Safe to Wait

There will be considerable debate in the U.S. Senate soon over the level of oil imports. But once the rhetoric is over, senators can vote with a clear conscience for a one-year moratorium on oil exploration and production in the outer continental shelf, including the entire California coast.

Imports are of concern. The United States does need to be more self-sufficient in energy. But a year’s delay in the offshore oil-leasing program will have no significant effect on long-term U.S. energy security.

The House-approved moratorium obviously comes in reaction to the Exxon Valdez accident in Alaska in March and more recent tanker spills in the East. Critics claim the legislation is overkill, since offshore oil production does not necessarily lead to tanker spills. But oil in the water is oil in the water. The year’s delay may finally force Congress and the Administration to honestly weigh the benefits of offshore oil production against the liabilities within the context of a real energy policy.

The postponement may give the President’s offshore oil task force more latitude in assessing the amount of available oil along the California and Alaskan coasts against the environmental risks. There will be more time to consider replacing dirty oil with cleaner-burning natural gas. Officials can factor in the oil savings from the use of alternative fuels in autos, as proposed in the President’s amendments to the Clean Air Act.

A year’s thoughtful delay is nothing compared with the non-achievement of James G. Watt and successive secretaries of the interior the past eight years. They had gloated that Jimmy Carter’s energy program never produced a drop of oil. But for all of Watt & Co.’s zeal to accelerate and expand the offshore oil program, while brushing aside legitimate environmental complaints, they didn’t produce any more oil, either.