Obama’s Illogical Approach to Offshore Drilling

In terms of environmental impact, the expansion of offshore drilling will provide the U.S. with new sources of fossil fuels, which, when burned, are a major cause of global climate change. If the amount of energy produced from oil and natural gas increases, there will be less of an incentive to develop clean, renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power. In addition, the plan would lead to an increased potential of accidents from offshore drilling, such as oil spills and leaks, which have adverse effects on marine environments. Obama’s plan would bar drilling in some environmentally sensitive areas, such as Bristol Bay in Alaska, but other areas would be susceptible to these environmental risks.

From an economic perspective, the predicted amount of oil discovered in these areas would have a very minimal effect on gas prices. The U.S. Energy Administration reported last year that fully opening the federal outer continental shelf to drilling as opposed to restricting drilling there would not affect U.S. gas prices by 2020, and would make them only three cents per gallon lower by 2030. In addition, it is estimated that oil companies have 34 billion barrels of undiscovered, undeveloped oil available n the lower 48 states. Therefore, opening new areas to drilling would have a very minimal economic effect.

Some have argued that Obama’s announcement was a political tactic to show Republicans that he is willing to compromise on the cap and trade bill, which the Senate will begin to debate in the next few weeks. If this was his intention, Obama’s strategy failed miserably. By appeasing to Republicans before negotiations on the bill have begun, Obama has taken an important bargaining chip off the table. He has moved the starting point of these negotiations to the right, and future compromises will therefore have to move even further to the right. If Obama had laid out demands for investments in renewable energy and green jobs, and then later used the expansion of offshore drilling as a bargaining chip to make sure these demands were met, this would be a much better strategy. There is nothing in recent history to suggest that Republicans will be willing to make concessions on other issues as a result of this plan. Just look at the recent health care debate, where Republican struck down every Democratic proposal despite the Democrats best efforts to compromise. Many conservatives are already claiming that Obama’s offshore drilling plan should increase the areas available for drilling even more.

Overall, Obama’s plan is not a sound environmental or economic approach to reducing our dependence of fossil fuels or our energy prices. It is also not a logical political strategy, given that further compromises will have to be made with moderates and conservatives as the Senate debates cap and trade. Instead of announcing this controversial policy now, Obama should have laid out ambitious goals for renewable energy development, and, if necessary, used offshore drilling expansion as a bargaining chip to achieve these goals in the future.