2008 Woodie Awards
Drilling for answers won't provide solution
Jeff Mason
Issue date: 7/16/08 Section: Opinion
Earlier this week President Bush lifted the executive ban on offshore drilling, a ban put on by his father back in 1990. The move came as a way for the president to bring the issue to the forefront and pressure the House and Senate into making a decision.
You have to applaud our president: he's not just sitting on his hands and being a lame duck. He's taking action. But it may not be a step in the right direction.
According to the Boston Globe, offshore drilling won't have a direct impact on gas prices for at least a decade while oil companies acquire the permits and equipment, as well as time spent looking for places to drill. And to top it off, the amount of oil produced may be too small to impact world oil prices.
There are also some environmental risks to offshore drilling, including the risk of oil spills, which can cause an incredible amount of damage to the environment and ecosystems.
On the other hand, advancing technology reduces the risk of a spill, and a report from the Independent Scientific Review indicates that offshore drilling has negligible effects on the environment. Even so, it doesn't completely take the risk of a spill away.
But more than anything, this move seems like a way to superficially patch things up. After all, the effects may not be felt until 10 years from now, and by then the energy crisis will most likely be in full swing.
So why is our government focusing on finding more fuel, rather than finding a new way to fuel our trains, planes and automobiles? I know there aren't a lot of good options at this point, but America is known for its innovation. Our companies are the largest, most successful in the world. Can't we get behind them and figure something out rather than award thriving oil companies with even more contracts?
Offshore drilling will help, but it's not a solution. We should be focusing on alternative energy, not on more fuel.
You have to applaud our president: he's not just sitting on his hands and being a lame duck. He's taking action. But it may not be a step in the right direction.
According to the Boston Globe, offshore drilling won't have a direct impact on gas prices for at least a decade while oil companies acquire the permits and equipment, as well as time spent looking for places to drill. And to top it off, the amount of oil produced may be too small to impact world oil prices.
There are also some environmental risks to offshore drilling, including the risk of oil spills, which can cause an incredible amount of damage to the environment and ecosystems.
On the other hand, advancing technology reduces the risk of a spill, and a report from the Independent Scientific Review indicates that offshore drilling has negligible effects on the environment. Even so, it doesn't completely take the risk of a spill away.
But more than anything, this move seems like a way to superficially patch things up. After all, the effects may not be felt until 10 years from now, and by then the energy crisis will most likely be in full swing.
So why is our government focusing on finding more fuel, rather than finding a new way to fuel our trains, planes and automobiles? I know there aren't a lot of good options at this point, but America is known for its innovation. Our companies are the largest, most successful in the world. Can't we get behind them and figure something out rather than award thriving oil companies with even more contracts?
Offshore drilling will help, but it's not a solution. We should be focusing on alternative energy, not on more fuel.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Justin
posted 7/18/08 @ 5:14 PM CST
It may not help right now, but if Clinton wouldn't have vetoed legislation passed my Congress in the mid-90's to allow drilling in Alaska then this current problem may not be an issue. (Continued…)
Post a Comment