Yet another in a growing list of editorial pages has weighed in against the Obama/Tillis/McCrory plan to open up the coastline of North Carolina to offshore oil and gas drilling. This morning it’s Raleigh’s News & Observer. Here’s the excellent conclusion:
“President Obama’s motivation for supporting offshore drilling is complicated. The clearest reason appears to be that he’s offering to open the Atlantic waters to gain support for his other push to close off from drilling millions of acres in Alaska and the waters off its coast.
He’s also trying to balance his pro-environment stances – opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline and support for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions – with the need for plentiful energy supplies.
Given the reality of global warming and the memory of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill into the Gulf of Mexico, the time for such balance is past. The United States should be building to an energy future based on renewable sources without environmental hazards. For now, the best hope is that explorers find there isn’t enough oil and gas off the Atlantic coast to merit the trouble of extracting it.”
Read the entire editorial by clicking here.
louis Saul
February 3, 2015 at 6:48 am
Let’s not be sophomoric about this offshore drilling. The bottom line is; energy needs for humans is imperative. Though, certainly the environment is just as important, too. The oil and gas industry try’s hard to implement rules/regulations to protect the environment; that is a fact. Unfortunately accidents happen, for example; BP. But relative to the amount of offshores wells, and drilling going on, the BP accident is statically irrelevant.
I will say I am biased; I am an oil and gas man. I believe that alternative energy sources should be developed, and implemented. With that said, it will take a multiplicity of alternatives to make-up for the simplicity and relative low cost of developing, and producing hydrocarbons. The public should understand hundreds of products are derived from petroleum.
Please see this link: A partial list of products made from Petroleum (144 of 6000 items):
http://www.ranken-energy.comroducts%20from%20Petroleum.htm
It will take some time to retool the infrastructure, not to mention the cost, to implement alternative energy sources, and substitute petroleum products. Again, it will take a multiplicity of alternatives to make-up for the simplicity of the hydrocarbon. The cost of retooling will result in higher cost to the consumer for many products we use every day.
Yes, Wind, Solar, etc. are relevant. Why does it have to be green energy or hydrocarbons? Why can’t we create jobs with all energy industries? Why should we close the door on additional jobs that could be created by multiple energy developers?
Let’s maximize all energy resources, why does it have to be either, or. Everybody wins if will let all energy development co-exist, thus we have exponential job growth and money being pumped into the economy. At this point, North Carolina, and our country, are not in a position let any oil and gas development opportunities be stifled.
We need to become energy independent, or would you rather continue relying on OPEC dictating price and cost. Saudi Arabia has hurt our job growth because of their current gamesmanship with supply. Now there are job layoffs. It may be great that pump prices are down, but do you think it will last? Also let’s not forget the obvious; oil and gas is a finite resource! If we gain independence, and leadership, in the world of oil and gas we can control the game, and pump prices will remain reasonable.