The real contamination of New Mexico
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
10 Comments
Leave a Response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Nope. Mr.Swickard is wrong regarding the effect of pit rules. There may be a sliver of wildcatters or production companies that would be swayed by the added cost of the pit rule. Not many. If the price of oil is up, we drill. If it goes too far down, we stack rigs. It isn’t much more complicated. If you want to get an idea of drilling activity in the state or country just read the daily, weekly, monthly and yearly “rig count” reports. You will note that drilling activity is up in New Mexico by two rigs to 70 according to the Baker-Hughes rig count. It shows that the rig count is up in New Mexico and in the country as a whole. http://investor.shareholder.com/bhi/rig_counts/rc_index.cfm If what Mr.Swickard claims about pit rules were true, these numbers for New Mexico would not be up. They are up because the returns to companies for exploration, drilling, completion, production, refining and retails sales is up. Ask any person in the oil industry if they will be drilling when the price of crude goes up. The answer is always “yep”.
There is NO way that there will be a New Mexico-specific greenhouse gas cap-and-trade plan. It is too complicated! We need to concentrate on present matters.
The pit rule is absolutely necessary to protect our shrinking water resources in New Mexico from contamination!
If any of you think change is not coming to regs in NM, including the pit rule, you should read what Ms. Denish says here:
http://www.dianedenish.com/news/articles?id=0060
She says, among other things: “Everyone can agree that our state’s economy depends heavily on oil and gas production, so we need a balanced approach to stay competitive with our neighbors. That’s why I also support revisiting the pit rule and I believe the Environmental Improvement Board must not only be passionate stewards of the environment, but also mindful of the potential economic impact of its regulations.” And: ” I strongly urge the Environment Department to reconsider moving forward with cap-and-trade at this time”.
Of course you all already know what Ms. Martinez thinks about the pit rule and cap and trade. So change in these thing is coming, no matter who is our new Guv. Live with it. And there is no oil company on earth that would say the pit rule has no impact on their decisions to drill in NM vs. the neighboring states. So when the pit rule is “revisited” under Ms. Denish for instance, what do you think they will say about its’ effect on NM’s competitiveness and business environment?
This was just reported today. Concho Resources Inc. signed a definitive agreement to acquire all the oil and gas assets of Marbob Energy Corp. Timothy Leach, Concho’s chairman, CEO and president, said, “After closing, we plan to increase the activity level and rig count on these acquired properties (in New Mexico), which should result in significant production growth over the next several years.” Again the pit rule is not relevant! See story below!!!!!
http://www.rttnews.com/Content/BreakingNews.aspx?Id=1364322&SM=1
The thing that’s nice about being a professional spin doctor (read: professional liar) is that facts are irrelevant, so long as you can turn a quick buck. The oil and gas industry – and their frequently paid mouthpieces – have, since time immemorial, promised us that the disasters they’ve inflicted on the public are “things of the past”.
Corporate apologists and paid mouthpieces always claim, “sure, we’ve had problems in the past, but with modern technology those things are now impossible.” Exxon promised us that prior to the Valdez (which still has not been cleaned up – because Exxon lacks the will and, frankly, Exxon – or anyone – lacks the expertise; it’s simply impossible to clean these things up). BP (and others) promised us that deep water drilling was “perfectly safe”, until facts once again proved otherwise. Texaco and Chevron promised the folks in the South American jungles similar pledges of “harmless” activity, all the while the cancer rates there skyrocket. Remember the promises of the Nuclear industry (Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, et. al.)? Similar spin. Same facts. Spin cannot change facts, no matter how many blogs someone writes. But thanks for playing.
To paraphrase Shakespeare, “methinks they doth protesteth too much.” When you can’t argue with facts, argue with promises. You can’t refute a promise, because it’s always “manana”. Tomorrow, tomorrow, I luv ya, tomorrow, you’re always a day away.
Read the Apache Corporation website on oil rig expansion in New Mexico
http://www.apachecorp.com/explore/Browse_Archives/View_Article.aspx?Article.ItemID=978
Oil prices not the pit rule determine the viability of an oil company business – basic economics.
Hemingway writes: “Apache Corporation is planning to build a hundred rigs ” So, how many would they have built if we had a better business climate? Announcements aside, are you sure they are really going to build those rigs? What will the price of oil have to be for them to drill? The pit rule is just one of several things that increase or decrease drilling. And, a very important question since we really need the money – like renewable energy are they drilling for the tax incentives rather than the oil? The tax incentive cost the state money, they do not support the public schools.
I have friends who have worked the rigs all of their adult lives… the rigs are leaving for better pickings. That is a fact. Good riddance perhaps but what are you going to use to fully fund the public schools? Will you close every school in New Mexico rather than drill the Otero Mesa or relax the rules of drilling?
I know what contamination does, I am a downwinder victim – cancer survivor – read more here: http://www.alamogordonews.com/ci_15518953
If we are not careful we will end up like Martha Kentucky and its Martha oil field caused by Ashland Corporation’s wreck less drilling practices.
New Mexico’s pit rule is a necessary safeguard to protect our most important resource – WATER.
We certainly don’t want to be singing a variation of this Kentucky song on Martha Oil Field.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NB0MPvDWGw
Mr. Swickard, PHD is obviously not aware that Apache Corporation is planning to build a hundred rigs in New Mexico despite the excellent pit rule!
Well put! We must be sensible in our decisions and not let “emotion science” overcome real science in our pursuit of what is in the best interest of all New Mexicans. There has to be give and take for this to happen.