Category Archives: national ocean politics

energy policy, fossil fuels, national ocean politics, natural resource management, offshore oil

WWNT Radio: Senators Push Administration for Expanded Offshore Drilling in Next 5-Year OCS Leasing Plan

Leave a comment
http://www.wwntradio.com/news/news.php/displayType/article/16448/2014/06/senators-push-administration-for-expanded-offshore-drilling-in-next-5year-ocs-leasing-plan
 
25 Jun 2014 3:07 PM
 
(Washington, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, along with Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) sent a letter to Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Department of Interior, regarding the Department’s oil and gas leasing plan for 2017 through 2022 on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
 
“You now have a final opportunity during the Obama Administration to put forward a plan that will not only generate substantial government revenues, create jobs, and improve the economy of our nation, but also could yield long-term geopolitical benefits through ensuring a decreased reliance on foreign resources,” wrote the Senators. “Given the tremendously positive impacts that opening these waters to new drilling would have, we respectfully advise that now is not the time to play politics with such a decision.”
 
In the letter, the Senators request that Interior’s 5-year leasing plan includes the expansion of offshore access to include areas off the Atlantic Coast, the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, areas off the coast of Southern California, and multiple areas off the Alaska shoreline that the Obama Administration had previously placed off-limits. A recent study concluded that developing oil and gas resources in the Pacific OCS and Eastern Gulf alone would generate more than 200,000 jobs and add $218 billion to the U.S. economy.
 
Since President Obama was elected, Vitter has been urging the Administration to stop putting large portions of the OCS off limits for leasing. The President’s current 5-year leasing plan is only half of what the previous plan was and keeps 85 percent offshore areas closed. At the beginning of this Congress, Vitter introduced legislation that would force the administration to go back to the previous 5-year leading plan that was scheduled before Obama was elected. Vitter also introduced the Energy Production and Project Delivery Act that increases domestic production, expedites important reviews for major energy projects, and could create millions of jobs.
 
Text of today’s letter is below. Click here for the PDF version.
 
 
June 25, 2014
 
The Honorable Sally Jewell
Secretary
Department of Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
 
Dear Secretary Jewell:
 
Beginning the process of developing the Department of Interior’s (DOI) next 5-year leasing plan is an important step to furthering our nation’s goals of providing a secure, stable source of domestic energy, leading us towards energy independence and improving our hobbled economy.  This latest leasing plan, which will govern oil and gas leasing for 2017-2022 on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), should serve as an important step in rectifying the self-inflicted damage done by President Obama’s moratorium on energy development in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as the unnecessary termination of the proposed 2010-2015 leasing program that would have rightfully expanded, rather than restricted, access to our federal offshore resources.
 
As we have pointed out in the past, Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) requires that these 5-year leasing plans be designed to “best meet national energy needs for the 5-year period following its approval.”  The Administration clearly failed to follow the intent of the OCSLA in the previous lease plan by placing over 85% of America’s OCS off-limits to energy production and offering the lowest number of offshore lease sales ever offered in the history of the process.  You now have a final opportunity during the Obama Administration to put forward a plan that will not only generate substantial government revenues, create jobs, and improve the economy of our nation as well as states and localities, but could have long-term geopolitical benefits through ensuring a decreased reliance on foreign resources in light of a deteriorating situation in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.
 
The current Obama DOI lease plan, under which you are currently operating, excludes areas of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) where expansion had significant bipartisan support.  In response, the House of Representatives has sent a clear signal by passing multiple bipartisan bills that call for opening new offshore areas that the Obama administration placed off-limits in their misguided 2012-2017 lease plan. Further, a bipartisan coalition of governors from Gulf Coast and Mid-Atlantic states have recognized the significant economic and job creation benefits of offshore energy production and have repeatedly encouraged the administration to expand offshore access to states that have been blocked from participating in the process. The administration’s lost opportunity included leasing off the Atlantic Coast, significant acreage in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, areas off the coast of Southern California, and multiple areas off the Alaska shoreline.  If this new lease plan is to have any credibility, it is imperative that these areas be opened and included in the new plan.
 
