Share

Bush Lifts Presidential Ban on Offshore Oil Drilling

by: Elana Schor  |  The Guardian UK

photo
2007 photo of an oil-drilling platform in Rio de Janeiro. President Bush just announced his plans to lift a US executive ban on offshore drilling.
(Photo: AP)

    George Bush has today lifted a presidential ban on oil drilling off American coastlines that was first signed by his father - a symbolic move aimed at pressuring Congress into lifting its own similar ban.

    Skyrocketing gas prices in the US have set off feverish political debates over offshore drilling, which was banned by Congress in 1982 and by former president George HW Bush in 1990.

    Most Democrats point out that drilling off the coast of Florida, California, and other states would have a negligible effect on the nation's current fuel crisis but a potentially devastating effect on tourism as well as the environment.

    Bill Nelson, Florida's Democratic senator, noted that US oil companies already control large tracts of land in the Gulf of Mexico where they have not yet begun testing for future drilling.

    "The fact is, the industry should be sinking wells in areas already under lease, before demanding control of millions of new acres or destroying long-protected lands," Nelson said in a statement.

    "Clearly, Americans are being gouged. But we cannot allow the administration to take advantage of the situation to give away the store before the president leaves office."

    Yet Bush and his fellow Republicans, including presidential hopeful John McCain, argue that the absence of short-term relief from high gas prices is no reason not to begin an offshore drilling process that would take years to bear fruit.

    Bush has argued that one of the reasons gas prices are climbing is that offshore areas remain off-limits to drilling. His administration claims that as many as 18bn barrels of oil could eventually be harvested from US coastal areas.

    The 26-year-old congressional drilling ban remains valid despite Bush's move, and Democratic leaders have shown little interest in lifting it even as they discuss a possible deal with Republicans on energy.

    Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, in fact, was one of the first to criticise the administration's continued pursuit of more domestic drilling.

    "If offshore drilling would provide short-term relief at the pump or a long-term strategy for energy independence, it would be worthy of our consideration, regardless of the risks," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement.

    "But most experts, even within the Bush administration, concede it would do neither. It would merely prolong the failed energy policies we have seen from Washington for 30 years."

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

  

»


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

The ruse to divert attention

The ruse to divert attention from their failed administration continues, even while most conservatives agree that offshore drilling will do nothing to help America's energy problems. It is an old solution to a different problem that makes no sense in today's world. First we need cleaner energy and offshore drilling will pollute our coastlines and do very little to help us become energy independent. You can also be sure that when the next spill occurs, and it will, the supreme court will squash any punitive damages to the oil companies. What we need is huge investments in clean technology: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydrogen. These will eventually wean us off foreign oil if they are given a chance. That will not happen until King of Oil George Bush is removed from office and replaced by Barack Obama who has promised an immediate 150 billion investment in clean energy. Thanks to the Brits from the Guardian who are right on!

Political expedience and the

Political expedience and the illusion of a lowered price for liquid fuels aside, we need to immediately begin off-shore exploration because the time frame from discovery to production is on the order of ten years. By 2018 the world petroleum situation will have worsened considerably and the United States will be well beyond driving Ferrari's', weekend trips to Cabo San Lucas, and keeping Disney World open. The focus will be fueling a rejuvenated national rail-transit system, keeping the mid-west and northeast adequately fueled with heating oil in the winter, and sufficient feedstock for industries that produced photo-voltaic panels and large windmill generators.

This would be great if gas

This would be great if gas prices were high due to lack of supply, but they aren't. Gas prices are high because the only currency with which crude oil can be bought, the U.S. Dollar, is on its way to toilet paper status. And what is the Fed doing about inflation? Creating trillions of dollars out of thin air to bail out banks. Furthermore we aren't running our of oil any more than we are running out of oxygen. Peak Oil is a fraud, and so is this offshore drilling ruse.

I respectfully disagree that

I respectfully disagree that offshore drilling is needed. A few extra billion barrels of oil may sound like a lot, but it will only further delay the inevitable while destroying our coastlines. We have already done far too much damage to our planet. In fact, I think that the damage done to the planet is the main reason to discontinue the use of fossil fuels. Had we been focusing tightly on this for the past 30 years, we'd have made huge progress. If we focus tightly now, we'll be in much better shape in ten years.

18 billion barrels of oil at

18 billion barrels of oil at current usage rates (20 million bbl/day) is under 2 1/2 years worth of oil. This for diverting massive amounts of capital and resources, and putting our coasts at great risk of serious environmental damage. Prince William Sound has not remotely recovered from the Exxon Valdez spill, with new damage being discovered each year. Far better to invest in new, clean technologies immediately. The time is now, after Congress passes a strong excess profits tax that diverts capital to development of wind, solar, tidal, algae-based oil, hydrogen, whatever works at the appropriate scale. Most likely several technologies will work in different regions, and for different purposes. Solar PV in the Southwest, wind in the central plains, tidal on the coasts, hydrogen and biofuel in between. This is a current crisis and we should be treating it like one. We should have begun this process YEARS ago, say, 1978? Oil companies bear significant responsibility, and they can significantly contribute to getting us out of this mess if they would just get moving. It needs to start happening YESTERDAY. But there's no rush when you're making $160 billion in profit every year, and that's why Congress must step in if Big Oil (and Big Auto) won't do it themselves.