Rank-and-file lawmaker's plan to open offshore to drilling

At last a sensible plan for oil development is emerging from Congress, but without the support of congressional leaders. A by-partisan group of Democratic and Republican lawmakers is working on a plan to open 574 million acres of coastal waters. The plan would use revenue from oil drilling to finance renewable energy and household conservation measures. This is exactly the type of plan that should be enacted. It will take decades and cost trillions of dollars to create a clean energy infrastructure in this country. In the mean time, we are going to continue to be dependent on fossil fuels to power our economy. This plan provides the energy needed now by our current fossil fuel based infrastructure while taking ‘profits’ from oil production to fund development of new clean energy sources. The plan would also fund household conservation measures (like winterizing homes in the Northeast to reduce the amount of oil used for heating.)

California is one of the states that would benefit from this bill if the state decided to allow more offshore drilling. There is an estimated 5.7 billion barrels of oil offshore California. Some of this oil could be developed quickly as fields with known reserves lie very close to existing drilling platforms. All of the infrastructure to extract the oil, transport it to shore through already existing pipelines, and process the oil are in place. Horizontal drilling techniques now allow some of these reserves to be developed very quickly from existing platforms. Some oil production could be brought on-line in less than a year. Oil production requiring new leases and infrastructure could be brought on faster than the estimated 10 years if the government would speed up its part of the process. Most of the time lag is due to regulatory delay. It is estimated that even offering new leases would take the government 4 years. Exploration and drilling permits could take another 3 years. 3 years to actually do the work and you have 10 years!

So why is California against drilling? Many claim the risk of oil spills might pollute their beaches and ruin their tourist business. There was a large oil spill off Santa Barbara in 1969 caused by a blowout of a well. 80,000 barrels of oil were released into the ocean. This resulted in new regulations requiring safety devices to prevent blowouts and oil spills in offshore drilling. Since that time, the industry record on oil spills from offshore drilling has been excellent. California already has naturally occurring oil seepage into the ocean from oil and gas seeps. One large known seep offshore Coal Oil Point is estimated to release 150 to 170 barrels of oil per day into the ocean. There are at least 2,000 active oil and gas seeps offshore California. Oil is part of the natural environmental. Drilling into undersea oil reserves may actually clean up oil seeps in California as extracting oil from a reservoir will decrease pressure and may stop some of the natural seepage.

Producing more offshore oil in California will generate a considerable amount of money for the state. It seems the state has chronic financial problems that might be helped by this oil revenue. Calfironia seems a lot like Mexico to me when it comes to developing oil. They are simply not going to allow anyone to profit from oil development and would rather financially go down in flames before they change their position. To me is seems very political and irrational.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is looking to divert the bill by looking at speeding up development of existing leases or offering leases in areas that are not currently off-limit to drilling. These areas are mainly in Alaska, but not including the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) with known probable reserves of 11 billion barrels and the oil infrastructure (Alaska oil pipeline) already in place to move the oil to market. She is also looking at tapping our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to provide immediate relief while at the same time maintaining there is no need for long term relief!

Voters recognize the need to develop our own oil resources and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 74 percent of voters support offshore drilling for oil in costal waters and 59 percent favor drilling for oil in ANWR. While Republicans and independents overwhelmingly favor offshore drilling, 59 percent of Democrats also support offshore drilling. Offshore drilling will be a major issue in the upcoming election. Every day people are reminded of our dependence on foreign oil every time they pass a gas station or need to fill up their own car. There is always the question: where is my gasoline going to come from tomorrow and next year, and how much am I going to have to pay for it?

In my previous article “Understanding Energy Return On Energy Investment (EROEI)”  I discussed why we should develop our cleanest, most readily available oil resources first. It does not make any economic or environmental sense to shut off development of oil resources with a high Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROEI) before developing lower EROEI sources like tar sands and oil shale. Restricting drilling would actually make global warming worse in the long run. Hopefully, developing offshore oil will get us the time and money to develop clean, renewable energy resources to we can leave a lot of coal, tar sands, and oil shale in the ground forever. To not develop our own high EROEI oil sources and then buy lower EROEI oil sources from foreign sources is just plain stupid.

Topics: Global Warming , oil , Congress , oil shale , tar sands , energy policy , Nancy Pelosi , California , offshore drilling