Governors Stand in Way of Offshore Drilling, Even if Congress Approves

grist.org

President Bush keeps repeating his call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. Republican presidential candidate John McCain is consistently drilling home the same message. And on Wednesday of last week, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said that just in case the ban is lifted, his department is laying the groundwork so offshore drilling in new areas could begin in as few as three years.

What drilling proponents don't say is that even if the congressional ban were lifted, many of the most promising untapped offshore areas would likely remain off-limits to oil and gas exploration.

Bush, McCain, and GOP congressional leaders all say that states should decide whether to open their shorelines to drilling -- and that states should get a share of drilling royalties as an inducement to say yes. But many governors and other leaders in coastal states are saying, "No, thanks!"

Some 8.3 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico were opened up to drilling by a bill signed into law two years ago, so Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi don't matter much in this debate.

What's at stake is an estimated 18 billion barrels of oil off the coasts of other states.

Some 10 billion of that is in Californian waters, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) wants it left alone. He has aggressively challenged his partymates on the issue, saying anyone who suggests that offshore drilling would lower gas prices is "blowing smoke." Chances are slim that Arnie and other state lawmakers would permit drilling near their shores anytime soon (even though a slim majority of Californians now support it).

Other West Coast governors are of the same mind. On July 29, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) and Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D) joined Schwarzenegger in a vow to fight the push for more offshore drilling.

In June, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D) and North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley (D) spoke out against offshore drilling, citing the damage it could do to their states' tourism, real estate, and natural resources. "Our economy is driven by tourism and use of the shore," said Corzine. "I think we would have a hard time getting public support for this concept." Likewise, Easley said he didn't believe the North Carolina legislature would approve offshore drilling.

In the Northeast, Maine Gov. John Baldacci (D) and other political leaders say "no way," fearing for their state's fishing industry and environment. Massachusetts tried offshore drilling up until 1982, and found there wasn't much oil there -- plus opposition to drilling from Bay Staters is "fierce," writes Boston Globe reporter Beth Daley. Maryland's governor is opposed. Neither Delaware nor Rhode Island has much shoreline to tap. And if Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell (R) is in favor of offshore drilling, she hasn't said so yet (she didn't bring it up in a recent speech on energy issues).

It's proved politically unpopular in Virginia as well, where the state legislature killed two bills that endorsed the notion of offshore drilling in June (though Democratic Gov. Timothy Kaine says he's open to exploration).

Florida's leaders long maintained a bipartisan opposition to drilling -- until a few weeks ago. After McCain flipped on the issue in June, Gov. Charlie Crist (R), who is interested in being McCain's vice president, followed suit -- albeit unenthusiastically. Other Florida Republicans have also backed McCain's drilling call, and a number of Florida voters are shifting in the same direction -- a recent Quinnipiac poll found that public support for drilling has jumped from 50 to 60 percent in the state. But even Republican U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez has fought to keep rigs at least 125 miles off the state's Gulf Coast, where tourists like to hang out. And most Democratic leaders in the state remain bitterly opposed.

Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue (R) wants to lift the moratorium, but oil companies gave up on finding oil off the state's coast in 1980, after spending millions on test wells that yielded very little.

South Carolina legislators have also indicated that they're game for offshore drilling, but Gov. Mark Sanford (R) says he opposes it. "We would certainly have some hesitation just based upon tourism and the natural beauty along the coast," said a spokesperson for the guv. "We certainly wouldn't want to do anything that would kill the goose that laid the golden egg." The good news for Sanford: Geologists say there's almost no oil off the state's coast.

A recent Gallup Poll found that 57 percent of Americans said they would support drilling in places currently off limits if it would bring down gas prices. But that's a big "if." Economists and energy experts say drilling wouldn't do a dang thing for prices in the short term, and very little in the long term. And the lack of either political will or available oil reserves in most coastal states makes drilling even less of a practical answer to high gas prices.

As members of Congress head home to their districts for August recess, Bush, McCain, and other Republican leaders continue to blame congressional Democrats for blocking offshore drilling -- but Dems in Congress are clearly not the only people standing between oil companies and the outer continental shelf.

Comments

[mamacat]

So, voters in Mid-America, who have never had to worry about the consequences of close-in offshore drilling, think it is a good idea, while those of us who have had to worry about it are against it.

