| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

scott unit II rough draft

Page history last edited by PBworks 15 years, 4 months ago

Scott Kale Unit II Rough Draft

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is your thesis? How did this particular argument come about? This essay will discuss the debate on offshore drilling, specifically off of Florida's coast. I will provide views from both sides of the debate and formulate my opinion on the issue. I will also discuss political views locally, as well as nationally, long-term and short-term effects, alternative energy resources, and potential dangers of offshore drilling. I was originally going to write about the current financial crisis but, because of the number of my peers already tackling that issue, I decided to write about Florida's offshore drilling controversy because I wanted to learn more about that issue.

 

 

Who's your audience and what techniques do you use to make your writing speak to their concerns and interests? In my essay, I include views from both sides of the debate, in order to keep readers open-minded and concentrated specifically on Florida's offshore drilling to make my essay more informative to Floridians.

 

 

Upon reviewing your completed composition (and process), what aspect of your work (or it's process) most surprised you? I was surprised by the number of times I flip-flopped in my mind on whether I was for or against offshore drilling. When I started this process, I was definately against it, but as I did more research, I found pros and cons of both points of view.

 

 

Did you learn anything new while growing your composition? Explain. I learned about the physiological dangers that oil exploration and production has on wildlife; when I started, I knew that oil pollution was harmful, but in my essay, I discuss what the toxins physically do to fish, birds, seals, and other marine life. I also learned about oil spill clean-up methods.

 

 

When you use secondary sources, do those sources contribute to ethos, logos, or pathos appeals?

My essay has information from descriptive studies by professionals in the field. I am using the information they concluded to argue my point.

 

When considering peer feedback as you revised your rough draft, which advice/suggestion/question/criticism/edit was most useful/helpful?

 

On your final version, where would you like to see the most feedback and attention from graders?

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Got Oil?”

 

 

 

“Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy.” This quote is from anonymous drillers that Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859. One hundred and fifty years later, oil drillers are thinking the same thing. but for different reasons Although environmentalists have been pushing for alternative energy production for decades, rising gas prices are what finally brought the energy crisis to mainstream America’s attention. Now that Americans are feeling the pressure of soaring gas prices, finally the seriousness of the energy crisis is being recognized. There is no question that we must reduce America’s dependency on foreign oil. But there is a question on how to best accomplish this. There are two opposing views on offshore drilling. Very basically, one sideis concerned about the environmental damage that will result from drilling activities and accidents (such as oil spills). As the other side is concerned about the estimated 15-16 billion barrels of oil that is unavailable for development because of the moratorium (which they feel would ease the pricing pressures at the gas pump). Of course there is a lot more to both views than just that.

 

But first, a little background information is needed. In 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed an executive order as a response to concerns for preserving the coastal environment, recognizing offshore drilling as an environmental threat. The 1990 directive was an expansion of Congress’ 1982 moratorium, which protected coastal areas of California from oil and gas production. Now, nearly all of the North Atlantic coasts, California, Washington, Oregon, New England, and the eastern Gulf of Mexico (coast of Southwest Florida) are protected until June 2012. Now, let’s start with the side that wants to drill. The moratorium has made a large part of future natural gas and oil supplies unavailable. In the US, the estimated figure of recoverable resources is 75 billion barrels of oil, of which it is estimated that 21% is within the moratorium protected areas. This means 15.75 billion barrels of oil, if estimates are correct. To narrow our discussion down to the Florida debate, 37 billion barrels of oil are estimated to be recoverable in the Gulf of Mexico, of which 7% are estimated to be within the protected area. That is only 2.59 billion barrels of oil. People on this side of the debate are for drilling if it would help reduce gas prices. Graph?

 

The positive effects of offshore drilling include reaping royalties for the state of Florida of up to 7 billion dollars per year for at least the next ten years, and possibly up to forty-two years, according to Rick Tyler, a political activist and spokesman for Newt Gingrich. On the other hand, if there ever was an oil spill disaster, it would cost more than 7 billion dollars to clean up and contain the contaminated area.

