The Santa Barbara Oil Spill of 1969: A Lesson In Offshore Drilling (PHOTOS)

The Bush administration's latest plan to drive down skyrocketing oil prices by lifting the executive ban on domestic offshore drilling has revived an old question in American politics: is such drilling ecologically responsible? The Washington Post today recalls when this kind of offshore drilling lead to disaster. See photos of the oil spill below.

On Jan. 28, 1969, a blowout on a Unocal rig six miles off the coast of California spilled 3 million gallons of oil into the waters off Santa Barbara. The blackened beaches and oil-soaked birds and seals became icons for the environmental movement and eventually brought oil exploration off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States to a halt.

Now, President Bush, Republicans in Congress and big oil companies want to reopen those waters to oil and gas exploration. In his radio address Saturday, Bush said that "technological advances have allowed us to explore oil offshore in ways that protect the environment" and that outer continental shelf areas now off limits "could produce enough oil to match America's current production for almost 10 years."

An estimated three million gallons of oil, over 10 days, was released into the Pacific Ocean during the Santa Barbara "blowout." The resulting damage to the surrounding water and beaches took weeks to clean.

Story continues below

advertisement

Most Democrats in Congress oppose President Bush's plan, but the plan also signals a break within the Bush family. It was George H.W. Bush who instituted the ban during his tenure as president and the president's brother, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, has long opposed offshore drilling. In 2001, the brothers clashed over the issue, though their differences at the time ultimately fizzled out.

''I am confident,'' Governor Bush wrote in a letter on Tuesday to the acting secretary of the interior, Thomas Slonaker, ''that the new administration will recognize the need to protect sensitive natural resources located both offshore and along Florida's coastline for the benefit of the entire nation.''

John McCain at one point also opposed offshore drilling, but recently reversed his stance.

Images courtesy of the LA Times , Darren Hardy, MarineBio.net, and the U.S. Geological Survey.

Comments

[research]

2 years of what we pay for oil, could pay for replacing coal nukes and imported oil with wind solar and ecars.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/research

the 158B$ in over and covert oil subsides would also cover the conversion costs over ten years.
transfer all that to the tax incentives for wind solar and plug in hybrids.

In the mean time, let the oil companies drill on the 60M acres they haven't used yet.

20GW installed wind last year at 1.4 $ per watt, cheaper then coal, faster then drill, or new coal or nuke plants.

[tralfas]

I would like to hear a realistic plan to help reduce energy costs today. If you think drilling for oil is foolish b/c it will take 7-15 years, how long will it take to get wind farms, solar arrays, geo therma, etc. in place, including all of the transmission lines? Will you even allow that? Look at the protests in SoCal about transmission lines in the desert. It seems that Dems, led by Sen, Reid, etc. are simply naysayers, but not solution providers. You are against coal, nuke, LNG, oil, but what are you for? Natural resources are called resourse for a reason, to use them. Seriously, what are your realistic near term solutions that don't force people who can't afford it to buy Prius' and take light rail where there is no light rail. And, oh, please explain what will be the source for the electricity that will power all of the electric calls you will demand we buy?

[totaldisbelief]

Big Oil gets deals from the Supremes on Clean ups.

[neoconhypocrites]

Welcome to the Niger Delta. It's time for an oil change.

[dezzertguy]

If we used the reasoning of this report, we would still be in caves. I understand true concern and we should be aware of all we do, but being good and safe does not mean we just bury our heads in the sand. We should use your heads to lead with with ideas, not think with our behinds as this report would have us do. Is sad we fallen so low.

[frankky]

During economic hard times we have to think priority, what's more important beautiful beaches or
a healthy economy. What good is it if we have beautiful paradise but we starve to death? If we are going to go through a depression where everybody steals and kills just to survive, the heck with
the environment you can drill in my back yard as long as I can have a car, job, cheap gas and food
on my table.

[research]

can they drill in your back yard if you STILL will have expensive gas? even 18 years from now?

[BlackbirdHighway]

For Gods sake people, why do so many of you just repeat the same stupid lies over and over?

