Green Driving Tips

Bob Morrison
My View

From 1965 to 1970, I was a systems engineer for the Apollo moon project. In order to complete the project, we had to get systems from different parts of the United States. For example, from Washington state and Alabama we obtained the boosters, from California we obtained the spacecraft, from Wisconsin we obtained the guidance system, and from New England we obtained the lunar landing module. For a successful launch and moon mission, all these systems had to be simultaneously functionally and operational.

A similar approach is the answer to our energy crisis. We have large reserve of oil in Alaska, in the Bekken Formation (in Montana and North Dakota) and off the shore of the Gulf of Mexico, to mention a few of the known sources. In addition, we have alternatives such as coal, natural gas, hydro, biofuels, wind, solar, hydrogen and nuclear.

To solve our energy crisis, we need to do a systems engineering approach, as we did with Apollo, and develop all of these resources and systems. Unlike the Apollo moon project, which depended on all systems coming together and functioning simultaneously, the systems needed to solve our energy crisis can come into play at different times.

The alternative sources of energy are at mixed stages of development. The use of wind for electric energy is certainly not new. Windmills were used by ranchers and farmers in the Midwest during the ’30s and ’40s to provide electricity to their homes.

Fuel cells are also not a new source of energy; they powered the Apollo space modules.

Bioenergy shows promise. Its largest drawback is the cost it takes to produce it, but research is under way to improve that process.

Unfortunately, these alternatives are not going to be developed and widely implemented overnight. Whether it is in our best interest or not, at present we are an oil-dependent nation. We need a shorter-term solution while also working on longer-term solutions.

Off the coast of Panama City exists a large natural gas reserve called the Destin Dome. Because much of the research for this area has already been done, harvesting of this natural gas could begin within a year or two of the politicians’ giving the OK.

The governor of Alaska herself is an advocate of both offshore and interior drilling within her state (she also has an 84-percent approval rating). In addition to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, huge sources of crude oil exist in such areas as the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea. These areas could be accessed even sooner than ANWR if Congress would give permission.

A major concern of offshore oil drilling has been environmental safety. After the “drilling blowout” in California’s Santa Barbara channel in 1969, the industry began to look closely at its emergency shut-off technology. The result was much improved sub-surface safety valves, which were instrumental in preventing spills during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

During a ground checkout during Apollo, a fire resulted in the loss of three astronauts. That didn’t stop the program. New checkout procedures were implemented, and there were no further accidents, but there were successful moon landings and walks. The same could be true about offshore drilling. Let’s move on as we did with the Apollo project and make the U.S. energy secure in both the near and the far future.

Alaska has a budget surplus, much of which can be attributed to the revenue it receives from oil leases and royalties. Florida is in a budget crunch but opted out of offshore lease sales in the Gulf that brought in revenues of over $2.4 billion, of which 37.5 percent was this was directed back into the participating States. Alaska also has legislation mandating that 50 percent of lease and royalties revenues go toward development of “green” energies.

Florida’s promising to reduce energy costs but not allowing drilling is like promising hungry people food but never tilling the fertile soil in one’s domain.

It’s time for Florida Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and many members of the Florida congressional delegation to re-evaluate their positions on offshore drilling and look at the economic benefits and jobs that would be gained. Florida stands to be hurt far more by tourists staying closer to home because of high gas prices than by the establishment of oil drilling, which has had a near spotless record for the last 30-plus years.

I think that they would find that Sen. Bill Nelson’s statement that drilling is “sheer stupidity” is off base and not in the best interest of Florida or a systems engineering objective for the nation trying to become energy secure.