Offshore Drilling

Offshore Oil: Does it really matter to us?

            There are many who say that offshore oil drilling is overall advantageous in many respects; however, I’d like to point out a few important, if not dominating, factors that make as negative an impact as they come. The one subject I would like to elaborate on here is something as simple as an everyday strain that the drilling so neglects to pick up: prices.

                People who are passionate about what they do, depending on what it is that they do, say that they’re only true desire is to help people: people as in everyday, suburban civilians. A policeman’s concern is keeping those people safe; a politician’s concern is himself, of all. But the people who come up with the ideas such as cars—an easier method of transportation—electricity—for everyday use—and et cetera, are looking to benefit the whole in convenient ways. It seems as though the idea of offshore drilling is to do just that . . . but is it really benefitting society?

                The U.S. Department of Energy issued a report on offshore drilling last year, which found that “access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017.” It concluded, “Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.” In the end, offshore drilling does not lower gasoline prices. It washes in wealth for the big companies that wouldn’t have originally been produced, but you or I wouldn’t see any significant changes. Why is that? The wealth is transferred to the oil companies, with which the assets are held; that’s beneficial to points that don’t have anything to do with American consumers. It is not beneficial in the way we would want it to be. According to an article written by Andrew J. Hoffman and Thomas P. Lyon, “At heart, this is an issue that pits environmental protection against financial gain. . . .” and this isn’t a new problem! Even if it did affect prices at the pump, we have already have some major accidents: accidents that cost a lot in terms of offshore oil spills. At one point, Hoffman and Lyon also point out, “. . . over 400,000 gallons of oil were spilled in the Mississippi river, forcing a closure of 100 miles of the river. Of course, much bigger spills have occurred in American waters. In 1969, the blowout of a Unocal rig off the coast of Santa Barbara spilled 3 million gallons, and in 1989 the Exxon Valdez spilled 11 million gallons off the coast of Alaska in 1989.” These accidents call for a lot of economic hardship.

                So it not only does not benefit the average consumer, but it has disadvantages aside from that as well. And, back to the pricing issue, the only other two ways the problem would be solved is that we either have a decreased need for oil—and in the same aforementioned article, it is pointed out that “the world consumed 43 billion barrels of crude oil in 2006 . . .”, and those numbers haven’t gone down significantly—or a great increase in supplies: and offshore wind isn’t working towards either of those things. To us, it doesn’t make a difference.

                In all, offshore oil drilling isn’t beneficial in ways that would directly matter to us.

Sources: http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/ajhoff/pub_professional/The%20Simple%20Economics%20of%20Offshore.pdf