Please stop saying that Katrina and Rita didn't cause any oil spills, when there is direct evidence that you are wrong.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused 124 offshore spills for a total of 743,700 gallons. The spills were photographed from space.

Unlike you, I have evidence to back my statement:

http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/06/19/mccain-katrina-spills/

http://skytruth.mediatools.org/node/19981

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/581/44814183_MMS_Katrina_Rita_PL_Final%20Report%20Rev1.pdf

[rollingdivision]

By far more oil is leaked into the environment by natural causes than drilling for oil. In fact there is evidence drilling for oil reduces the total amount of oil introduced into the environment.

[klmebane]

if i were even willing to buy your argument that drilling reduces the total amount of oil introduced into the environment, the by products that come from our use of that oil are STILL being introduced into the environment. 100's of millions of years worth of oil deposits released into the atmosphere in the last 100 years. thats an awful lot of pollution.

[rollingdivision]

The issue is where the US gets it's oil from, not whether or not we should be using oil.

[UnknownSoldier]

if McCain gets elected sell all your assets and buy Oil Contracts on the NYMEX because we will attack an Oil Producing country which will send the price of oil north of 200 dollars and send gasoline to about the 6.50 - 7.00 dollar a gallon range

[ljmck]

Bush/Cheney and their oil buddies couldn't be happier about the state of the economy and the price of oil. Oil is bringing them untold profits, and they think they're about to grab the two prizes that have eluded them for many years, offshore drilling up and down our coasts, and drilling in ANWAR.

I mean, do you see them trying to help the economy or the "little people" negatively affected by it? Just a few light touches for show. They're happy to scare us into more crimes against the land--and against ourselves.

[hoopesaz]

Is this environmental fear mongering? That's what it seems like. One could take many lessons from an oil spill, only one of which would be "never drill oil off the coast again". In fact, that seems like the most rash decision of all.

I'm sure there were plenty of lessons learned that might help them avoid such an accident in the future. And at the very least, respond to and contain any such accident much better.

All of this "there is really only one answer" garbage from both the right and the left makes me want to vomit.

[rollingdivision]

And not a word of about the fact all the oil not gotten from coastal rigs comes through the very same waters and into shore on supertankers making the total amount of oil exposure the same. But the incidence of off shore rig oil leaks is much much lower from than supertankers leaks.

[UnknownSoldier]

A Spill would cost the U.S. Tax payers more than we could gain from taxes on the oil to be drilled. cost benefit analysis

[beingrepubwontmakeurich]

Nah, we leave the fearmongering to get us into 100 year wars in the middle east, deep debt to Asian nations, and complete relinquishment of our civil liberties.

[rwe]

pathetic liberal ignorance.... 1) this happend in 1969 ,,, during Katrina and Reba not one drop spilled or leaked...2) the leased land does not have oil..3) Why do the prograssives not want progress?

[ErnestineBass]

It was hurricane RITA, PINHEAD!

Keeerist, C&Ping the same BS, especially when you can't even get the name of a hurricane right, is the height of stupidity.

[UnknownSoldier]

Lie, there were spills during Hurricane Katrina, just no extremely large spills.

[BlackbirdHighway]

Well, that is an outright lie. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused 124 Offshore Spills For A Total Of 743,700 Gallons. The spills were photographed from space.

Unlike you, I have evidence to back my statement:

http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/06/19/mccain-katrina-spills/

http://skytruth.mediatools.org/node/19981

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/581/44814183_MMS_Katrina_Rita_PL_Final%20Report%20Rev1.pdf

[beingrepubwontmakeurich]

1) When you increase drilling you increase the likelihood of these types of accidents, particularly in light of the diminished resources available to handle it that the Oil Companies are actually admitting to being the case. Simple laws of probability really.
2) If you think no oil spilled or leaked from Katrina or Reba you would be incorrect.
3) Any oil that may show up in the next 6 - 10 years if we were lucky, would NOT be utilized for US consumption. It's called supply and demand, and the real demand is in Asia, my friend. Not here. I can't think of anything less progressive than risking our coastal economy and environs for a few barrels of oil to give to China.

