Two overlooked facts that are key to any discussion on offshore drilling

[grantcart]

There are many here that are much more knowledgeable about the science of pollution, climate change and off shore drilling her than I am but there are two facts that the media, environmentalists and the pundits seem to be unaware of:

1) Currently the world is undergoing its largest expansion, a veritable explosion, of off shore drilling and these additional leases are just not very significant in the world wide context (in fact the demand for off shore platforms is so high these fields may not get platforms for a decade).

Example: Brazil

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Brazil%27s+offshore+oil+discoveries&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Offshore discovery could make Brazil major oil exporter


By Alan Clendenning, Associated Press Writer
SAO PAULO, Brazil — A monster offshore oil discovery could help Brazil join the ranks of the world's major exporters, but full-scale extraction is unlikely until 2013 and will be very expensive.

The "ultra-deep" Tupi field off the coast of Rio de Janeiro could hold as much as 8 billion barrels of recoverable light crude, and initial production should exceed 100,000 barrels daily, says Guilherme Estrella, exploration and production director of Brazilian state oil company Petroleo Brasileiro (PBR).

Petrobras, as it is known, will start pilot pumping in 2010 or 2011 but full production would take several more years, Estrella said late Thursday.

http://www.offshore-mag.com/index/article-display/9645537393/articles/offshore/drilling-completion/latin-america/2010/04/ogx-reports_another.html

Since the original reports of this massive find the estimates have only increased.

On a regular basis oil exploreration is finding more and more, for example they have announced that this off shore platform has just struck oil yesterday:


RIO DE JANEIRO – OGX Petróleo e Gás Participações SA reports the find of an oil-bearing interval in the Aptian strata of well 1-OGX-8-RJS in shallower waters of Santos basin block BM-C-41 offshore Brazil. Drilling continues below the carbonate pay.

The well, named Fuji, is 82 km (51 mi) offshore state of Rio de Janeiro in 125 m (410 ft) water depth. Diamond Offshore’s Ocean Star is doing the drilling.

These off shore fields in Brazil will account for hundreds of more offshore platform operations than those off the shore of the US. They also may create a such a demand that rigs may not be available for a long time.

The second fact is that while off shore drilling represents a potential harm currently the oceans are going through a much faster chemical change by reaching a maximum absorption of CO2 increasing the accidity of the Ocean.

http://environmentalism.suite101.com/article.cfm/ocean-acidification

It’s no secret that greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming. But there is another equally devastating environmental consequence of humanity’s large carbon footprint that is much less widely understood: how fossil fuel emissions are changing the chemistry of the oceans.

“Ocean acidification is the ‘sleeper’ environmental issue of our time, the wet underbelly of climate change, or its evil twin,” report the filmmakers of A Sea Change (aseachange.net, FAQs), an award-winning documentary that provides a compelling overview of ocean acidification, including scientific research and a humanistic story of one family's personal concern about the future of the oceans.
The Oceans' Chemistry is Changing

According to the Energy Information Administration, slightly more than 30 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) will be released into the air this year by vehicle exhaust and other fossil-fuel emissions (see eia.doe.gov: Figure 9: World Carbon Dioxide Emissions 2006-2030). About one-quarter of that amount will be absorbed by the oceans. ("The Ocean Carbon Cycle," Harvard Magazine, Nov./Dec. 2002) While this balancing process curbs the rate of global warming, it does come at an ecological cost.

CO2 absorption makes the seas more acidic, compromising the health and viability of the ocean's food chain, notes Victoria Fabry, an ocean biologist at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in San Diego, California (scripps.ucsd.edu): “Essentially, you put CO2 in sea water and the pH declines and also the carbonate ion decreases, and that is a very important building block for the shells and skeletons of organisms such as corals, mussels, clams, scallops and different types of plankton.” (Scripps Oceanography at COP-15 blog; sio.ucsd.edu/cop15: posted in "ocean acidification," Jan. 5, 2010).

Read more at Suite101: Ocean Acidification: How Carbon Emissions are Changing the Chemistry of the Seas http://environmentalism.suite101.com/article.cfm/ocean-acidification#ixzz0jy8D3X0x

Here are the facts that are frequently overlooked:

1) Whatever offshore drilling happens offshore the US will be a "drop in the ocean" compared with other offshore efforts.

