GULF SHORES, Ala. - Residents living along West Beach Boulevard acknowledge the need for oil and gas exploration, but they are concerned that a new gas rig just miles from the shore could be the start of something disastrous to the beaches and local tourism-driven economy.

  The drilling rig causing concern is located an estimated 4 to 6 miles from shore and currently operated by Devon Energy of Oklahoma City.

  Discussion during the last two Gulf Shores City Council meetings revealed that city leaders have long opposed any type of drilling within 12 miles of the shoreline, which is intended to place rigs below the horizon and out of sight.

  During the latest meeting Mayor Billy Duke said that he and Council had sent a resolution to the state voicing opposition to any drilling closer than the desired 12-mile buffer.

  Perhaps the first person to shed light on the matter was West Beach resident Ed Minkina who said he has dedicated every spare moment to researching the rig.

  “I want to be clear that I support drilling because we need the fuel, but they should keep it out of sight so that it does not harm our beach which is the main reason why anyone comes to Gulf Shores,” Minkina said.

  “I left town for two days and when I got back home I had a new neighbor, this huge rig was just sitting right out in the water without any warning.”

  Minkina cited his greatest fear is that people seem willing to throw their hands in the air and not do anything about it. “We’ve got to make sure our city, state, and federal leaders know that this sort of thing will destroy the goose that laid the golden egg.”

  Sharon Moore, who lives several houses to the east of Minkina, agrees with the majority that it’s a matter of where and how.

  “It’s a must that we drill in order to get off of foreign oil, but they have the technology to drill horizontally from further out and although it will cost a few more bucks that’s how it should be done,” Moore said.

  “Obviously, by using alternative drilling methods the energy company will reduce the amount of royalties paid to the state but the extra cost would be a very good investment to keep everybody safe and the state would still make a great deal of money.”

  Dennis Hatfield, who lives on Little Lagoon and is a former petroleum geologist and natural gas marketer, has previously worked for Amoco Production. He believes the matter could be resolved with greater focus on three key areas.

  “The first issue is the visual pollution that can be addressed with extended reach directional drilling, I’m not sure if they can do it from 12 or 15 miles out but it can certainly be done from further out than where the rig is now,” Hatfield said.

“Additionally, the energy company can sub-sea complete the rig so that the operation is hidden beneath the surface of the water and that would also prevent a platform from being built right along our shoreline because they would simply pipe the gas out of there.”

  “The second issue is a matter of public safety with the risk of a hydrogen sulfide accident that could actually kill a few people in the worst case scenario.”

  “At the very least if there is a gas release of hydrogen sulfide and it’s caught in a wind from the southwest we’re going to have a stink that will not go away,” added Hatfield, referring to the unpleasant “rotten egg” odor given off by sulfur. “If that alone happens, I think we can stop worrying about traffic and overcrowding problems.”

  The third issue that Hatfield said should not be underestimated is that the rig, which is currently drilling at around 22,500 feet deep, is currently able to dump mud and sledge pulled from the drilling site directly into the water.

  “Our leaders should ask or even force zero discharge operations, because what you end up with is a sediment plume that floats around in the water and can wash right up on the beach.”

  Moore said she and her husband Tom have regularly seen brown foam wash ashore in front of their home since the rig first arrived.

  “We have increasingly seen the brown foam and mud form along the beach, the tourists are also taking notice,” she said.

  Concerning the proposed solutions to the problems at hand, Hatfield predicts that representatives with the energy company will try to convince leaders and the public that the alternative methods will prove to cumbersome effectively killing the project.

  “I’ve got to disagree that my suggestions would kill the project because we were able to do those things back in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s when natural gas was about $1.50 per 1,000 cubic feet compared with today’s rate of $13.00.”