New Page 2
(Editor’s note: A shorter version of this commentary
appeared in the
Lansing State Journal on June 29, 2008.)
Perhaps it takes $4 a gallon gasoline to restore reason
to U.S. energy policy. President Bush has called on Congress to lift the ban on
off-shore drilling for oil and gas. Recent national polling indicates that
consumers struggling with higher costs for food and energy have shifted their
opinion — a majority now supports the development of offshore oil and gas
reserves. This change in public opinion presents an opportune time to reconsider
directional drilling for oil and natural gas under the Great Lakes, which was
prohibited by state law in 2002 and by federal law in 2005.
Forbidding directional drilling was bad energy policy
then and it’s bad energy policy now. Based on an analysis prepared by the Senate
Fiscal Agency in 2002, continuing the practice would have resulted in an
economic benefit to the state of approximately $1 billion. Adjusted for the
price of oil today, the economic benefit of tapping Michigan’s Great Lakes
reserves would be $3 billion to $4 billion.
State geologists estimate that approximately 30 wells
could be directionally drilled under the Great Lakes. Directional drilling, also
called slant drilling, is performed at an angle, allowing placement of the well
head onshore rather than on a drilling platform in the lake. While director of
the Department of Environmental Quality in 1996, I was approached by oil
companies interested in exploring for oil and gas under the Great Lakes. After
consulting with then-Gov. John Engler, I asked the Michigan Environmental
Science Board (a group of scientists mostly from universities with environmental
and natural resource expertise) to examine if directional drilling under the
Great Lakes posed any threat to natural resources.
The Board concluded: "[T]here is little to no risk of
contamination to the Great Lakes bottom or waters through releases directly
above the bottom hole portion of directionally drilled wells." The Board went on
to say: "There is, however, a small risk of contamination at the well head." The
board made recommendations on steps that could be taken to mitigate any impact
to the Great Lakes from the well head, including locating the wells at least
1,000 feet from the shoreline and implementing proper waste disposal measures.
Before the ban, eight wells had been directionally drilled under the Great Lakes
without environmental harm.
Even though environmental safeguards recommended by the
Michigan Environmental Science Board were put in place, the Michigan Legislature
still voted to ban directional drilling under the Great Lakes despite the fact
that eight wells in that category were already in operation and had created no
environmental harm. The day before the vote, I received a call from a state
senator who apologized in advance for voting for the ban. He acknowledged that
directional drilling posed no real environmental threat, but told me that it was
the right "political vote." Unfortunately, such actions are all too common among
state and federal legislators who would rather reap the short-term perceived
political benefit of appearing "green" without taking responsibility for the
long-term damage done to energy supply and jobs.
No matter how bullish one might be about alternative
energy, experts agree that we will be dependent on oil to meet our nation’s
transportation and energy needs for many years to come. Our leaders in
Washington and Lansing should encourage the responsible development of our
abundant oil and natural gas reserves by eliminating arbitrary road blocks such
as the ban on directional drilling. By doing so, they would display a sincere
attempt at meeting the nation’s energy needs while providing a much needed boost
to the state’s lagging economy. Additionally, our state leaders should reject
the worn-out argument that Michigan does not have enough untapped oil and gas to
make a difference — a reasoning that if followed ensures a permanent energy
stalemate.
#####
Russ Harding is director of the Property Rights Network and
senior environmental analyst at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a
research and educational institute headquartered in Midland, Mich. Permission
to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and
the Center are properly cited.
Post a public comment on this.
View all comments on Mackinac Center articles.
