Today, oil spills are one of the common and unfortunate disasters that plague the earth’s waters. Oil spills spread and wreak havoc by ruining delicate ecosystems. Not only are these oil spills difficult to contain and eliminate but the damage it does is also hard, if not harder, to repair. Hence, Obama’s plan of expanding off-shore oil drilling is one that needs careful consideration, where there must be proper control of the cons. Obama has a grand scheme of assuring national and economic security by means of energy independence in the form of oil.
However, his means of attaining said oil would be through off-shore drilling which makes the risk of oil spills all the greater. Anticipating the unfavorable view that people would have on his plans, Obama raised points to consider. Obama is targeting the mid- and south Atlantic Ocean area as well as that of the Gulf of Mexico in hopes of protecting tourism and environment. He even proposed that Bristol Bay be protected where drill plans during Bush’s reign already earned much rage from environmentalists.
Obama wishes that people would divert their attention from the means and just focus on its end, as he envisioned the US economy to shift from fossil fuel and imported oil to using the country’s own fuel along with clean energy. Unfortunately, the problem with Obama’s vision is that not everyone agrees to the end justifying the means. While energy executives push for the vision as prices rise in the market, environmentalists see the definite risk of oil spills as unacceptable.
To further his side, Obama chose to speak in front of an aircraft called the “Green Hornet” that would run on a mix of fuels that was half-biomass and could be the first plane to travel faster than the speed of sound. Obama claims that military leaders are seeking progress in alternative fuels not only for environmental protection but for purposes of national security as well. Obama concludes the negatively viewed concept by saying that the decision he has made was tough.
He explains that the reality is that with the energy needs, economic growth, job demands and need to maintain the competitive level of the nation’s businesses cannot be supported with renewable energy alone. He claims that these aspirations require not only the new renewable energy but traditional sources of it as well. With the whole issue, it is important to consider three things, the pros, the cons, and whether the cons are risks worth taking. Truly, Obama’s vision definitely has good intentions.
As mentioned, it targets to meet energy needs, to support economic growth, address job demands and the demands of maintaining competitive business. He also thought of the location well where tourism would not be compromised and, he claims, that the environment would be protected. However, to all those points, environmentalists have one answer – the effects of oil spills, a con that is not worth risking. A single quart of oil could pollute up to 150,000 gallons of water.
It could harm not only the living creatures near the water but it could poison animals near the water as well. It does not only kill but it also affects the whole food chain on several levels. The worst part is that oil spills are difficult to isolate and clean. Obama’s vision is definitely bright. His dreams and goals for the nation definitely travel towards betterment for the overall standard of living of the US. However, the biggest problem is his vehicle towards his goals.
While his goals could definitely further members of the nation, nature could very well be at the losing end and when nature is at the losing end with his vehicle towards his goal for the nation. And unfortunately, when nature loses, so does everyone else. Works Cited: • Obama announces plans to expand off-shore oil drilling, calls it necessary. LA Times. Web. 6 May 2010 • Oil Spills. Air & Waste Management Association. 1 May 2000. Web. 6 May 2010