Study after study has shown the positive impacts of expanding offshore oil and gas development in regions that this Administration has blocked.  A study by Wood Mackenzie concluded that developing oil and gas resources in the Pacific OCS and Eastern Gulf alone would generate more than 200,000 jobs and add $218 billion to the U.S. economy.  A recent study by Quest Offshore Resources also found that oil and gas development in the Atlantic could generate nearly 280,000 jobs, expanding the U.S. economy by up to $23.5 billion.  To further underscore the incredible economic potential of offshore oil and gas development, previous reports have even found that simply speeding up permitting could create hundreds of thousands of jobs nationally and over 155,000 in our states alone. 
 
The opportunity for offshore oil and natural gas production provides a significantly positive contrast when compared to offshore wind energy production, which the Administration has spent significant resources pushing.  Wind leases net the government $1 to $2 per acre versus $100 per acre for oil and natural gas energy resources in the deepwater.  In addition, there is strong indication that the royalty rate for wind energy is a fraction of the tax credit it receives, meaning the government will end up with a net loss of revenue on each project. Moreover, we are unaware of any operating offshore wind facility at this stage despite significant commitment of resources and time by this Administration.  With the wind energy production tax subsidy slated to expire at the end of 2014, we cannot imagine any circumstances in which an offshore wind farm is competitive and question why the Administration has devoted many resources to promoting the offshore wind industry when the benefits of developing more domestic oil and gas are proven. 
 
A recent analysis by Mark P. Mills, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, found the following:
 
 * In the 10 states at the epicenter of oil & gas growth, overall statewide employment gains have greatly outpaced the national average.
 * A broad array of small and midsize oil & gas companies are propelling record economic and jobs gains-not just in the oil fields but across the economy.
 * America’s hydrocarbon revolution and its associated job creation are almost entirely the result of drilling & production by more than 20,000 small and midsize businesses, not a handful of “Big Oil” companies. In fact, the typical firm in the oil & gas industry employs fewer than 15 people.
 * The shale oil & gas revolution has been the nation’s biggest single creator of solid, middle-class jobs-throughout the economy, from construction to services to information technology.
 * In recent years, America’s oil & gas boom has added $300-$400 billion annually to the economy.  Without this contribution, GDP growth would have been negative and the nation would have continued to be in recession.
 
Given the tremendously positive impacts that opening these waters to new drilling would have on our struggling economy, the massive job creation an expanded plan would yield, and the foreign policy benefits from expanding domestic fossil fuel production as unrest increases in areas of the world such as the Middle East and Russia, we respectfully advise that now is not the time to play politics with such a decision.  This administration and the DOI should take this opportunity to strengthen both the American economy as well as our geopolitical standing by issuing a 5-year leasing plan that expands offshore access to new areas consistent with our nation’s energy and economic needs.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
David Vitter
U.S. Senator
Louisiana
 
Roger Wicker
U.S. Senator
Mississippi
 
Jeff Sessions
U.S. Senator
Alabama
 
Tim Scott
U.S. Senator
South Carolina
Special thanks to Richard Charter
energy policy, national ocean politics, natural resource management

Santa Rosa Press Democrat: West county forums show support for marine protections

Leave a comment
By MARY CALLAHAN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA
June 21, 2014, 3:00 AM


A series of public hearings on the North Coast last week unsurprisingly revealed overwhelming support for extending national marine sanctuary protections to the Sonoma and southern Mendocino coasts, federal officials said.

But with long-sought, permanent bans that would forbid oil drilling and other potentially harmful human activity in coastal waters within reach, many conservationists are looking to the details. They are seeking refinements in federal plans that would optimize conditions for wildlife in newly protected waters.

