Let Them Drill
Culture, energy 5:58 PM
Today's America is more dependent on foreign oil than it has ever been. In fact, we are a more oil-dependent society in general.
As the price of a barrel surges upward and trickles back down only to break new records later, we all gasp bated breaths and reshuffle our fianances to 'make it work.' We all ask ourselves, "Do I really need to make that extra trip in the car?" "Where can I trim fat from my spending?"
We need more energy. To be sure, we should all find ways to use less also. Changing lightbulbs and driving hybrids, upgrading the insulation of our homes - there's no shortage of large and small ways to reduce our energy needs.
But tomorrow, the single mom on Elm Street has to fill up her tank with gas. She can't afford a new hybrid car, and she can't save on gas by not going to work. Her minivan won't run on hydrogen, and she can't slap a solar panel or wind turbine on it. She needs gas, and she needs to have enough money left over to feed the kids.
That gas should be American. The OPEC cartel gets away with hiking up the cost of a barrel of oil simply because they have the upper hand. They have the oil we need and we have to buy it. But if a large percentage of our consumption comes from America instead of abroad, we have a much greater leverage over the price. Even if it is true that an oil rig approved today won't pump any crude for 7 years, we should approve it anyway. Although strictly speaking, we would not see the raw material in time to increase our short term supply, we would see an immediate effect at the pump. The oil cartel, speculators, and American consumers would hear loud and clear - we are serious about tackling our energy crisis.
Of course, you and I know more oil isn't a long term answer. We are in fact hurting the environment using a fuel that won't last long anyway.
This is why we must invest in many alternative fuel sources. Hydrogen cars and nuclear power plants are only the beginning. In the years to come we can and must make a solid investment. We must embrace wind and solar and geothermal and new ideas we haven't even wrapped our minds around yet so that we can truly save the world one gallon at a time.
Until we can - rather, while we do these things - there are many reasons we must let them drill.
As the price of a barrel surges upward and trickles back down only to break new records later, we all gasp bated breaths and reshuffle our fianances to 'make it work.' We all ask ourselves, "Do I really need to make that extra trip in the car?" "Where can I trim fat from my spending?"
We need more energy. To be sure, we should all find ways to use less also. Changing lightbulbs and driving hybrids, upgrading the insulation of our homes - there's no shortage of large and small ways to reduce our energy needs.
But tomorrow, the single mom on Elm Street has to fill up her tank with gas. She can't afford a new hybrid car, and she can't save on gas by not going to work. Her minivan won't run on hydrogen, and she can't slap a solar panel or wind turbine on it. She needs gas, and she needs to have enough money left over to feed the kids.
That gas should be American. The OPEC cartel gets away with hiking up the cost of a barrel of oil simply because they have the upper hand. They have the oil we need and we have to buy it. But if a large percentage of our consumption comes from America instead of abroad, we have a much greater leverage over the price. Even if it is true that an oil rig approved today won't pump any crude for 7 years, we should approve it anyway. Although strictly speaking, we would not see the raw material in time to increase our short term supply, we would see an immediate effect at the pump. The oil cartel, speculators, and American consumers would hear loud and clear - we are serious about tackling our energy crisis.
Of course, you and I know more oil isn't a long term answer. We are in fact hurting the environment using a fuel that won't last long anyway.
This is why we must invest in many alternative fuel sources. Hydrogen cars and nuclear power plants are only the beginning. In the years to come we can and must make a solid investment. We must embrace wind and solar and geothermal and new ideas we haven't even wrapped our minds around yet so that we can truly save the world one gallon at a time.
Until we can - rather, while we do these things - there are many reasons we must let them drill.
Posted by Nick Stone
on 5:58 PM.
Filed under
Posts
Good points all. Really. But I would ask the speaker if he would yield for a question?
Why should the American people believe that their tax money and their natural resources should be expended on an endeavor that will eventually bear fruit, when there is so much oil that has already been located, claimed, leased, and tapped?
All through the western areas of our nation, there are crude oil rigs and natural gas taps that are sitting still. The energy conglomerates have lobbied congress for the lease on these wells and gotten them. They have gotten huge tax incentives to build the infrastructure to harvest the product. They have spent many millions of dollars to short change the owners of the property for the mineral rights to their land. But they refuse to take any product out of the ground. Why is that?
Why do these energy companies want the leases on near-shore oil beds? These oil beds have yet to be adequately explored. We have no way of knowing how much oil is actually out there. In addition, once we find a profitable oil bed, it will cost the energy company up to ten times as much to harvest product as it would on dry land. Why would they want to do that? Many states with coastlines on the continental shelf have stated that they would demand a profit sharing agreement to allow drilling on their coasts. Why would the energy companies risk that?
Why is near-shore drilling such a hot topic if it is expensive, inefficient, risky, publicly unpopular, unproven, and long in return on investment?
Thanks for the question, Chris!
You seem to have various concerns about this topic, and understandably so. It is the mission of this blog to have open and frank discussion on difficult topic, so let's do just that.
To be sure, your concern about the oil companies owning land currently that they do not utilize to tap oil is one that I share. Congress has already made inquiry into the matter, and I hope that they continue to do so on our behalf. If the oil companies are refusing to drill for energy in an effort to inflate their profits, we should all agree that is both shameful and illegal.
You also mentioned exploration, and I agree this is supremely important. Experts say that the US is sitting on about 3% of the world's petroleum reserves, though we consume about 20% yearly. This is cited as a prime reason that we cannot - and I quote, "drill our way out of this problem." An understandable sentiment, except that these same experts are cited as a reason not to bother exploring off the continental shelf, the ANWR, and many other places within our reach. You can't say that we don't have enough oil to make a difference on one hand, but then on the other, argue that we can't explore to make sure. Those arguments don't jive.
So why not find out for sure? We can do so in an environmentally sensitive way, and if we do in fact turn up poor prospects, that's ok too. In the meantime, we're investing in alternative fuels that will eventually bear fruit. At least then we know the truth.
Also, I want to really stress again, there is a psychological impact. We need to prove to OPEC, the oil companies, and consumers that we have gotten serious. That we are so furious and frustrated with the fact that oil is above $100 dollars a barrel, that we are considering any and all options to regain control of price and supply of this crucial resource.
You asked, "Why is near-shore drilling such a hot topic if it is expensive, inefficient, risky, publicly unpopular, unproven, and long in return on investment?"
Well, it's a hot topic because because it's become obvious that our energy deficit is harmful to our security and economy. It's expensive but pays for itself many times over in dividends. The public has gotten on board, with more than 60% of Americans now supporting the idea of more drilling. Petroleum extraction and use has taken us from Little House on the Prarie to today, so I'd hardly call it unproven. In terms of being long on investment, I'd ask, in comparison to what? Doing nothing? Building a new nuclear power plant? Waiting for efficient solar power?
So, in conclusion, I understand that you have concerns, and they are very valid. But I fear the alternatives are far more dire. This is a calculated risk that we must take, but I submit that more oil is absolutely not the only piece of the puzzle. We must also stay focused on the long term, with a far more careful approach to the environment and our own health and safety.
Thanks for your comments!
Might I suggest you read this. Thanks.
http://www.slate.com/id/2197283/
Anonymous,
Thank you for your comments. Drawnlines blog honestly does encourage other points of view.
Please be assured that I did click over to the story, and reading those arguments actually reinforced my position.
Again, thanks!