I'm not anti-coastal drilling as part of some treehugging doctrine. If allowing some drilling is the price of getting a clean energy & climate action bill passed, I probably wouldn't be screaming for a veto. I just think that until we've grabbed the lowest-hanging fruit of renewable energy and energy efficiency (and we've barely started picking), we shouldn't put our coastal economies at risk.
But this is what makes rational discussion of the issue so difficult: Big Oil's willingness to lie right in Virginians' faces about the realities of drilling. Here's what the Heartland Institute, which admitted to taking more than half a million dollars from ExxonMobil before it stopped revealing its funders, is telling Californians about coastal drilling:
Offshore oil drilling has a proven track record as a safe and effective means of acquiring energy. Oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico weathered hurricanes Katrina and Rita with little or no spillage, according to the National Ocean Industries Association.The "National Ocean Industries Association" is yet another industry front group that joined ExxonMobil to fund one of the worst global warming denier groups ever. So one polluter front group is quoting a lie from another polluter front group that Katrina and Rita caused no spills.
What does the actual historical record tell us? Just check this actual headline from 2005: "Katrina oil spills may be among worst on record." Considering Virginia is right in the line of fire every hurricane season, this is a huge worry.
But that's far from the biggest doozy:
Drilling would help clean up the coastline. According to the National Academy of Sciences, 60 percent of the oil found in the North American marine environment comes from natural seepage through the ocean floor. Only 1 percent comes from offshore oil and gas development. Drilling and removal of oil allows for less natural seepage, hence cleaner beaches and a cleaner marine environment.Here's the problem: natural seepage happens in tiny amounts over long periods of time, while man-made spills happen all at once and in large quantities.
Let's do a visual demonstration. Natural seepage:
Now the man-made version:
With absolutely outrageous lies like this, how can we believe anything Big Oil tells us about the dangers of offshore drilling or how much revenue we could expect from it? ExxonMobil will spill oil on your leg and tell you it's raining.Unfortunately, neither Creigh Deeds nor Bob McDonnell sound willing to take the tough stand against Big Oil. Expect to hear more questionable forecasts of black rain for the next four years.
Posts
12 comments:
OK, first I am going to put forth an argument that rang as being truthful with me:
It is less risky to the overall earth environment if we drill locally and transport short distances then if we drill afar and transport large distances. There is greater increased danger to the global environment if we add increased distances during the transportation phase. Makes sense doesn't it?
Second: You are not going to get a lot of voters to agree with you if you demand that every citizen must ride a bicycle to the grocery store and attempt to figure out how to transport that trunk full of groceries home on the back of the bicycle. While public transport might be an option for the daily commute to and from work, it is not going to completely replace the average citizen's need for private conveyance at times.
Our nation has a thirst, even addiction, for crude oil based energy supplies. It is the needle in our veins. While many of environmentalists' recommendations are worthy and could help us break our addiction, allowing these environmentalists free reign will be followed by a backlash from the majority of voters.
I am not going to be a hypocrite. I am willing to sacrifice, but not too much. I am willing to endure pain, as long as the pain does not threaten my family's survival.
Third: I am going to point out that while there are some exceptional leaders who have been able to "go green" most of these leaders have means to get there beyond the average voter. It is not just conservative people who like to listen to Rush Limbaugh who pull up alongside you at the fuel pump. People who have their radios dialed to NPR (National Public Radio) are fueling up their tanks as well.
"Little David," so you're OK with keeping America addicted to oil and sending money to Chavez and Ahmadinejad as long as you can save 5 cents a gallon on gas?
I swear, we learn more from these comments about what the right really thinks than a week of listening to Bob McDonnell's lies ...
The costs of our "oil addiction" are devastating from an economic, trade, national security and environmental perspective. It is absolutely imperative that we slash our oil consumption ASAP. How anyone could not understand this is utterly beyond me; heck, even George W. Bush said we had to kick our "oil addiction."
One reason I love talking to environmentalists is because almost always they are at least above average in intelligence and sometimes their intelligence pegs the meter.
OK, mister super intelligent guy, you figured out how to make a living in the world you are designing. But what about the average voter? If the world you are designing leaves the less intelligent voter in the dust and eating the bread crumbs from your table, they are going to stop voting for you.
I am going to admit to being a socialist at heart. However I am going admit that pure socialism just doesn't work. You have got to motivate me to get off my butt and if you do not do so I am going to sit on my butt and allow for you to provide for me.
The fact is that I've yet to see a reliable forecast of what the state might expect in revenue from off-shore drilling, if anything.
Fiscal prudence, which used to be a Republican value, would suggest comparing that possible source of revenue with the very real revenue that the state recieves from Va. Beach tourism. I agree with the Republicans that the technology for off shore drilling has been getting better and cleaner due to new technology. But it doesn't have to be BETTER to make this a winning move for Virginia, it has to be PERFECT. Because only one spill at Katrina like levels could destroy Virginia Beach tourism. That's a fragile beach that require extensive maintenance. What we're not seeing here is an intelligent evaluation of potential risks and benefits of drilling.
Yeah, and the increasing expense to maintain Va Beach's beaches might be a problem one day.
I think that there are benefits to off-shore drilling on Virginia's coasts even if none of the revenue goes to the state. As long as the rights are not sold at today's depressed prices (we are still looking peak oil in the face) and the revenue went only into the federal coffers, I would be submissive.
However the Gulf states have been successful in getting increased royalties for exploration off their coasts. What is fair for them should be fair for Virginia.
While I might be motivated towards what is best for America many Virginia citizens will be motivated towards what is best for them.
I am also going to add that you seem to accept that less then perfect drilling somewhere else and transporting it over long distances is preferable to drilling locally. I guess you think the environmental standards over there exceed the standards here?
It is OK if the impacts on the environment happen somewhere else just as long as you do not have to pay the consequences even while you too fill up your tank.
Yes, I am more willing to accept risk of oil spills in the Saudi Arabian desert than at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. Call me crazy.
How about no oil spills anywhere? It's pretty hard to "spill" energy efficiency, solar or wind power. :)
That's a little idealistic Lowell. We're going to need oil for a while yet. But there are cost and benefits to drilling for it off Virginia's coast and it doesn't look like anyone, least of all the people drilling, have actually done a cost/benefit analysis of that course. Perhaps because they aren't interested int he facts. They don't need facts they've got an ideology.
"The people FOR drilling"
You may not have spills with wind energy, but you would have to clear cut large swaths of mountaintops of trees in order to harness energy.
Wind farms are an industrial site just like any other. They are inhospitable to wildlife, and require environmental destruction.
MCS, we assume you'll be taking an equally bold stand against mountaintop coal mining? And oil shale development in Colorado? And tar sands in Canada? Let me know if you need a ride to the protest.
Post a Comment