[shel3364]

Can anyone tell me why the oil companies aren't drilling on their leased land? I hear they have all this land, but never hear why it isn't explored before we go offshore.

[ADVOCATE4ZPG]

By conjuring this alluring pipedream to a U.S. public in a panic/tantrum over motor fuel prices, the petroleum companies hope to derail all talk of an EXCESS PROFITS TAX in this and the next congress: They will be able to argue that they NEED high (egregiously so!) profits to finance additional, OFFSHORE DRILLING......which, of course, has no chance of supplying even ONE additional barrel of oil for years!

U.S. drivers are almost entirely responsible for their plight: They resisted ANY change in CAFE standards for THREE DECADES: the lifestyle of SUV/pickup "DOMINANCE" over any semblance of independence from OIL IMPORTS was a CONSCIOUS CHOICE!!! Concupiscience over conscience--much less conscienceness!

[rollingdivision]

They lease land and survey the land for oil and gas, most leased land has no recoverable oil or gas so they don't drill where there isn't oil or gas. Used drilled land leases go back to the government after 10 years.

[beingrepubwontmakeurich]

because it is too expensive.
it's too expensive for them to drill offhsore too.
and they don't have the manpower, engineers or refinery capacity to handle anything they could bring up anyway.
The Oil Co's nickel and dime their employees so much that many qualified people are leaving decent jobs here to go over to saudi arabia to work where they are paid and treated far better for their skills.
so this is all a big steaming pile of doggy doo that people are falling for. lifting this ban would do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help US citizens.

[ProudNeoCon]

Not all land is likely to have oil. It is very expensive to drill even a test well. So oil companies will drill only when geological survey shows that there is some likelhood that there is oil

[danoj]

Katrina rolled through the gulf, hear anything about oil spills? I didn't. This isn't 1969 oil exploration is much safer enviornmentaly these days. Absolutaley no reason we shouldn't tap our own resources. Ther is no excuse for it and dems ought to be ashamed.

[klmebane]

just because the media didn't tell you about spills doesn't mean there weren't any. the media today leaves a lot of stuff out.

also, offshore drilling only postpones the inevitable. eventually, there will be no more oil. in the past 100 years or so we have burned up 100's of millions of years of fossil fuel deposits. sorry, but those supplies will not last forever. we need to come up with alternative energy sources, and the fact that so many republicans are so against something that will truly help our economy is what's REALLY shameful.

blackbird highway said:

Well, that is an outright lie. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused 124 Offshore Spills For A Total Of 743,700 Gallons. The spills were photographed from space.

Unlike you, I have evidence to back my statement:

http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/06/19/mccain-katrina-spills/

http://skytruth.mediatools.org/node/19981

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/581/44814183_MMS_Katrina_Rita_PL_Final%20Report%20Rev1.pd

[rollingdivision]

They lease land and survey the land for oil and gas, most leased land has no recoverable oil or gas so they don't drill where there isn't oil or gas. UNused drilled land leases go back to the government after 10 years.

[chosenson]

But oil spills aside, will more drilling cause prices to decrease at the pump? Even if we were capable of producing more oil tomorrow, it would not make any difference. Here's why:

* On a recent TV broadcast we learned that 1/3 of the world's oil reserves are located in Canada.
* The US gets most of its oil from Canada
* Yet, Canadians pay more at the pump than Americans do
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=news/state&id=6062021

What do we learn from this info? Producing more oil domestically will NOT automatically translate to lower gas prices. Ask the folks in Canada. GW and McCain know this, yet they insist on saying whatever it takes, including misleading the public, to get more votes. Today, GW was simply campaigning for McCain.

[UnknownSoldier]

The Oil in Canada is too expensive to produce, however if Oil continues to climb it will be profitable to bring it to market.

[hoopesaz]

A decision to start drilling for oil of the coast will change the price at the pump because it will affect those who speculate on future oil supplies. But even then, drilling off of the coast isn't about drastically reducing