Big Oil

Pablo Wegesend



Published in a July 2001 issue of the University of Hawaii's Ka Leo O Hawaii



In the last few months, very few controversial topics have been mentioned as much as the energy industry. Many are worried about the prospect of oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (also known as ANWR). Environmentalists are worried that Big Oil will pollute ANWR. Those who want drilling say that we need to reduce our dependence on OPEC. (the U.S. imports 60.8% of all the oil it uses) [source - www.api.org]

The first casualty in any war (or debate) is usually the truth. Many times, only parts of the truth are stated. While the environmentalists get riled up over drilling in ANWR, rarely do they mention the fact that the drilling will only occur in a 19 square mile area. That 19 square mile area is less than 1% of all of ANWR. 19 square miles is about the same size of Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C. (sources : John Stossel of ABC News, Sean Hannity of Fox News, www.api.org [American Petroleum Institute])

What is also ignored is that the EPA has reported that the emissions of 6 pollutants have declined 29% since 1970, and that oil spills that occureed in U.S. waters have declined 90% from 1989-1998.

While the Left claims to care about the working man, the oil industry that they demonize employs 1.4 million people in the U.S. Would the Left rather have those people unemployed so that they can use Left's favorite programs like welfare?

Another fact that is often ignored is that if the oil companies want to make a profit, they better make sure they don't spill any oil.

The oil companies know that if their oil is spilled, that means that those gallons of oil can't be sold. That means they lose money. What kind of business wants to lose money?

"Greddy Big Oil" comapnies know that their oil better be transported safely, so all that oil can be sold for a profit.

The real "greedy" oil companies have to make sure that none of their oil spills because they know that irresponsibility of their workers means lawsuits and boycotts. Lawsuits and boycotts are bad for business.

Why would any oil company plan to have oil spills if that means boycotts, lawsuits, and less profits? Despite all the hate for oil by environmentalists, oil does give power to our transportation and electricity. The oil-produced electricity allows the environmentalists to use their computers to make their websites, use the printing press to print their books, use the Xerox machines to make fliers, and use mail delivery (which are transported by planes and mini-trucks) to transport their books and brochures. Where is their grattitude for those who risk their money to drill oil? Are the environmentalists willing to live without all the convenience that oil brings? Am I wrong to ask them to practice what they preach?

Or we could do what Europe does (notice that the Left always demands the U.S do what Europe does) and use nuclear power. 80% of the power used in France is nuclear Yes, we all know Chernobyl happened, but Chernobyl wasn't a profit-making venture. Remember, that was in the Soviet Union, where profits didn't matter. They didn't have to worry about having to efficient enough, and safe enough to keep their customers satisfied. They didnt have to worry about being boycotted or sued. Hence, the disaster.

So maybe profits, capitalism, and energy aren't that bad after all.


Return to Essay Index


Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1