Let States Decide Whether To Allow Offshore Drilling

By Bristol Herald Courier Editorial Board

Published: June 21, 2008

More than two decades ago, Congress declared much of the nation’s coastal waters off limits to oil companies.

For a number of reasons, it might now be time to lift the federal ban and let individual states decide whether to allow drilling off their shores.

But understand this: Offshore drilling isn’t a panacea, and it probably won’t bring down prices at the pump. Politicians who suggest otherwise – including President Bush, his would-be successor Sen. John McCain and a plethora of congressional Republicans – are trawling for votes. They assume that voters desperate for relief from high gas prices will believe their half-truths and reward them on Election Day.

The Republicans are reading the people’s mood correctly. Americans are angry about $4-a-gallon gasoline and are anxious to assign blame. High gas prices are causing lifestyle changes for all but the very rich and pose an undeniable hardship to those at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder.

Blame-game targets have included the oil companies, commodity speculators, OPEC, environmentalists and politicians of all stripes. Some of those pushing hardest to open more of the ocean floor for drilling fall squarely in the blame-the-environmentalists crowd. These are the ones who boastfully proclaim they would drill through a caribou’s skull to get at the oil in Alaska, if that’s what is required.

This drill-now-and-damn-the-consequences attitude cannot dominate this debate. More rational minds must prevail as the nation searches for a middle ground that balances energy needs and environmental protection.

Those rational minds are more likely to be found in various statehouses than in the hyper-partisan confines of Congress. We suggest returning the issue to the states in some form.

In 2006, Congress considered legislation that would have maintained the ban on drilling within 50 miles of now-protected shores. The same bill gave states the right to extend that protection to a maximum of 100 miles out. This approach would let states like Virginia, South Carolina and Florida allow drilling. And, it would give states like California, North Carolina and New Jersey a tool to oppose it.

Opposition to drilling revolves around environmental concerns, not a trivial matter in states that rely on tourism to fuel their economies. These states have a right to protect their beaches and their views.

The offshore drilling ban followed two oil platform blowouts – one off the coast of California in 1969 and one off the coast of Texas in 1979. Both resulted in some pretty nasty environmental problems, and tar balls on beaches aren’t exactly a selling point.

However, technology has improved. Oil platforms took a direct hit during Hurricane Katrina, but there were no spills. One deepwater platform, Thunder Horse, which is just now coming online, was pummeled by Hurricane Dennis. The platform listed, but didn’t topple, and engineers have since fixed the problem.

In recent years, oil spills have generally involved shipping accidents rather than platform troubles. Department of Energy analysts believe offshore drilling could slightly reduce the nation’s need for imported oil, which would lead to less shipping – a potential environmental boon.

But again, we feel a need to counter some of the spin coming from the right. Drilling offshore will not produce energy independence; at best, it will reduce the level of dependence.\

The federal government estimates there are 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil beneath the ocean floor in areas where drilling is now banned. That’s about a 2½ year supply at the present rate of U.S. consumption, and it will be seven to 10 years before any benefit is realized.

Offshore drilling is part of a long-term solution. It isn’t a quick fix for prices at the pump. Congress should consider an end to the drilling ban, but it must quit selling offshore drilling as a miracle cure. Level with the people.