Allowing deep water offshore drilling is in the United States best interest

My opponent suggests makes three arguments: "1. Allowing deep water offshore drilling decreases US reliance on foreign oil. 2. Allowing deep water offshore drilling increases the supply of usable oil. 3. Allowing deep water offshore drilling increases the number of job opportunities, which leads to less unemployment, which benefits the economy immensely. " In this respect, my opponent is absolutely and undeniably correct. More oil produced in the US will, to some degree decrease US reliance on foreign oil; it will increase the amount of usable oil and increase the number of jobs. But the question becomes, is this really in the best interests of the United States? The answer is absolutely and undeniably no. If the only limit on our oil resources was "how big a tube can we stick in the ground," and the only effect of using oil was the environmental impact of the occasional oil spill; then this argument would be different. Unfortunately this is not the case. The worlds oil resources are running out, even with offshore drilling and the cumulative climatic effect of using fossil fuels, of which oil and natural gas is a significant proportion, is culminating in one of the biggest crisis mankind has ever faced: Climate change. Without breaking the world's current dependence on oil, the consequences on the US, and the rest of the world will be almost apocalyptic. Both in terms of the economic meltdown that would result from the lack of cheap and available energy, and in terms of the potential affect on the worlds climate as the worlds economies continue to emit carbon dioxide. (1) Peak oil is steadily approaching; with even pessimistic estimates signalling that this will occur at, or around 2030;(2). After this point, the economic consequences, should the US still be utterly dependant on oil, will be dire. Ironically, new offshore drilling projects my proponent supports are not predicted to give any sort of significant output until the time that peak oil reaches us; meaning the benefits of such programs will be dwarfed by the negative effects of peak oil. (3). Not only that; the estimated reserves in the lower 48, combined with new deposits in the gulf of Mexico combine to be around 33bn barrels of oil (an upper estimate) that could be taken from the ground. However, at 20m barrels consumption a day, this works out at around 4 1/2 years worth of oil. (3)(4) This means while it's obvious that deep sea drilling in such protected area's, and existing ones will definitely present somewhat of a short term benefit; it will come too little and too late to have any meaningful or long term effect on the US energy problems, and more specifically the United states best interests. Now is not the time to let the oil companies re-invest their profits into the same technology and into producing the same resources that placed humanity in this crisis in the first place; it is the time to put economic incentives in place so that they invest that money in securing their own future, and ours. While my opponent is absolutely correct; that there are economic benefits in oil, these only benefit an economy that's lifespan is limited and that is destructive to its own existence. As such; propping such an economy up, for the short time that offshore drilling will provide, is not in the best interests of the United States. ---- References ---- (1) . http://en.wikipedia.org... (2) . http://en.wikipedia.org... (3) . http://www.howstuffworks.com... (4) . http://www.washingtonpost.com...