Reservations expressed during public hearings in Point Arena, Gualala and Bodega Bay are not enough to dampen enthusiasm for a proposal to more than double the combined size of the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones marine sanctuaries. The plan would extend sanctuary designation to 2,771square miles of ocean, creating a band of protected waters along about 350 miles of California coastline. Protections would extend from Cambria to Manchester Beach, when combined with the Monterey Bay sanctuary.

But several concerns have come to light in recent weeks that advocates hope can be ironed out to the advantage of marine wildlife.

“We really need to be sure that whatever rules and regulations are created actually work, not just for us but for the future,” Stewards of the Coast and Redwood volunteer Sukey Robb-Wilder told representatives for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on Thursday.

A key concern is the exclusion of three river estuaries from the sanctuaries – the Russian, Gualala and Garcia – that are integral parts of the ocean habitat for many flora and fauna, advocates say.

“You don’t need to be John Muir to get the connections,” Bodega Bay resident Norma Jellison said during a public hearing Wednesday night. “Whatever ends up in the Russian River ends up in the estuary ends up in the ocean – in other words, marine sanctuary waters.”

Also controversial is a provision in the current proposal to designate four special zones for the use of Jet Skis and other motorized personal watercraft that would otherwise be prohibited within sanctuary boundaries.

Thirdly, an allowance for the superintendent of either sanctuary to authorize otherwise banned activity under certain conditions has drawn much criticism, many suggesting it leaves room for those with wealth and influence to circumvent specified prohibitions.

“Authorization allowing someone to do something that you’re saying is no good reduces protection to all,” said former Gulf of the Farallones Superintendent Ed Ueber. “We know that. Let’s not allow it.”

Championed by former Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, for a decade before her retirement, legislation to expand the sanctuaries never got enough traction to get through both houses of the legislature in the same session.

But it had enough public and political support, as well as a scientific justification, for the Obama administration and NOAA to move forward on the expansion through a public hearing process.

NOAA representatives said the expansion is driven by the critical role of an intense and productive ocean upwelling offshore from Point Arena. The upwelling brings nutrient-rich waters from ocean depths to the surface, providing destination feeding grounds for seabirds, marine mammals, fish and other wildlife from near and far.

Nutrients from the upwelling are driven south by the wind, so that expanding the boundaries actually safeguards wildlife populations within existing sanctuaries, Gulf of the Farallones Sanctuary Superintendent Maria Brown said.

“It’s one of the most abundant and environmentally rich waters in the world,” Brown told those at a Wednesday hearing in Bodega Bay.

Extension of the sanctuaries would put the area off-limits to oil drilling and energy exploration, as well as other activities that would disrupt the seabed or put wildlife at risk.
New regulations include limitations on low-flying aircraft and cargo ships near so-called “wildlife hotspots,” including breeding spots for seabirds and marine mammals, she and Cordell Bank Superintendent Dan Howard said.

But in response to requests during initial public sessions on the extension, the new proposal includes specified zones for personal watercraft used for surfer rescue, fishing and recreation, Brown said.

The regulations also include a provision superintendents have used to permit fireworks, Caltrans shoreline road repairs and other uses, Brown said.

In any such case, an organization seeking a waiver must already have obtained necessary permits from other federal, state or local agencies.

Any permission from sanctuary staff also may have added conditions, Brown said.

But many of those in attendance at the three hearings spoke against the authorization, some saying it opened the door to manipulation and pressure from the powerful and connected.

Among those with “strong” objections was state Sen. Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa.
“National Marine Sanctuaries are intended to provide permanent protection of exceptional marine resources,” she said in written comments to NOAA. “Exceptions to rules should be rare, they should be carefully deliberated by local experts, scientists and the public, and they should not be subject to the political pressures of the day.”

Evans also joined more than a dozen California congress members – Reps. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, and Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, among them – seeking to extend the proposed sanctuary boundaries into the estuaries and opposing permission for personal watercraft, with the possible exception of search and rescue operations.

NOAA is accepting public comment on its proposal and the related draft environmental impact statement through June 30.

