Objections to offshore drilling don’t hold water
By Robert L. Bradley, Jr.
Coastal-state politicos are scrambling to block a federal plan to expand offshore oil and natural gas drilling. In June, governors from five East Coast states condemned the initiative. In July, congressmen tried, and failed, to insert an anti-drilling amendment into a spending bill.
They claim opening America’s coasts to oil and gas exploration will put the health and prosperity of local communities at risk. This argument doesn’t hold water at any depth.
Offshore drilling is safer and less disruptive today than at any time in history. Developing coastal resources would create hundreds of thousands of jobs and generate billions in tax revenue.
The momentum is there. In 2017, America produced more combined crude oil and natural gas than any other country for the sixth year in a row. According to the International Energy Agency, U.S. crude oil production will exceed that of Russia by 2019.
This is good news for Americans. Oil and gas industries currently support more than 10 million jobs and contribute over $1 trillion to our economy each year.
In order to remain a global oil and gas leader, however, the United States will have to take advantage of its energy resources.
Currently, energy development is prohibited in 94 percent of federal offshore areas. According to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, those regions could contain over 327 trillion cubic feet of gas and nearly 90 billion barrels of oil. That’s enough to fuel America for over 12 years at current consumption rates.
Leaving economic resources in the ground does nobody any good. That’s why in January, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced plans to make over 90 percent of the nation’s outer continental shelf available for drilling.
It’s this policy that the governors of Virginia, North Carolina, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Rhode Island — together with some green activists and a handful of congressional lawmakers — are determined to defeat. Their reasons for opposing offshore drilling, however, are doctrinaire at best.
Connecticut Gov. Daniel Malloy claims developing the Atlantic outer continental shelf puts the interests of oil companies before “the safety of families.”
Wrong. Offshore drilling rigs must meet a staggering number of rigorous safety standards designed to prevent spills and quickly respond to accidents. This helps explain why 99.999 percent of U.S. produced, refined, and transported oil successfully reaches its destination.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam insists that “offshore drilling is a clear and present threat to Virginia’s economy.”
Contrarily, in Virginia alone, developing the Atlantic outer continental shelf would create 25,000 jobs over the next two decades, boosting the state’s GDP by more than $2 billion annually by 2040. All told, energy and natural gas development along the East Coast will generate roughly 280,000 jobs and over $51 billion in tax revenue by 2035.
Finally, the governors claim that the policy infringes on their rights to control coasts. It does no such thing. States have jurisdiction over only the first three miles of coastline. The areas that Secretary Zinke is seeking to open are under federal control.
Opponents of offshore drilling say they are looking out for the best interests of their states — and, indeed, their country. What they are actually doing is compromising a domestic energy boom that continues to create jobs and spur growth. And with current gasoline prices at worrisome levels, the lesson is that all supply, offshore and on, now and in the future, is required.
Robert L. Bradley Jr. is the founder and CEO of the Institute for Energy Research.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
