The shortsightedness of California offshore oil drilling
June 19th, 2008 Categories: San Diego County Community News, What to do in San Diego
“We are in this situation because of our dependence on traditional petroleum based oil”– Govenor Schwarenegger, North County Times,6/19/2008
SAN DIEGO–The best thing to come out of the rapid rise in cost of crude oil prices is the increased focus it has cast on alternative energy. But now, President Bush is trying to turn California offshore oil drilling in to a solution to the current situation. What I appreciate about our Govenor is his strength of resolve to call himself a Republican, yet not tow the party line when he knows it is bad for California.
Offshore, California is reported to sit on a reserve of approximately 11 billion barrels of oil. According to a 2005 report from the California Energy Commission California’s current oil production reached its peak of 72 million barrels 
1995. Now with new technology it should be safe to assume that production could be increased from this number, but we’ll stick with the 72 million figure. Using this number it would take less than 16 years to pump all of the reserve.
Now, let’s pretend we will be opening this NEW supply as well as areas of the Atlantic and the Gulf Coast region not in production to help our current crisis. When could we expect these regions to come online and what would be the impact?
According, to a 2007 report by the Energy Information Administration using official US government data, we should not expect these resources to come online until sometime around the year 2017 and the impact of these new resource through 2030 would be ‘insignificant’ with only an increase of production near 7%.
The cost of offshore drilling in California
Local congressional Representative Darrell Issa(Vista) has weighed in as, in favor of opening the coast to drilling. His reasoning according to todays North County Times is twofold. 
First he feels we are “running out of options” and, there is a “greater likelihood of spills from ships than from platforms” that are now needed to bring oil into California. While the first comment made from the congressman shows either his ignorance to the importance of developing new energy alternatives or his desire to tow the party line, the second comment is not based on fact.
Californian, in 2005 burned 44 million gallons of gas and 10 million gallons of diesel EVERYDAY. Our oil consumption is so great that in 2005 we could only produce 37% of the oil needs of the state. The only way to turn back those ships Congressman Issa is so worried about is to stop using so much oil. In order to do this we need to invest in alternative energy strategy and look at new ways of developing biodegradable non petroleum based ‘plastics’.
Besides the occasional oil spill, which we are all keenly aware of, a not so apparent impact on the coastal environment would be the removal of the old offshore oil platforms themselves.
They have already started to decommission old oil platforms and many more will be running dry. There are a couple schools of thought going and a state assembly bill about this problem.
The oil companies would prefer to remove the above sea structure while leaving the submerged legs in place. This process is termed ‘rigs to reefs’. The idea being that these legs become artificial reefs. In fact in 1996, 2,700 tons of mussels, scallops sponges and other sea creatures were left 
rotting on the docks in Long Beach when Chevron removed four platforms off Carpinteria. This tactic could save the oil companies approximately 600 million dollars. But this is not just favorable to the oil companies. The blasting necessary and other heavy work required to remove these legs from the sea floor would be very detrimental to sea life.
It seems the environmentalist most opposed to this have teamed up with an adversary, the fishing industry. See the fishing industry is opposed to this solution as it would prevent from using trawlers to fish for fear of snagging their nets. This method of fishing in and of itself is not environmentally friendly.
The beginning of the end.
Ultimately, there seems to be nothing substantial or positive gained from opening offshore oil reserves to drilling. Instead of having the government 
and energy companies investing hundreds of millions to extract this finite energy source many years down the road, our citizens deserve this money to be used in developing alternative energy sources and other alternatives to petroleum based products that will produce long term benefits. More is learned in the time of crisis than during periods of abundance. That is when complacency sets in.
Back when Alaskan pipeline was approved there was provisions in U.S. Senate Bill 2275 that NO oil from the Pipeline was to be exported..Later after the Oil Companies complain that they were getting enough revenue (do they ever get enough ?) the ban was lift and about 7% of the pipeline oil went to Asia..At that time gas prices in the U.S. was $152 per gallon and California was $1.73. This info comes from the Congressional Libary research report on the situation.
Why isn’t the Congress re-imposing this ban and send all the oil into the West Coast.
Mr. Issa needs to voted out of Office in Nov as well as almost all the Republicans if we ever want to get middle of the road solutions to our Nations problems. All the far right Republicans have done in 7.5 years is do whatever Bush wants and look where we are today..deep in the hole across the board. We were moderate Republicans since 1952 when we first voted..but we went totally independent since Bush’s first term.
Apparently, oil drilling technology was stifled after the Santa Barbara spill in 1969. So, no more drilling off our coast even though Santa Barbara seepage puts roughly enough oil on the beaches a the Exxon Valdez spill over a 4 year period. The environmentalists answer to any difficult question is alway NO.
No drilling
No Mining
No Nothing!
We will simply enhance the position of the petro-dicatators for the foreseeable future by purchasing their oil to fuel our economy rather than take what God gave us right here at home. Hydrogen fueled cars and others that run on biofuel and some of the other new technologies will not appear overnite. We need oil in the mean time like it or not. Drilling at home should be part of the strategy to become less oil dependent. Make it worthwhile for Americas entrepeneurs to invent an oil replacement and it will happen.
Perhaps this latest rise in oil prices is a blessing in disguise. The environmental lobby that put a stranglehold on common sense is going to start losing its grip. This is what happens when you overplay your hand.
I work as a diver in the Gulf of Mexico and I see alot of unaffected marine life and clean waters free of oil.We should open up the oil drilling off the shores of California ASAP. It would not only produce more oil for americas but add ten of thousands of jobs to people that need them.I understand the dangers of drilling and what can happen if their was a spill, but I believe the good out weighs the bad by a vast amount on this topic. Open the field of the coast of California or pay 7 or 8 or 12 dollars a gallon for gas, end of story!
Hello,
The problem with drilling off California is it is very low grade oil that will take several years to come online and then not last very long. I think this crisis is just what we need to spur new technology which will create new jobs and save what little oil we still actually control for a time when our grandkids may need it as a matter of life and death. Remember oil is used for much more than gasoline.
Leave your response!
Really Simple SyndicationCategories
Clubs
San Diego Happenings
Triathlon Related Shops
San Diego Neighborhoods
Charities
San Diego Dining
Coaching Links
Real Estate
V.I.B.s
Archives
Copyright © 2007 This is Brian Real Estate Blog Agent Login Design by Real Estate Tomato Powered by Tomato Blogs