Beachfront drilling returns

Editorial

Less than a year after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was finally plugged, Senate President Mike Haridopolos looks to be slyly hawking beachfront drilling again.

Haridoplos, who is running for the U.S. Senate, and House Speaker Dean Cannon were among the champions of a proposal to allow drilling in state waters — three to 10 miles offshore — until the BP rig exploded, killing 11 workers and gushing 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf over three months. The tragedy ruined the economies of waterfront communities, and even Gulf resorts unaffected by the spill saw their business plummet.

Supporters quickly retreated from the drilling plan, but high gas prices this spring gave the drill-everywhere crowd another opportunity to push their case. And now Haridopolos is calling for a new "all-energy" policy. Gov. Rick Scott, similarly, wants a revised energy policy. Haridopolos says drilling in Florida waters won't be considered next session, but you can see where this is heading.

Florida does need a comprehensive energy policy, one that includes natural gas, clean coal, nuclear, alternative sources such was solar, wind, wave and biofuels and more focus on conservation.

But nearshore drilling should not be in the mix.

Most Americans favor reasonable offshore drilling, but what is being pushed in Florida is essentially beachfront drilling, which would inevitably damage the state's annual $65 billion tourism industry as well as reduce its appeal to tourists and residents.

Politicians such as Scott and Haridopolos always say they will consider drilling only if it can be made safe, but no human activity is foolproof. All drilling poses some risk, and it is necessary to take some risks if the nation is to meet its energy needs.

But Florida needs to keep risks as low as possible. Nearshore drilling is simply too unsafe for the expected return.

Despite oil industry claims, accidents happen, and not infrequently. The chances for a major disaster can never be ruled out. During the campaign to drill in Florida waters, the oil industry acted as if it were as clean as rain water and accidents were an ancient curiosity. But since 2001, there have been 858 fires and explosions in the Gulf of Mexico, according to the Minerals Management Service, and oil spills are common, though most are modest.

The Deepwater Horizon debacle has caused industry and regulatory reforms, and technology surely will continue to improve.

But drilling will never be risk-free, and the closer to shore the drilling is done, the greater the chance of devastating damage.

A spill only a few miles off the coast would allow scant time for containment or the natural processes such as evaporation, dilution and sun exposure that break down the oil's toxicity.

Nearshore drilling, particularly in the Gulf, is simply too great a threat to the sandy beaches that underpin the state's tourism industry and coastal economies.

There is little reason — other than to benefit a few select interests — to jeopardize the coast. An independent study conducted last year by the reputable Collins Center for Public Policy on behalf of the Legislature found the total estimated oil reserves in Florida would satisfy U.S. demand for less than a week and would have no "discernible impact" on gas prices or U.S. reliance on foreign oil.

Why would Floridians risk the most beautiful — and valuable — resources they have for such a modest return?

Offshore drilling should continue to be a part of the nation's energy strategy, and reasonable people can debate about what is a safe buffer for the state.

But any objective cost-benefit analysis would show that drilling very near shore would be a terrible business decision in addition to an environmental disaster.