2) That drilling will happen in the future.

3) Currently the oceans are absorbing about 100 million metric tons of CO2 every week.



CO2 absorption is a much greater and more immediate threat to the life of the Ocean than offshore drilling so if it takes trading offshore drilling to get Senate action on CO2 reduction, EVEN IF ITS ONLY A START, it would be a trade that I would take any day of the week.

[1776Forever]

1. I am against drilling but I also can understand what a stranglehold there is on us from oil imports.

I think President Obama was like most of us and didn't want to do this until he got into office and found out what the rest of the world is doing now. The world oil importers could put a hold on our oil and control us in that way I suspect. I am no expert but it is a shame that we can't go quicker into electric and solar. I just hope if they do drill offshore they do it where it will be the least invasive! I have seen the beaches in MS and they are not pretty!

[grantcart]

2. It seems that this is a necessary poliltical move to get some Republican Senators

to move on a more comprehensive climate change package.

[TheKentuckian]

6. Yall keep pretending that Republicans are rational or get busted for

for moving the goalposts or just being hypocrites.

Plus, this and the nuclear is just the ANTE. What further concessions will be required to actually get some votes? By summer we'll have Democrats on here saying that tearing up ANWAR is cool and froody.

There is more oil than votes to be had and their ain't much oil. Not enough to justify the risk when we can't really affect supply or price. Leave it in the ground as we'll need it more later than today or ten years from now. Long range plastics and whatnot are plausibly more crucial than fuel and if we peak out then we'll need it to get us over the hump.

[1776Forever]

9. Seems you are right - Repubs are saying it won't make a difference......

Bush Official Dan Bartlett Admits Authorizing Offshore Oil Drilling Will Be Unlikely To Win Over Any GOP Votes
Think Progress
Zaid Jilani

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/31/bruce-bartlett-gop-appeased/

During an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, former Bush official Dan Bartlett said that the move is unlikely to get any Republican votes for an energy bill. While saying that he thinks it is a “shrewd move” that will “demonstrate…that the Democratic Party doesn’t just cater to the extreme aspects of their base,” Bartlett conceded that it will likely not win any Republican votes because “Republicans have made a calculation that cooperating with this administration at this time is not necessary for them to pick up seats“:

BARTLETT: This is a shrewd move by the White House this announcment they’re doing on energy and offshore oil drilling. … These are the things they need to demonstrate to their constituents that the Democratic Party does not just cater to the extreme aspects of their base … Now, do I think that this measure here will help grease the path for a climate change bill and bring Republicans on board? No. Republicans in the Congress have made a calculation that cooperating with this administration at this time is not necessary for them to pick up seats. So if this is more of a legislative maneuever in order to get a broader bill on climate change, unfortunately this is going to come up short.

Indeed, Republicans have thus far indicated that they are unwilling to compromise in exchange for the administration’s lifting of offshore oil drilling bans. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) immediately “dismissed the president’s plan as not going far enough in opening up U.S. waters for exploration,” even going so far as to accuse Obama of defying “the will of the American people” because he didn’t open up even more territory for offshore drilling. Meanwhile, Chairman of the House Republican Conference and the American Energy Solutions Group Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) derided the plan as a “smokescreen” and a “feeble attempt to gain votes” for comprehensive energy legislation.

[1776Forever]

7. Yes that too - Found this quote from 2008 then-candidate Obama said it back then:

Bush Official Dan Bartlett Admits Authorizing Offshore Oil Drilling Will Be Unlikely To Win Over Any GOP Votes
Think Progress
By Zaid Jilani

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/31/bruce-bartlett-gop-appeased/

The Obama administration announced today that it will be approving “significant oil and gas exploration off America’s coasts.” One possible reason for the administration’s policy shift may be that it is seeking Republican votes for comprehensive energy reform. In the summer of 2008, then-candidate Obama explained that he saw allowing offshore oil drilling as a compromise necessary to “get something done“:

“The Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the drums on drilling,” Obama said in the Post interview. “And so we don’t want gridlock. We want to get something done.” The freshman Illinois senator and presidential nominee-to-be added: “If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage — I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done.”

