Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on May 29, 2014

Bookmark and Share

(Don’t) Drill, Baby, Drill: Economic, Environmental, and Military Conflicts Associated with Offshore Drilling

(Don’t) Drill, Baby, Drill: Economic, Environmental, and Military Conflicts Associated with Offshore Drilling thumbnail

In 2008, a 25-year congressional prohibition on offshore drilling off the Atlantic coast ended, opening it up to energy exploration and poising it to be the next energy frontier. The intersection of increased energy prices and rising demand made drilling in this area an appealing endeavor, and in 2010 the Obama administration announced their intent to proceed with drilling projects off the Atlantic coast, in the Gulf, and in Alaska. A month later, in an unfortunate and telling twist of fate, a BP oil rig in the Gulf exploded, causing one of the largest environmental catastrophes in the US. The result was a seven-year suspension of all drilling activities in the Atlantic. As 2017 approaches, the discussion of offshore drilling has resurfaced, providing to be more divisive than ever. To protect our waters and move towards an energy independent future we need definitive legislation to protect against offshore drilling in the Mid and South Atlantic and refocus our efforts on clean energy technologies.

The Backstory

The 2010 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf was one of the worst environmental disasters in the United States to date and the results have come to shape the future of energy exploration, regulation and infrastructure. As the moratorium on drilling nears its end and the Administration begins to develop the next ocean energy exploration plan, politicians in coastal states are pushing for reconsideration of offshore energy frontiers. Earlier this month, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) released a Programmatic Environmental Impact Study (PEIS) on the effects of geophysical activity in the area and effectively advanced the national trajectory towards offshore drilling.

Politicians from coastal states are among the most vocal, and generally positive, groups. Those that share the Atlantic coast line- especially Virginia, Georgia, Florida, North and South Carolina- stand to bring in significant tax revenue as a result of bringing the oil industry into their states. Off-shore drilling has been equated to jobs, an economic surge, and revenue sharing.

What’s at Stake?

Environmental groups warn against moving forward where Deepwater Horizon left off, cautioning that the potential energy gains do not justify or begin to offset the significant risks. Major concerns are three fold: economic, environmental, and defense.

A 2011 Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management study found that there is less than two months supply of oil, at current rates of consumption, in the Mid- and South Atlantic combined. This crude oil must be refined into usable fuel, requiring significant infrastructure development in areas along the coast. Due to infrastructure requirements, access to the small oil supply remains years away. These refineries and pipelines emit significant amounts of oil and fumes daily, polluting the surrounding air and water.

Additionally, the areas in which drilling is being discussed are high productivity zones and are actively used for commercial fishing, outdoor recreation, and ecotourism. A 2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers report concluded that, as of 2011, Virginia brings in $191,000 of seafood, making it the third largest seafood producer in the country. The same report attributed 10% of Virginia’s tourism to its beaches. The sportsman industry in these areas would be in jeopardy, putting billions of dollars and jobs at risk.

Offshore drilling poses a huge threat to land and water health in addition to habitats in these areas. Oil wells produce drilling muds that contain mercury, lead, and other toxic pollutants that contaminate the water supply and endanger organisms in these areas. It poses a notable risk to several endangered species, including the North Atlantic Right Whale. The BOEM PEIS on the effects of geophysical activity in the Atlantic and found both the use of airguns and the potential risk of a spill to have moderate impacts on marine mammals, sea turtles, marine protected areas, and coastal and marine birds.

On a practical level, the lease sale off the coast of Virginia contains areas vital to Department of Defense and NASA. According to a DOD report, 72% of the proposed area in Virginia would interfere with naval activity and thus be un-drillable. Drilling operations would also interfere with NASA activity on Wallops Island. Losses to military operations in Virginia alone could cost $1.9 billion yearly.

On the Horizon

The heart of the issue is energy supply. Technology has put us on the precipice of the new renewable energy frontier that could negate the need for dangerous, expensive and intrusive drilling projects. Institute for Local Self Reliance explains that many states, particularly in the South East, would be able to meet significant portions of their energy needs through local renewable. Ahead of the development of the administration’s plan for the next phase of energy exploration, there needs to be a community wide effort to campaign for alternative energy sources.

The Energy Collective

7 Comments on "(Don’t) Drill, Baby, Drill: Economic, Environmental, and Military Conflicts Associated with Offshore Drilling"

  1. rockman on Thu, 29th May 2014 8:35 pm 

    I truly do find artcles like this hilarious. They list all the dangers and down sides of drilling along the US coastline…except along the Gulf Coast. And to make it even more bizarre they use BP blowout in the GOM as an example of why we shouldn’t drill in our offshore waters…except along the Gulf Coast. And they list the potential danger to the biotic productivity of the offshore areas…except in the GOM. And finally the run down the potential risks to the health and livelihood of all those who live along the coast…except along the Gulf Coast.

    A long list of reasons why the gov’t shouldn’t offer leases in those areas…except in the GOM where the current administration has offered 150 million acres for lease just since President Obama was elected along with over 140 GOM drill permits issued just since the BP blowout.

    I assume they must feel that some mystical force now protects the GOM and the folks who live along the coast. Otherwise how could they deal with the guilt of readily utilizing the tens of $billions of the oil/NG that comes from the GOM?

  2. Plantagenet on Thu, 29th May 2014 8:36 pm 

    The Obama administration is determined to press ahead with offshore drilling. Liberals and greens won’t say boo to Obama so look for more offshore drilling

  3. GregT on Thu, 29th May 2014 10:40 pm 

    In the mean time, back in the real world.

    Our scientific community has reached a consensus. We must avoid a 2 degree C global mean temperature increase ‘at all costs’. We can’t afford to burn all proven reserves, let alone add more CO2 into the mix.

    Yet, we are still more concerned with propping up BAU for a few more years, than we are about the future of our own children, and all life on the Planet.

    Quite the dilemma.

  4. bobinget on Fri, 30th May 2014 11:38 am

  5. GregT on Fri, 30th May 2014 12:23 pm 

    Thanks for the link bobinget,

    I’ll post the full link so it’s easier for people to access.

    Looks like we’re screwed no matter what we do now. Guy McPherson may not be so far off after all. Drill, baby, drill, burn, baby, burn.

  6. J-Gav on Fri, 30th May 2014 3:07 pm 

    Well, I caught that RNN piece too along with a few other articles on the subject. It appears to be fairly mid-long term, which mean most people won’t give a damn, given the rate of future discounting we’re now operating on.

    But whether it’s 50 years or 150 years, I don’t see it as being particularly favorable to coming generations. They’ll need all the personal and community resources they can muster to limit the pain. And hopefully they won’t waste precious time and energy in generational blame games, serving no purpose at all.

  7. K. Glick (EEI) on Fri, 30th May 2014 3:15 pm 

    All I can think of after reading this is “Thank God we are rapidly developing renewable energy applications” because I just can’t see where — global warming aside — we have 50 years of fossil fuels left to drill for on the planet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *