The pictures of oil from the BP gusher reaching the shores of Louisiana tear at my heart. But the images haven't changed my mind about offshore oil exploration. I'm still a "Drill, baby, drill" guy.
I've previously written about the need to do a full cost accounting of alternative energy such as solar, wind and biomass. Now it's time to apply the same standard to oil. As with every other source of energy, I want to know the true cost of oil exploration and extraction, and that includes the cost of safety measures to prevent catastrophic blowouts.
Given the economic disaster that's bound to hit the Gulf Coast, the true cost of deepwater drilling is about to go up dramatically, or at least it should.
Ultimately, British Petroleum - and not the U.S. taxpayer - should bear the full cost of its multi-month oil spill. To that end, President Barack Obama should begin assembling economists, conservationists and Gulf Coast public officials to start the accounting.
Perhaps even more important, the president needs to establish an independent inspection team to immediately examine the other 61 deepwater oil platforms (beyond 200 meters) in the Gulf of Mexico, 24 of which drill at depths in excess of 1,000 meters. The Minerals Management Service (MMS) conducted an inspection in early May. Its review turned up only minor issues, but given allegations that the agency is too cozy with the oil and gas industry, hard-nosed safety experts and engineers should double-check that conclusion.
Once the well is capped and environmental and economic restoration has begun, the president should establish an independent panel of scientists and engineers to determine the safety measures that need to be in place as offshore exploration drills deeper into the ocean depths. Much of the research work has been done, but mostly it collects dust at MMS and other government agencies. It's time to dust off the studies and get the recommendations in place.
Frankly I've been surprised at how unprepared BP and the Interior Department have been in fighting the blowout from the Deepwater Horizon rig. Never again should an oil company have to make up solutions (such as shooting golf balls into the wellhead) as it goes along to address a catastrophic failure that could go on for months.
Hindsight is 20/20, but one obvious solution that needs to be explored is requiring relief wells to be in place for deepwater platforms. Of course, the industry will scream that building a relief well could double the cost of exploration. But we're about to learn that the cost of not having a relief well could be far greater.
The last thing we need is political exploitation of this disaster. Fine BP according to the laws on the books. Prosecute its management if negligence is found. But the spill should not be used as a phony-baloney rush for more tax funds to develop wind, solar, biofuels and other forms of inefficient energy.
Those fuels will become prevalent when it becomes economically feasible for them to be so. Infusing more tax funds only delays the day when green energy can compete economically with carbon-based fuels.
Instead of using the Horizon disaster to call for the end of offshore oil exploration or for more subsidies for green energy, environmentalists would be more effective and win more friends by calling for increased safety measures for offshore drilling, regardless of the depth. Those increased costs should be rightfully shouldered by oil company shareholders and consumers, particularly at the pump.
Safety - not global warming - could be the game-changing factor that reduces the cost differential that could unleash private investment and demand into alternative energy.
For example, with gasoline at $3 a gallon, I can afford to look at hybrid vehicles as the ugly, boxy cars they are. At $6 a gallon, however, the 40 miles-per-gallon that a hybrid can deliver is going to look awfully good in my driveway, as long as that extra $3 goes toward safety measures that will prevent another Deepwater Horizon disaster.