[TheKentuckian]

3. What would his proposal change in that area?

Any oil we allow to be extracted will just be sold on the world market. Hell, we randomly export most of what we produce now. This can only be excused as policy if we are going to nationalize those reserves.

[1776Forever]

4. I agree - I heard the CEO of Shell say that it would be on Ed Schultz Show but it needs to be law!

Reuters reported this:

Government set to unveil offshore drilling plan
Tom Doggett
WASHINGTON
Mon Mar 29, 2010

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62T06520100330

The plan could pave the way for a significant new domestic source of energy, helping to reduce U.S. dependence on oil imports and boost supplies of natural gas used to displace coal in power plants as the country works to reduce emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gases.

.....

You're right we need to hold them to it!

[grantcart]

5. The exploration is only one part of a larger change in policies

For example issuing tough gas mileage standards and taking the single largest step in reducing CO2 omissions. - Just a start but if it takes agreeing to the hypothetical drilling a decade from now I would take it (although drilling around the more fragile Alaska ecosystem always makes me nervous).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8067959

[Go2Peace]

8. What is with all the EXCUSES? "I prefer not to beat my child, but....."

probably he will turn out ok in the end so a little whip to his ass on occassion is ok... Same argument, maybe a little less dramatic.

[grantcart]

14. So you would prefer a strategy that fails to reduce CO2 but would

restrict any further offshore drilling despite the fact that hundreds of other platrforms are going up outside the territorial control of the US?

[Go2Peace]

15. Obviously people are not aware of the state nor importance of our oceans

I could care less what "other countries" are doing. We can't control them. We are dramatically loosing species, our coral beds are down 25% and we will lose 75% by the end of the century. And allowing these areas to be opened does NOTHING to solve our energy problems...

I don't know what else I can say. This is simply bad policy when measured in terms of science.

[zulchzulu]

10. Oil and natural gas companies have been sitting on approved land leases for years and not drilling

That's probably the most integral part of all this. People are either unaware of it or don't want to know about it.

Anyone with half a neuron in their brain knows that Obama is playing the Republicans' hand on "Drill Baby Drill" knowing that the limited drilling that has been brought out there will in fact not even lead to actual drilling.

The Land Lease Sale 220 off the Virginia coast is a perfect example where it will takes years to find the best places to start drilling and then have to go through years getting EIS (Environmental Impact Studies) approved and voted on. Plus the Navy and NASA are against drilling off the Virginia coast.

Add that millions of acres of seabed-based land leases have been available to the oil and natural gas industry for decades and only a fraction of those leases have been implemented shows that all the knee-jerking hullabaloo about ruining beaches FROM offshore drilling is petty nonsense.

Beaches are getting polluted from offshore waste dumping.

[1776Forever]

12. Here is a good reference to offshore drilling - it is hard to understand what are the facts.

http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2009/12/10/false-solution-offshore-oil-drilling/

[TheKentuckian]

13. We know this. I made the point constantly during the election in 08

However, the playing their hand stuff has about no chance of working. We try it all the time and they simply move the goalposts or flat out bullshit and get away clean.

[yowzayowzayowza]

11. Also....

Having camped on Texas beaches many months in the past 25 years, I've seen many rigs come and go both on and off shore. Stuff within 5 miles of shore can be really ugly and even noisy; beyond that they're mostly just blobs on the horizon. There was a time when a trip would consume multiple pairs of flip-flops due to the copious tar balls, but that was a very long time ago. The latest drilling behind the sand dunes has scarred no more than a beach house parking lot. The equipment running up and down the beach is escorted by observers who coordinate with the turtle patrol.

It is in the interest of the oil cos to handle their product with care for manifold reasons. Spills are expensive, wasteful and really bad PR. The technology of todays oil industry is far from the excesses of Spindletop and 'Giant'.

Fact of the matter is this domestic oil supply cannot begin to fulfill our future energy requirements. The drilling approval forces advancement of the energy policy discussion beyond the meme that we can domestically "Drill, baby, Drill" to get there.