 

There is a sizable risk to drilling, and a potential for catastrophic damages, which is sparking the big debate over offshore drilling. Annually, the US can produce 1.8 billion barrels of oil. Americans consume 19.6 million barrels of oil a day, which is 25% of the worlds total consumption. 60% of our oil supply is currently being imported from other countries because our consumption is more than production. The Department of Interior estimates that as much as 19 billion barrels of oil remain untapped in coastal waters that are currently off limits for oil exploration. Some local businesses are pushing for offshore drilling. For example, David Mattiford, a charter fisherman in Destin, FL said that he welcomes oil companies to the area because the $1,200 needed to fill up the tank in his charter boat is a figure that he cannot continue to pay. He also stated, “Oil platforms attract schools of fish and oil spills are easily contained with today’s technology.”

 

Oil spills are the result of human activity that release liquid petroleum hydrocarbon into the environment; however, oil can also be released into the environment from natural geologic seeps on the sea floor. Researchers at Texas A&M University state that gas and oil are coming back into the known reservoirs very quickly, in terms of geologic time. The influx of new gas, and even some oil, has been traceable in as little as three to ten years, which is very different from what research had previously showed. In the past, oil fields were not thought to be able to refill; there was a generally accepted assumption that oil formed in place, rather than far below. Harry Roberts, a marine geologist at Louisiana State University, explained, "petroleum geologists don't accept it as a general phenomenon because it doesn't happen in most reservoirs". In fact, Roberts pointed out that natural seepage in places like the Gulf of Mexico "far exceeds anything that gets spilled" by oil tankers.

 

The analysis of ancient oil in the Gulf of Mexico (that appears to be coming up from somewhere deep below) actually implies that this flow of new oil is from deeper, hotter formations. This new oil is not a result of a lateral inflow from the old deposits surrounding existing oil fields, as previously believed. In fact, analysis of this new oil's chemical composition indicates that it is being driven upward and that it is being altered by highly pressurized gases squeezing up from below.

 

The other side that is against drilling recognizes that new offshore oil development will not reduce gas prices anytime soon. The negative consequences of offshore drilling threaten the environment, wildlife, and local businesses. Enid Sisskin, who is an environmentalist from the Gulf Coast Environment Defense, says, “If we want to be energy independent we need to be weaning ourselves off of oil, not continuing our dependence on them by continuing to drill.” An oil rig has the potential to contaminate the water with periodic oil spills, and also puts the wildlife in danger. When there is an oil spill, birds get covered in oil; this not only affects their body temperature but also makes them less buoyant in the water, impairs their ability to fly, thus making them more vulnerable to their predators. Oil can also cause kidney or liver failure; most birds affected by oil spills die shortly after unless medical attention is given. Similar to the birds, seals that are covered in oil from spills have a high chance of getting hypothermia and dying because of the effects that oil has on maintaining body temperature. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita damaged over 100 drilling rigs and over 450 pipelines. The Minerals Management Service estimates that over one million gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico from both hurricanes and the Coast Guard estimates that 9 million gallons of oil spilled from both onshore and offshore drilling.

 

Bringing the drilling debate to Florida, another dimension is added to both arguments—tourism. Tourism is Florida’s main industry. An oil spill disaster off of Florida's coasts would put local beaches as well as local eco-tourism businesses in danger. A catastrophic oil spill could affect the tourism industry that the state relies on for revenue and poses potential damage to nearly 850 miles of Florida's coastline. Florida accumulates 90 to 100 million dollars per day in tourism. The potential for damage is from more than just oil spills. There are also threats to wildlife, potentially lost wetlands, and of course, drilling pollution. There are a lot of potential losses not only for Florida residents, but also for animal and marine wildlife, if an oil spill were to occur. "I guess you would say I'm fairly close-minded," DT Minich, the head of tourism in the St. Petersburg/Clearwater area, said in reference to drilling off of the western coast of Florida. He also states, "I just don't see that there's a reward. There's no balance between risk and rewards. Tourism is the No. 1 driver of our economy — not oil — and we just can't take that risk."

 

In addition, offshore drilling is not doing anything to reduce our dependency on foreign oil; all it would do is buy us a little more time before we need provide alternative sources of energy. In terms of political views locally, Florida politicians have traditionally opposed offshore drilling in the past, but Governor Charlie Crist recently changed his mind in support of offshore drilling. There is speculation that he changed his mind because he was a top contender for the role of John McCain's vice-presidential running mate. Nationally, Congress just last month allowed a twenty-six year old moratorium that banned drilling off of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to expire. However, Florida’s western coast remains off limits to oil drilling until the year 2022, as part of a compromise; Congress agreed to open 8.3 million acres off of Florida's panhandle for oil drilling in exchange for this no drilling zone. That was two years ago. Now, Congress is currently pushing to waive that no drilling zone.

