In our view: Drilling Delirium

Many of America’s most crucial issues become unnecessarily mired in false dichotomies. Either you’re for the war, or you’re for the terrorists. Either you understand global warming, or you’re dangerously ignorant. These, though, are not the philosophies of the problem solvers.

As we have editorialized before, an artificial polarization has emerged on the subject of offshore drilling. One side is falsely portrayed as wanting to drill everywhere, all the time, as if to ignore any and all environmental concerns. But knowledgeable offshore-drilling advocates really aren’t that foolish or narrow-minded.

The other side is falsely portrayed as wanting no drilling anywhere offshore, at any time, as if to ignore the fact that almost 4,000 offshore platforms extract more than 1 million barrels of oil a day from beneath the Gulf of Mexico. But the smartest leaders of this group really aren’t that foolish or narrow-minded, either.

A rational perspective reveals the truth. Offshore drilling is vital (providing about one-fourth of U.S. oil production). Its measured expansion could be a part of America’s short-term energy plan. But that expansion will have negligible effect on supply or price, and there are many more powerful ways to move our country down the road to energy independence and a proper stewardship of the environment.

On Wednesday a quarter-century ban on drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific costs is scheduled to expire, barring unforeseen last-minute developments. Of course, this issue is of great concern to Washington state and Oregon, where shorelines and beaches are revered.

Associated Press writer Josef Hebert described the moratorium expiration as “a striking defeat” for Democrats, “giving Republicans a rare victory on energy policy six weeks before the election.” But Hebert also reported the belief of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that lifting the ban won’t produce any more oil for seven to 10 years. And no one seems to think lifting the ban will have any effect on gas prices anytime soon.

Further diminishing the alarm is the expectation that a post-election Congress will revisit this issue next year. And when it does, the false dichotomies should be set aside.

One provision that must exist in any new energy policy is the right of individual states to make their own decisions. We doubt if the people of Washington state or Oregon would ever approve any type of drilling off their coasts. Conventional wisdom seems wisely anchored against that precedent.

But U.S. Rep. Brian Baird, D-Vancouver, is not as confident as we are. He keeps hearing from more and more people who believe offshore drilling is a key part of the solution. “Unfortunately, as gas prices soar, more people fall for the ‘drill here, drill now, save money’ line, but there are a hundred other better ways to achieve our energy goals,” Baird said.

In addition to the need for states to make their own offshore-drilling decisions, a new comprehensive energy policy should preserve the belief that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) must remain off-limits to drilling. There are too many other places where oil and gas can be produced, using many types of new technologies. Perhaps with Wednesday’s expiration of the moratorium will come a cooling off period, and after that, bumper-sticker mind sets and partisan yammering will yield to science, states’ rights and real progress toward alternative energy sources and reducing consumption.