The editorial cartoon of Sept. 17 perpetuates several myths about offshore drilling. “Graveyard of the Atlantic” implied that energy development will kill coastal tourism, marine habitat and energy conservation. Such views are common, and they reveal ignorance regarding both modern hydrocarbon extraction methods and the contemporary management priorities of energy companies.

Drilling off the North Carolina coast is only being discussed for the outer continental shelf — some 50 miles offshore. Due to the curvature of the Earth, a platform could only be visible from a high rise balcony, and from there a pretty good telescope would be necessary. Plus, modern extraction methods allow multiple wells to be drilled farther and deeper from a single platform, so the number of platforms will be substantially less than in the Gulf. Land prices alone will keep support services and infrastructure away from the beach, not to mention zoning. The boats and barges that must be in the water would utilize existing industrial infrastructure at Morehead City and Wilmington, and might even generate positive returns for all our tax dollars that have been invested in expanding port facilities. Energy development is undoubtedly an industrial activity, but if it ever does occur off our coast it will not be easily noticed by tourists.

Another frequent criticism is the potential damage to fisheries. Anyone who fishes our coast knows that one big key to success is structure. This is why the state builds artificial reefs. Anyone who fishes in the Gulf knows that oil rigs are big structures. This is why they fish near rigs. Drilling would benefit the recreational fishery, which contributes millions to our economy. Concern for marine habitat is better focused on the commercial fishing industry, whose anachronistic harvest methods destroy habitat and routinely slaughter non-target fishes and sea turtles — all with taxpayer subsidies.

As for oil spills, those are usually related to tankers. Neither Katrina nor Ike caused oil spills at the offshore platforms, and you'd have to go back 40 years to find a significant spill that resulted from drilling. Our current system would impose numerous laws on the oil and gas industry with several state and federal agencies involved.

Compliance is costly, and the energy companies developed highly successful pollution prevention programs long ago.

How, specifically, might energy conservation be killed by drilling, as depicted in the cartoon? Despite full reservoirs, most of us continue to practice at least some of the water conservation measures we got accustomed to during last year’s drought. The facts are: We’ll never see $2 gasoline again, most of us can’t afford to go out and buy a hybrid, and our near-term economic future is dismal at best. We are all compelled to achieve unprecedented levels of energy conservation. Plus, no matter how hard he tries, even Obama can’t break our oil habit in 10 years. History shows that every energy transition (e.g. wood to coal, coal to oil and gas) takes about 60 years to complete.

Finally, consider the economic case in favor of drilling. Careers in skilled trades are certainly better for the chronically depressed economy of eastern N.C. than seasonal jobs in tourism that barely pay minimum wage. Energy development will also be a tremendous benefit to the tax base through reduced unemployment and the increased income and property taxes. Instead of fretting over fallacies, we should be exploiting every available resource to minimize the potential for energy problems to compound our economic calamity.