Unh Professor Larry Hamilton on The Bp Deepwater Horizon Disaster

When the spill happened in April of 2010, we thought this would be a very interesting time to go in and not only ask the standard questions we've been asking about environmental opinions, but to see and ask whether they were in fact changing as we watched. So the first idea was to ask has the spill affected you and if so how? But secondly, to put that in context. Have your views changed as a result of this in any way? It was very interesting. We found a strong pattern of difference between the two areas we study. We did about 1,000 telephone interviews in two coastal parishes of Louisiana and about 1,000 more in three counties of the Florida Panhandle. Both in areas where the oil was actually washing ashore. Both fairly close to the BP Verizon spill site. And both very much affected economically, though in somewhat different ways. And we were controlling for a lot of individual factors. We were struck by how different the responses were from the Louisiana parishes and the Florida counties that were right down the coast. In general, the Louisiana residents were much more likely to say they had been personally affected by the spill. They were more likely to say their views have been changed as results of the spill. And also because we were asking some sort of bigger picture questions, they were more likely to mention that they had been personally or their community affected by extreme or unusual weather events. And also that they felt the future of their community was threatened to a greater extent by rising sea levels due to climate change. So all of those were higher in Louisiana. But then we also ask questions like well, would you support a moratorium on deep water drilling until new safety measures are implemented. And that was much, much less popular in Louisiana. Much more so in Florida, even though they had been less affected by the spill, by their own account. Similarly, we asked which do you think is more important? Should America be increasing the drilling and the exploration for oil or should we be developing alternative and renewable energy resources? And increased drilling was much more popular in Louisiana than it was in Florida. And the third question was sort of a catch-all question. Which do you think is more important for the future, to use resources now to create jobs or to conserve them for future generations? And the Floridians were more likely to say conserve. The Louisiana respondent's more often said, use them now for jobs. So it was this paradox between the Louisiana residents seeing more effects of the spill and for that matter, from extreme weather, from rising sea level and saying their views had been changed. But the Florida residents being more supportive of such things as a deep water moratorium until new safety measures were implemented and the development of alternative energy rather than increased drilling. Well, it wasn't really what we expected. But as we went back to the previous research other people had done well before the spill, it made more and more sense. The most obvious thing there are the economies. The economy in Louisiana is extracting something like $60 billion a year from oil. The economy in Florida something like $60 billion a year from tourism. So they're both using the coast, but in very different ways. So oil is bringing money into Louisiana, but oil on the beaches would take money away from Florida. It would harm their livelihoods. So one part of is the obvious economic difference. But I think beyond that, you have a lot of culture, a lot of development, a lot of history taking two different tracks through the whole 20th century in how to use and development and relate to the coast.