal government repeal tax breaks to oil and gas industry?
- Should oil subsidies be eliminated in the US?
- Assuming we can capture and store emissions, should we continue to rely on coal as a primary energy source?
- Does protecting the environment have to come at the expense of jobs?