Brown said the NOAA staff would spend subsequent months analyzing input and potentially adjusting the proposal before issuing a final rule, hopefully this winter.

Substantial adjustments, such as including river estuaries in the expansion area, could not be approved without a complete public hearing process, including public input sessions and a supplemental draft EIS, that would have to proceed separate from the expansion itself, she said.

Comments may be submitted online at www.regulations.gov/#!docket Detail;D=NOAA-NOS-2012-0228 or by mail to Maria Brown, Sanctuary Superintendent, Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary, 991 Marine Drive, The Presidio, San Francisco 94129.

More information is available at farallones.noaa.gov/manage/expansion_cbgf.html.
 
_______________________________________
 
You can reach Staff Writer Mary Callahan at 521-5249 or mary.callahan @pressdemocrat.com.
Special thanks to Richard Charter
national ocean politics

Sun Sentinel: More Oil Drilling Near Cuba Raises Environmental Alarms In Florida

Leave a comment
CBS 12-TV
 
By William E. Gibson/Sun Sentinel/Washington Bureau
SUNDAY, JUNE 15, 2014

WASHINGTON Russia has agreed to plunge into the search for oil in deep waters between the shores of Cuba and Florida, renewing fears of a major oil spill and the potential for environmental disaster.

With President Vladimir Putin looking on, Russian companies Rosneft and Zarubezhneft signed an energy agreement with Cuba late last month to explore offshore oil deposits. The agreement also calls for Rosneft to build a base at the Cuban port of Mariel to relay equipment and personnel to offshore rigs, linked by pipelines and a helicopter pad.

The drilling area north of Havana straddles the Gulf Stream, a powerful ocean current that rushes north to the Florida coast. Oceanographers warn that an oil slick caused by a major spill could reach Florida’s beaches, reefs and marine sanctuaries in about a week.

“If there’s a spill in an area within 50 miles of Key West, the immediate vulnerable land areas are going to be in South Florida,” former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham warned in an interview last week. “The largest natural reef in the United States is located right near the area where the drilling would take place.

“If there is an accident, there is zero capability in Cuba today to respond to that accident.”

Graham, who served two terms as Florida governor, met with Cuban officials in January and co-chaired a presidential commission on the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. He and energy experts said the Russians have little experience with deep-water drilling and that the U.S. embargo of Cuba prohibits the use of American technology to prevent or respond to a spill.

A State Department spokesperson said U.S. officials “have expressed our concerns” to Cuba and its partners, but the United States can do nothing to stop drilling in Cuban waters. While the embargo limits the use of American products, U.S. companies have been licensed to respond in case of a spill.

The agreement reflects Putin’s outreach to nations once aligned with the former Soviet Union and re-creates a Russian presence 90 miles from Florida. Cuba, which once relied on Soviet patronage to prop up its economy, is re-establishing close connections with Russia.
U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami, a leading critic of the Castro regime, said the growing relationship “has damaged U.S. interests and invited cronies of Putin’s oil and security industries to our doorstep.”
The energy agreement also stirred concerns about the safety of oil exploration less than 50 miles from Florida in waters more than 5,000 feet deep, where drilling is far more hazardous than on land or in shallow waters.

“Are the Russians going to let U.S. officials inspect their rig?” said Jorge Pinon, a leading energy expert at the University of Texas. “Is the U.S. just going to sit on the sidelines and allow Cuba to drill with a piece of equipment, when we don’t know whether it has the latest blowout preventer or the latest technology?”

Zarubezhneft and companies from Spain and Malaysia have searched for oil along Cuba’s north coast since 2012. So far, their exploratory wells have not turned up enough oil to be worth extracting. Cuba is negotiating with other companies from Brazil, Canada and Angola to join the hunt for black gold.

By Pinon’s estimate, foreign companies have spent more than $700 million over a decade in the futile search for oil between Cuba and Florida. But Cuban officials say seismic testing indicates that as much as 20 billion barrels worth of crude oil lies there – more than enough to meet its needs for 100 years.

