An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Offshore Drilling Bill
The House pulled the offshore drilling bill from today’s agenda, but what is this really about? Is it Big Oil? (Washington Post)
Foes of offshore drilling hoped that today’s move spelled the end of efforts to get the bill passed. “Let’s hope this is the end of Congress’ fling with Big Oil and that we can make a fresh start to achieving true energy security with the new year and the new Congress,” Athan Manuel of the Sierra Club said in a statement.
For people along the Gulf Coast, and especially those in Louisiana, I suspect pulling the bill will underscore what they already perceive as complete indifference to their situation… because this was, in large part, about them. More here.
5 Responses to “The Offshore Drilling Bill”
I didn’t learn enough from the articles about this to be able to make an informed opinion about the merits.
But I can understand how the Gulf Coast folks can feel hosed.
I don’t understand the purpose of not drilling for oil where we know it to be. There is oil in the ground, we need it, and sooner or later its coming out of the ground to service that need. Let them drill, and make sure its done with as small an environmental footprint as we can. Whether its off the coast or in ANWR who cares?
The environmental disaster of an oil spill (such as the Valdez in Alaska) is one of the reasons I often have trouble supporting expanding drilling. In fact, in a very recent conversation with an O&G friend in Houston, I was told that much of the Alaskan pipeline is deteriorating, and there’s an enormous problem brewing there.
Along with that, there are the oft-overlooked side-effects such as subsidence and altered wetlands, which led in large part to the massive problems in SE Louisiana post-Katrina.
That said — there is, as Slamfu says, need, and in this specific bill, there is the side benefit of long-overdue royalty percentages to Louisiana, which has had an incredibly low cut of the revenues compared to other states.
The bill was proposed by Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and the royalty piece is crucial, not just for LA, but for taxpayers everywhere. Louisiana is VERY concerned about its damaged wetlands; they know they need them — and there are measures that can be taken to correct this. Furthermore, there are levees that have not been funded by the gov’t that LA would like to repair / improve… but as things stand, there’s not enough $.
They don’t want to be a burden on taxpayers anymore than taxpayers want to support them.
It’s all very difficult. And sad.
CNN’s version of this article said that there were 1.2 billion barrels of oil available in the Gulf shore, but that the U.S. uses 21 million barrels a day. So, there’s enough energy down there to supply the U.S. energy needs for two months? I can’t really be convinced that the environmental impact is worth it.
response to (Slamfu 12.5.2006 8:46pm)
“There is oil in the ground, we need it, and sooner or later its coming out of the ground to service that need.”
The problem isn’t really in the drilling – although that can become problemtic. The problem is, as you put it, the “need” for the oil. It’s dirty, limited, and expensive. America’s reliance on oil is one of several reasons why America is falling behind Europe. I admit that Al Gore barely has a pulse, but just imagine how much better America would be, if it had elected him in 2000. The national budget would probably have been balanced (even factoring in 9-11). No war for oil/PNAC would have been started. Steps would have been taken to end America’s reliance on oil. America would have been a proponent of the Kyoto Protocol. George W. Bush reminds me of a traveling salesman. He smiles and talks a good game, but that’s about it.