Breakthrough

By Adam Zemel, Breakthrough Generation Fellow

Deep sea wind turbines have a lot to offer:
Data shows that the wind is stronger and more consistent farther out from shore, meaning that deep sea wind farms could provide more and more constant energy than even the more typical offshore wind turbines being argued over in plans like Cape Wind

This (older) article from MIT discusses building wind farms 100 miles off shore, which shows another strength for deep sea wind: 100 miles away from the shore, farther than the human eye can see, is not anyone's backyard. There is no threat from NIMBY activists, or NIMFrontY activists, or NIMYPeriod activists. A patch of water 100 miles away from land is not in anyone's yard at all!

Newt Gingrich has been making quite a ruckus recently with his petition, "Drill here. Drill now. Pay less." (And environmentalists have been making quite a ruckus recently by wittily making the same repetitive joke, "Drill here, drill now, pay MORE!"--get it? Do you get the irony???) Gingrich is pushing hard for America to expand its offshore drilling operation. I visited American Solutions to check out the scuttlebutt about the Gingrich vision for offshore drilling. There isn't a lot in the way of substantive proof that drilling is our best option, but there is a lot of coverage of politicians talking about drilling. And, of course, there is the petition. This is the statement you sign your name on to if you sign:

"We, therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices (and diesel and other fuel prices) by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries."

You know what? That doesn't sound so bad to me. I mean, check me if I'm wrong, but I think we have pretty good proof that there is wind out at sea. That makes offshore wind a "proven energy reserve." Deep sea wind farms might not have an immediate effect on gas prices, but drilling for oil out there won't either. And, considering the fact that both off shore drilling and deep sea wind have about the same 10-year frame for return on investment of resources, it only seems prudent to explore every "American Solution" we have at our disposal. While we're out there...why not?

Which is why, if "Drill Here, Drill Now" is really about easing energy anxiety, lowering energy prices, reducing energy dependence on foreign countries and overcoming the American energy crisis, then Newt Gingrich would be open to expanding his scope and creating a "Develop Here, Develop Now" pro-offshore energy development petition that puts money into off shore drilling and deep sea wind. This plan really will cover both types of American Solutions: do what we've always done, but do it more and better AND use American ingenuity to come up with a new and better solution.

This brings up a serious question that each of us working toward a clean energy America really needs to answer: "Can I embrace pragmatic solutions that aren't exactly ideal, but might bring clean energy to the country and increase the political feasibility of comprehensive energy solutions?" We are coming to a point in the energy debate where we need to think seriously about these kinds of practical political questions. I think serious soul-searching will show that we need to be pragmatic. A "Develop Here, Develop Now" type proposal or similarly pragmatic solution might be the best political vehicle in the clean energy political fleet.