I do not trust the oil companies to drill safely. That, coupled with the tremendous potential that alternative energy sources hold for us, much more quickly and much more drastically, and I will not vote to let the oil companies pick the low-lieing fruit near our shores. There are already about 50,000 oil wells in California, so its not as if we are not doing our part to drill up all the oil.

[TxAggie]

California ranks 1st in energy consumption and 14th in production- no you are not doing your part. 50,000 wells is not impressive. The low lying fruit near your shore is billions of barrels of oil that underlie federal lands, not California lands.

You do not trust the oil companies todrill safely, why the hell not? We are not Pemex. the American oil industry leads the world in know how and safety. The Santa barbara blowout occurred 40 years ago, name one by American Industry that has come close anywhere in the world.

[RememberTheAlamo]

Hi All,

Am all for drilling, but I am even more for states rights . . . I think it is a great idea if the west coast and Northeast Governors respect the wishes of their states.

Clearly, Point A (CA) will never be produced.

The large field off Atlantic City can not be brought in without a pipeline across NJ . . . which will just never happen!

A caveat to this . . . is the West Coast and Northeast wealth will be shipped to interior energy producing states. It is like Urban rent, paid to the red rural states. . . . and this is so cool!

Hope nobody figures this out for a long while!

So, in the mean time . . . Go Governors!

[TxAggie]

What large field off of Atlantic City?

[RememberTheAlamo]

Hi TxAggie,

There are several formations off Atlantic City which we explored in the early 1980s. The seismic wasn't processed correctly . . . there were "tricks" to the analysis . . . anyway, we recovered in time and were able to map very sizeable prospects offshore . . . but avoided a leasing catastrophe . . . Tenneco successfully drilled one of the "off-structure" leases, which confirmed our analysis (They hit oil).

But the problem was . . . and remains . . . even if you produce . . . the populace of NJ (that is a blue state remember!) . . . would never let a pipeline come ashore and the idea of offshore storage is only worst (the beach thing) . . . so great, you discovered oil . . . but like Tenneco politely said . . . . "not commercially producible" . . . which was an interesting twist on the standard line.

[dadw5boys]

Well everyone should experience the feeling of cleaning the oil off your feet or shoes with KEROSENE after a walk on the beach!!!!

[MaryanneAZ]

Details, details. When have politicians ever let the facts stand in the way of getting elected? McCain has known about and opposed offshore drilling for decades. However, he wants to win an election. In offshore drilling he found traction; albeit false traction. It was his only Ace and the Gang of 10 has now allowed Senator Obama an opportunity to jump on the false bandwagon of offshore drilling with a royal flush Ace high. It's a gift and a win for Obama. If "average" voters largely believe something, then our elected leaders have little choice but to kow-tow to the electorate. A compromise with "limited" offshore drilling, which will never happen as this article spells out very well, is the perfect answer to Obama's dilemma on the issue. Go Team Obama!!! Yes WE Can!!! And I, frankly, do not care if we have to be pragmatic and practical to get Obama elected. This is election is too important. My son's future is at stake. I'm in.

[DuganS1]

McCain didn't support off-shore drilling before because oil wasn't over $100, $120, or $140 before. It becomes a much bigger issue when oil and gas prices go up, doesn't it? McCain also realizes that off-shore drilling will reduce our reliance on foreign oil and help the balance of payments issue.

[kbrandauer]

I say the first oil derrick has to be put offshore of the Bush compound in Kennebunkport Maine. After that we can then decide where else to drill.

[saltysea]

Yup. And then the first new nuclear plant and waste facility.

[RememberTheAlamo]

I want the 1st oil derrick!

Let the politicians get in line (at the back).

[TheJibreelaMonsters]

I would love to see there re-election chances?

[leduck]

well..., 18 billions barrels scattered here there maily off the coast of california and florida doesn't impress me much
let me know when a real elephant field is discovered
otherwise, i think we're in trouble

[UnbiasView]

Fine, I'm all for allowing them to make the decision on state lands on drilling.

[KillTheMessenger]

Expect a lot of lawsuits.

[UnbiasView]

Of course, the environmentalists stand side by side with the lawyers and Democrats in their fight against the building of anything new . . . bridges, roads, power plants, etc.

[TxAggie]

I agree. State lands extend out to the three mile limit- after that its Federal.