Political turmoil in Venezuela, meanwhile, jeopardizes the stream of cheap oil it has been exporting to Cuba.


“The Cubans were very frustrated by the first round of drilling, but there is still a lot of optimism and hope, and a sense of urgency with what’s going on in Venezuela,” said Dan Whittle of the Environmental Defense Fund, who meets frequently with Cuban officials. “They are determined to move forward with more exploration next year.”

Russia, meanwhile, has used energy as a foreign-policy tool while defying international economic sanctions that stemmed from its seizure of Crimea. The outreach includes a major energy accord with China.
When the Cuban agreement was signed, Putin noted that many of the world’s oil deposits are running dry. “Therefore, we have to move to new areas, often hard to access … and develop reserves that were traditionally considered economically less efficient and hard to reach.”

Graham and environmentalists say the pressure to drill threatens Florida’s delicate ecosystem, its beaches, its endangered species and its tourism industry.

The nightmare scenario inspired best-selling author James Grippando, a lawyer in Fort Lauderdale, to write a recently published novel, “Black Horizon,” depicting horrors created by a major spill near Cuba that fouls the Everglades and the coastline.

“It all takes place in eight days,” Grippando said. “According to the experts I talked to, that’s essentially the window of opportunity we have to respond to a spill. The oil would reach the U.S. coastline within six to 10 days.”

Special thanks to Richard Charter
energy policy, national ocean politics, natural resource management, offshore oil

ABC News: Greenpeace Boards 2 Drill Rigs in Arctic Protest

Leave a comment
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/greenpeace-boards-drill-rigs-arctic-protest-23878100
STAVANGER, Norway May 27, 2014 (AP)
By MARK LEWIS Associated Press

Greenpeace activists boarded a drilling rig hundreds of miles offshore Norway and another in the Netherlands in a protest Tuesday against oil and gas exploration in Arctic waters.

Juha Aromaa, a spokesman for the environmental group, said 15 activists boarded a rig operated by Norwegian energy company Statoil about 109 miles (175 kilometers) off the Bear Island nature reserve early Tuesday without encountering any resistance from the onboard crew.

Statoil was given the green light to drill in the northern part of the Barents Sea late Monday by Norway’s government. The rig had been on a government-ordered hiatus after Greenpeace complained that a spill in the Arctic could have disastrous environmental consequences.

Norwegian police were not planning to intervene because the rig had not started drilling and was therefore under the jurisdiction of the flag state, the Marshall Islands, said Ole Saeverud, police chief in the northern city of Tromsoe.

Erlend Tellnes, a Norwegian protester on board the rig, said the activists had enough supplies for “a long time” and could get supplied again from shore if necessary.

“We have a lot of food and we are prepared to stay here as long as we can,” he said by telephone, adding that there was a “fairly good relationship” between the activists and the workers on the rig.

In a statement, Statoil said its safety measures in the “very unlikely” event of an oil spill were robust, and described the Greenpeace action as irresponsible and illegal.

Also Tuesday, Greenpeace said 30 activists in the Dutch port of Ijmuiden boarded a rig contracted by Russia’s Gazprom to drill in the Pechora Sea. Greenpeace said they were removed after five hours.

The Arctic is believed to hold an estimated 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its untapped gas. Those resources are expected to become easier to access as climate change melts the frozen region.

 

Special thanks to Richard Charter

 

national ocean politics, natural resource management

Santa Rosa Press Democrat: Federal officials release plans to expand North Coast sanctuaries

Leave a comment

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20140414/articles/140419753#page=0

Santa Rosa, California

By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
April 14, 2014, 1:19 PM

Permanent protection from oil drilling off the Sonoma and southern Mendocino County coast appears imminent, anti-drilling advocates and local officials said Monday, as a federal agency unveiled a plan to expand two protected areas along the scenic shoreline. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released a plan to more than double the size of two marine sanctuaries, extending their northern boundary from Bodega Bay more than 60 miles north to Point Arena. Offshore oil or gas exploration, development and production would be prohibited throughout the expanded sanctuaries, a holy grail sought by environmentalists since the late 1970s.

