Too bad we can't burn hot air!

The topic of offshore oil drilling is in the news these days. The Bush administration has proposed opening up areas of the coastal shelf that are under federal jurisdiction to oil exploration. With gasoline prices flirting with $4 a gallon, this was predictable. Equally predictable were the chorus of critics lining up to oppose the administrations proposals.

Their objections range from a concern that offshore rigs will hurt tourism on the beaches to fears about global warning. The folks bringing up the argument about tourism may have a point. But I do wonder: how do they think those tourists are getting to the beach? Rickshaws?

I do want to share my take on some of the other objections to offshore drilling that have been raised.

Offshore drilling won’t lower gas prices, because it will take five to ten years before offshore fields start producing.
This claim is absolutely true, and if your only reason for advocating a return to offshore oil exploration is to cut gas prices right now, you are selling an idea that won’t work. To a large extent, however, the increase in prices is due to increased demand from fast growing emerging markets such as China and India. As those economies grow richer, their demand will only continue to increase, while supply from existing oil fields shrinks. Even if demand (and prices) drop in the near future as conservation efforts take effect, prices will inevitably move higher in the future. So even if offshore drilling doesn’t lower gas prices in 2008, it will keep them from going even higher in 2018.

The oil reserves in offshore fields would only supply enough oil to replace imports for three years.
Actually, it would take ten to twenty years of production to deplete the new offshore oil fields that would be developed if the moratorium on exploration is repealed. This means that a more accurate way of stating this claim is that the reserves in offshore fields would only supply enough oil to replace 30% of imports for ten years. That would be a major boost to any strategy for energy independence for America. It would also do a lot to improve our current trade imbalances, supporting our currency.

We need to work on conservation, not expanding the supply of oil.
The current high gasoline prices seem to be doing a pretty good job of encouraging conservation. Americans are driving about 4% fewer miles than a year ago, and demand for fuel efficient hybrids and other small cars has exploded, while demand for big pickups and SUV’s has collapsed.

Using more oil makes global warming worse.
If we don’t burn oil, then electric utilities are faced with a couple of choices. (A) Burn more coal, or (b) rolling blackouts. Option (c), of course, is build more nuclear power plants, but even if we start today, it will take decades to replace all of our power generation infrastructure. In the meantime, oil fired power plants generate more power with less carbon output than the alternatives. Unless you prefer blackouts.

The attitude of those who oppose offshore oil exploration seems to be that we should not be using petroleum at all. That is not a realistic goal. Play a little thought experiment with me. Assume that one day soon, due to some miracle, it rains Toyota Priuses everywhere. So everyone switches to driving hybrids, all at once. Average fuel efficiency triples overnight. Guess what: every one of those cars still has a gasoline engine. We are still going to need to use oil.

No matter what we do in terms of conservation and developing energy alternatives, we’re going to be using a lot of oil for a long time to come. We can continue to rely more and more on getting that oil from countries where America is disliked, in essence enriching our enemies. Or we can do everything within our power to keep greater independence from foreign sources. Offshore drilling will be only one part of any strategy for maintaining a high energy society. It is, however, a necessary part.