McCain: Offshore Oil, Why Not Offshore Wind?

“Look there, friend Sancho Panza, where 30 or more monstrous giants rise up, all of whom I mean to engage in battle and slay, and with whose spoils we shall begin to make our fortunes. For this is righteous warfare, and it is God’s good service to sweep so evil a breed from off the face of the earth.”

“Look, your worship,” said Sancho. “What we see there are not giants but windmills, and what seem to be their arms are the vanes that turned by the wind make the millstone go.”

So said Sancho Panzo and Don Quixote on the plains of Montiel right prior to a quixotic attack on a windmill. It’s an appropriate analogy for the fight many  coastal inhabitants have been having against the so-called destruction of their scenic coast lines by the construction of offshore wind turbines. If John McCain gets his way those same people will have a lot more to worry about than titling at windmills. Yesterday, in front of a crowd of oil executives McCain launched his plan to end the ban on offshore drilling.

Politico has pointed out that McCain is playing with fire on an issue that will be given close attention in some very important swing states. Three-quarters of Florida’s population lives within reach of the coast. Connecticut, which is on McCain’s swing list, has been repeatedly dragged into controversy over the construction of wind turbines. The issue will also resound in other coastal states which have been considered “up for grabs” by the two campaigns: Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, New Jersey, California, Oregon and Washington State.

McCain has apparently forgotten who it was who pushed for the ban on offshore drilling. It was a common cause for all types of people, liberal and conservative, who enjoyed the beauty of their coastlines unspoiled. The issue had been brought to the forefront during Bush I because of the Exxon Valdez spill and memories of the 1969 Santa Barbara spill. The ban was signed into law by the elder Bush and saved through a veto by Clinton. Now Bush the Younger looks ready to dive behind McCain on this issue ( as if anyone thought he didn’t already want to) as well as Governor to a swing and coastal state Charlie Crist. Big risk, considering how much Floridians love their beaches.

One has to wonder why if McCain is so willing to go offshore to boost energy production, why he wouldn’t jump behind and support offshore wind production. In going after our coastlines he is already risking making tens of millions of Americans peevish;  many of whom are big money contributers. Is there really any question as to why the most controversial offshore wind farm proposals were off of Nantucket, Martha’s Vineyard and Cape Cod?

With the possibility of oil rigs being put everywhere off the coasts, maybe coastal inhabitants will long for the days when they would have accepted wind farm proposals. Between a wind turbine and an oil rig, which do you feel is uglier? There are also some real benefits to offshore wind and some real risks to oil. Oil brings jobs to a region, but because oil is an unrenewable resource, they don’t last. Also the expertise needed for offshore oil drilling is very rare to find in any one particular area, so most of the new jobs will be taken by experts brought in from other places. There is always the possibility as well, no matter how “safe” they make the platforms, of their being a major oil spill. While drilling techniques have improved since 1969 its not as simple as them being “safe enough these days that not even Hurricanes Katrina and Rita could cause significant spillage from the battered rigs off the coasts of New Orleans and Houston…” as Senator McCain stated in his speech. It isn’t as a big wind comes and knocks some stored oil barrels over the side; The act of drilling is estimated to release 9,900 gallons of drilling fluids and metal shavings into the local environment.

While offshore wind does has some detrimental effects in terms of killing coastal birds and damage to the seafloor (it also seems to have some beneficial effects for fisheries however, in that ocean trawlers dislike navigating the wind farms,  fishing techniques being harmful to seafloor habitat) it also has some very positive aspects. Offshore wind produces 5 times as much power as land-based turbines of the same size. The resource is perpetual, meaning even if workers have to be brought in from other areas to install the turbines, many will have to stay to maintain them. Finally, there is no risk of spillage along our coastlines, and it’s a localized source of electricity. This means the decommissioning of many harmful coal plants along the coast who have the added problem of having to ship in coal. The newly approved wind-farm off of Nantucket may be able to supply three-quarters of the sounds electricity, at considerable savings to the locals there.

With all this discussion of energy independence and no-carbon solutions why McCain, or Obama for that matter, hasn’t espoused offshore energy is a bit of a quandry. No matter what the bourgeoisie feel about their unspoiled coastal views its time a major political figure stepped up, took a hit, and told the American people we may have to sacrifice a little. After the last 8 years I know most environmentalists would fall down in spasms of tearful joy if a major politician espoused an environmentalist cause, and maybe offshore wind is the time, and the issue.

Little hope for McCain though, as he’s met with oil exec.’s 50 times since he started campaigning and environmental and alternative energy companies once a piece.

-Marc-