 

The use of alternative energy is a way to reduce our demand on oil and has made its way to the top of our nation's priority list over the last couple of years. The Pickens Plan proposes the utilization of wind energy, solar energy, and natural gases to reduce our dependency on oil. The cost of building wind facilities from the Texas panhandle all the way up to North Dakota could produce 20% of the electricity for the United States at a cost of $1 trillion and a one time cost of $200 billion dollars to transmit that energy to cities and towns. It seems like a lot of money, but compare that figure to the $700 billion we spend on foreign oil every year and suddenly its not so big. Natural gas is the cleanest transportation fuel that is available today. As transportation utilizes an abundance of our oil production natural gas is cleaner and more fuel efficient. An energy bill from 2005 provides tax incentives for a number of solar and energy efficiency measures. The US government provides tax incentives for businesses and homeowners to install solar power and energy that is not used nut created on your solar panel gets sent back to FPL and you are credited for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel."

 

 

Attributed to Sheikh Rashid bin Saeed Al Maktoum, Emir of Dubai, this quote is amusingly scary but possibly realistic. With technological advancements and industrialization that has occurred since the 1800’s, our demand for oil has skyrocketed, leaving us in our current predicament. I am for offshore drilling, whether you are for or against offshore drilling, the reality is still that weaning America off of their oil needs is not going to happen overnight or even over a few years. Changing over to an alternative energy source is a process that will happen slowly. We must invest our resources into developing alternative energy supplies such as wind, solar, and natural gases, but we also need to drill in the interim because our dependency on foreign supplies makes our nation extremely vulnerable. It can take up to ten years to see any change in oil prices if we were to find an untapped resource of oil today, but we will still be taking a step closer towards energy independence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

References:

http://www.environmentflorida.org/issues/save-our-shores/stop-offshore-drilling

http://www.sierraclub.org/wildlands/coasts/ocs/florida.asp

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-02-florida-drilling_N.htm

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2008/10/3/388267.html?title=Debate+over+oil+drilling+continues+at+tourism+summit

http://www.wjhg.com/news/headlines/30192474.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill

http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ngv.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Barry Jay- I saw that you had the same problems that I had. Run on or longer, sandpaper like sentences. You and I could use some work on the flow of our essays. Other then that I liked the essay and I liked the way you incorporated pictures. Yup yup! I would just say work on your sentence and essay flow by adding some rhetorical and grammar changes.

 

 

 

Suraj J- When I read your essay, I first taught of the stock market. Oil is a traded commodity and at this moment oil is trading around 60 dollars a barrel, well off its high of 147 few months back. In other words, demand has drastically decreased and opec has had to cut production. Therefore I believe that there really is not need for offshore drilling at this moment. In a few years we might need to start this debate again. All and all, I like your essay, well formatted and it just needs to be reread for grammatical errors.

 

 

 

 

Have you heard that gas prices are expected to drop below $2 a gallon? Does this reflect futures trading?

 

As I said when we were having an open discussion about your project, I was most impressed by your use of the quotation by the Emir of Dubai. If anyone would know about the state and nature of peak oil, that would be the guy. This adds legitimacy to your argument that would silence most critics. The value of an extremely primary source can't be overstated. Some analyst could scream up and down that his studies show that the oil isn't going to run out nearly so fast but... he still could not argue with the man who has been taking it out of the ground his entire life.

 

To work off of what Suraj said, have you considered the effect of oil futures trading on the price of oil? When you say that drilling now would unlikely show an immediate change in gas prices, is it not also possible that the mere gesture of drilling would cause the oil futures to begin trading for less? The trading markets are largely influenced by the impressions of those people trading. In other words, beyond the direct effect of drilling for oil in places hence-before untapped here in the US, what is the symbolic effect of it? How would the public image of the effect of drilling impact fuel prices? I can see arguments for them either decreasing OR increasing, and would like to hear what you think.

 

- Danny

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.