| More
oil drilling is not the answer
By
KEN MIDKIFF
Published
Friday, September 5, 2008
(http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Sep/20080905Comm004.asp)
A number of
years ago, I spent some time south of Port Arthur, Texas, along
the Gulf Coast. Out in the waters of the Gulf were many oil platforms
that were constructed in Port Arthur and towed into the Gulf, where
they were stood aright and stabilized.
While I marveled
at the wizardry that enabled all these platforms to drill and to
pump up oil, I was taken aback by the amount of debris that had
washed up on the beaches near the platforms. Some of this had clearly
been discarded by workers on the platforms - water bottles, candy
wrappers and beer cans. Some consisted of the usual debris found
on coasts everywhere - ropes, parts of nets, floats.
But what was
astonishing were the chunks of tar. They were everywhere. Of the
consistency of soft caulking compound, these chunks of semi-solid
oil were all over the beach - in some places covering the sand entirely.
The beach in such places looked black. It was clear to me that this
was not trash thrown overboard by uncaring workers but oil that
had leaked or otherwise escaped from the platforms, pipes or tankers
that nudged up to the rigs.
Lately, with
escalating gasoline prices (about $3.50 now), there has been a hue
and cry for more drilling off our coasts - particularly the West
Coast. In spite of the fact that such drilling - even if oil were
found and accessible - would have little or no impact on fuel prices
and that the oil would not even start to flow toward refineries
until 2018 (if then), politicians have adopted the mantra "Drill
here, drill now."
No doubt that
such a phrase is politically popular, especially when it is touted
as one means of lowering pump prices. Chances are, however, that
politicians who embrace this are either deluded or are attempting
to delude voters. Whether they acknowledge it or not, they have
chosen gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles over unpolluted shorelines.
The Gulf of Mexico is placid in contrast to the misnamed Pacific
Ocean. If oil-drilling platforms were allowed offshore of California,
Oregon and Washington, the damage would likely be immense. What
is needed is not more drilling but a conversion to something other
than fossil fuels.
The only clear method to energy independence is to divorce ourselves
from a dependency on oil. Even if every drop of oil were squeezed
from lands under the United States, we would still need to depend
upon a large percentage of our oil from unstable countries that
have led us to support some unsavory characters. The worst scenario,
supported by scientific, geologic and economic studies, is that
oil itself will be harder to obtain, more expensive and we might
eventually run out.
It is clear
that this country is nowhere near relying on renewable sources -
wind, solar - to provide our energy demands. At present, cars, trucks,
airplanes, trains and other modes of transportation depend upon
a growing demand for oil-based fuels.
What is needed
immediately are two things: vehicles that are much more fuel-efficient
and a massive government program to convert from energy dependency
on fossil fuels to energy provided by wind and solar.
Unfortunately,
only baby steps have been taken on both. At some point, perhaps
when pump prices are $6 or $10 per gallon, it might dawn upon the
folks in Washington, D.C., that stopgap measures - opening up the
strategic reserve, sending out stimulus checks - won’t work.
What is needed is for the U.S. government to get serious about energy
efficiency and renewable fuels.
We can’t
run an economy on hot air. But that’s all we’ve heard
from both parties.
|