Energy Choices In Context

The recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a painful reminder of a couple of things:
1) The three-decade old ban on offshore oil and gas drilling was put in place for precisely this reason - in fact it is eerily similar to the original catastrophe that sparked a serious movement against ocean drilling near the coast (Santa Barbara, California, 1969)
2) Reliance on oil and gas for energy inevitably means environmental damage and threats to health and safety. Not surprisingly, accidents in the Gulf of Mexico are depressingly common. Since 2001, there have been 69 offshore deaths, 1,349 injuries and 858 fires and explosions in the Gulf, according to the federal Minerals Management Service.

However, the timing of this catastrophe is especially significant for at least two reasons:
1) Only a few weeks ago on March 31, President Obama declared his support for a partial lifting of the longstanding ban on offshore drilling. The President called for new offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean from Delaware to central Florida, plus the northern waters of Alaska. He also said he wants Congress to lift a drilling ban in the oil-rich eastern Gulf of Mexico, 125 miles from Florida beaches. This was a surprising move for a Democrat, but of course, there are bigger fish to fry with the pending climate change bill yet to be taken up. Let the horse trading begin.

2) The juxtaposition of this catastrophe with the recent decision of the Department of the Interior to approve the Cape Wind project on Nantucket Sound - to be the first offshore windfarm in the U.S.

It was this latter juxtaposition on Boston.com's page that struck me - a picture of a forlorn looking man and his dog walking along a lonely beach, enjoying one last moment of calm before an impending storm of some sort. At first I thought this picture was of a resident along the Gulf Coast waiting for the inevitable oil slick to arrive. But the picture was taken on Cape Cod - no oil slick, just a bunch of windmills. The caption reads: "Bill Thys and his dog walked on Craigville Beach. Cape Wind’s 130 turbines would rise behind them to the left and stand more than 400 feet above the water."


Aside from the very misleading implication that the windmills would tower over the scene (they would actually appear about 1/4 inch above the horizon from Mr. Thys's location - see the image simulation above from the Cape Wind Environmental Impact Statement), the bigger problem with this sentiment is that the disruption of wind turbines cannot be compared to the disruption and destruction wrought by our oil-dependent energy system. Moreover, oil slicks, as it turns out, are the least of our worries.

There are a lot of decisions to be made about our energy future, and development of offshore resources is certainly one of them. Energy is THE issue of the 21st century - tied as it is to climate change, economic development, and political security. Unfortunately, some of the most insidious impacts of our energy choices will not be so spectacular, which means that they will not command attention on their own.