“This particular victory for the ocean was 35 years in the making,” said Richard Charter of Bodega Bay, a veteran coastal protection advocate.
A marine sanctuary is “really the only tool we have that can protect this coast in perpetuity,” said Charter, a senior fellow with the Ocean Foundation. The sanctuary expansion, first suggested by the federal agency in 2008, is still not a done deal and probably would not be implemented until the winter or spring of 2015. But it doesn’t require a vote by Congress, and Charter, a lobbyist in Washington, D.C., said he does not anticipate any reversal.

Sonoma County Supervisor Efren Carrillo, whose district covers most of the Sonoma coast, called Monday’s announcement “truly marvelous.” Sanctuary rules allow recreational and commercial fishing, while the ban on energy development protects a coast that draws more than 1 million visitors a year, “spending the almighty dollar there,” Carrillo said.

Former Rep. Lynn Woolsey of Petaluma warned that “anything can happen” on Capitol Hill, but took pride in the likely expansion. “I have great faith that my legacy is intact,” said Woolsey, who retired last year after 20 years in Congress. For nearly half of her tenure, Woolsey waged an unsuccessful campaign to expand the sanctuaries through legislative action. With Congress deadlocked, Woolsey said the White House had assured her it would handle the matter.

The latest proposal was unveiled by the Obama administration in late 2012. It enjoyed enthusiastic support from local residents at a public meeting at Bodega Bay’s Grange Hall in January 2013, with Woolsey earning a hearty applause from the crowd.

The lone lament from environmentalists on Monday was that the proposed expansion stops just north of Point Arena, about 15 miles north of the Sonoma-Mendocino line. In community meetings last year, Mendocino County residents said the sanctuaries should reach farther north, possibly as far as the Oregon border. “We’re looking for permanent protection for the entire (Mendocino) coast,” Mendocino County Supervisor Dan Hamburg said Monday. The federal agency’s proposal is “better than nothing,” he said, adding that Mendocino will push for a greater expansion.

Rachel Binah of Little River, a veteran anti-drilling activist, noted that southerly currents would carry an oil spill north of Point Arena into the protected areas. But the proposed expansion “is a big deal,” she said.

The plan would add 2,771 square miles to the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones sanctuaries, which currently cover 1,808 square miles from south of the Farallon Islands to Bodega Bay. Expanding the sanctuaries to Point Arena would encompass a “thriving marine ecosystem” that sustains whales, sharks, salmon, crabs and the largest seabird breeding colony in the contiguous United States at the Farallon Islands, NOAA said in a press release.

California’s disdain for offshore oil development dates back to the Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969, which still ranks as third largest after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon and 1989 Exxon Valdez spills. The state halted offshore oil leasing that year, and Congress implemented a leasing moratorium on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts in 1982.

But the moratorium, which required annual reauthorization, lapsed in 2008, leaving the North Coast vulnerable to exploration of oil deposits off the Sonoma and Mendocino coasts. Tupper Hull, spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association, reiterated Monday that his group’s members have “no interest” in tapping North Coast oil.

Public hearings on the proposed expansion and a draft environmental impact statement may be submitted through June 30. Public hearings will be conducted by NOAA at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bay Model Visitor Center in Sausalito on May 22, Point Arena City Hall June 16, Gualala Community Center June 17 and Bodega Bay Grange Hall June 18. All meetings are at 6 p.m.

Charter urged people to attend the hearings, saying they “are the place to close the deal” on coastal protection.

For more information, go to sanctuaryexpansion.org.

(You can reach Staff Writer Guy Kovner at 521-5457 or guy.kovner@pressdemocrat.com.)
Special thanks to Richard Charter