Michael Swickard
Opponents of the New Mexico oil industry would have you believe that life in New Mexico hangs by a thread due to the potential disasters tied to oil exploration, development and production. Further, they insist that state government must intensify the rules on drilling or the water, air and land of New Mexico will be ruined for generations. Not true.
There was a time when New Mexico was very contaminated, and it has taken decades for that terrible pollution to abate. Many New Mexicans were sickened by this pollution and the human damage remains to this day. This pollution was not by oil; rather, it was plutonium. No one seems to remember this.
The first atomic explosion was a test of an implosion-design plutonium device. It was set off at Trinity Site roughly between Socorro and Carrizozo on July 16, 1945. There was one aspect that surprised scientists. The explosion stirred the landscape below the 100 feet tower and then spewed this toxic material into the atmosphere while subsequent rains flushed the fallout down the Tularosa Basin, Pecos and the Rio Grande Valleys. The plutonium acted upon generations of unknowing New Mexicans.
When the United States dropped the two devices on Japan it used an “air-burst” method at about 2,000 feet to keep from really contaminating these areas. While that helped Japan, it was not much help to already contaminated New Mexico.
Of interest: There were three nuclear devices over two years at the Trinity Site and only two of them exploded. One device underground did not explode and was dubbed Sleeping Beauty. The unexploded nuclear device was finally dug up in 1967 and removed.
The triggering device used car batteries with a life of seven years, so the scientists waited 21 years to declare the batteries really dead. Of course, visitors to Trinity Site in the 1950s and 60s did not know about Sleeping Beauty.
The federal response to concerns about nuclear contamination and danger was, “We beat the Japanese, what do you want?” I would like to know if it was worth making New Mexicans sick.
An attempt to impose political agendas
The current phobia about oil contamination pales in comparison to our plutonium contamination. Any problem with oil can be dealt with no lasting effect. But we must understand the notion of oil contamination for what it is: an attempt to impose political agendas upon New Mexico.
The environmental lobby is foremost concerned with an agenda that places the environment ahead of everything else in New Mexico. Know this: For truly pristine air, water and land the nation must stop using all oil products. The environmentalists may say, “Good riddance.” What about New Mexico’s school children? They are dependent upon the revenue that oil and gas brings to our state.
So how much pollution is acceptable if zero tolerance removes the funding for all New Mexico public schools? Right now the state is in a flutter due to too much spending and not enough resources. Public school teachers are being fired. All over New Mexico in potential oil development areas and especially in places like the Otero Mesa we must wonder how attractive is the political ideal of no pollution if generations of New Mexico school children get a lesser education.
Again, the money for the schools comes from the oil industry, which is being hammered by the environmental lobby. New Mexicans cannot have it both ways – plenty of money from the oil industry to fund the schools and no pollution.
A good example is the new “pit rule,” which oil people say makes New Mexico less competitive. Environmentalists say it protects New Mexico from pollution, but it would seem that the way it protects is it sends many drillers to other states instead of New Mexico. A pristine Otero Mesa provides no financial resource for the schools. Which is more important: schools or the Otero Mesa?
The decision to develop an oil field is made on four factors: the current and projected value of crude oil; the projected amount and quality of the crude oil in that field; the cost of developing, drilling and bringing into production the wells; and, finally, the amount of hassle it takes to do this business.
Example: More rigs will start when the price of crude oil reaches $100 a barrel and no rigs will even pump if it falls below $10 a barrel. More to the point: If the ease and cost of drilling is better in one state, it will attract more drillers. The drillers are not married to New Mexico. There are many other places for them to go, but New Mexico is tied to oil and gas to fund its public schools.
The rigs may just go somewhere else and New Mexico would be the poorer.
Worrying about real contamination
Any contamination by the oil industry must be weighed with the benefits both financial and by the use of oil. In theory at least, we can do away with all of the oil contamination from cars, trucks, roads, roof repairs, etc. Without any oil we are confronted with not having the value of paved roads, inexpensive mobility along with goods and services brought to New Mexico, not to mention heating/cooling our houses.
On this 65th anniversary of the contamination of New Mexico by plutonium, maybe we should worry about real contamination rather than political anti-business environmental ideals. What is best for our children?
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.
Swickard bio │ Archives │ Feed