Official Says Offshore Drilling May Not Be Needed

A California energy commissioner told a presidential task force on offshore oil development Thursday that drilling on two controversial California coast sites “may not be necessary” in the near future because there are substantial reserves of onshore oil.

Energy Commissioner Richard A. Bilas told the President’s Outer Continental Shelf Leasing and Development Task Force that deposits of oil in the state are much larger than those off the coast.

“The fact is that reserves in Kern County alone may be three times greater than reserves offshore,” Bilas said.

Bilas, chairman of the commission’s fuels planning committee, made the remarks at the last of 10 hearings held by the task force around the country since May. President Bush established the task force in February to examine concerns over proposed oil drilling leases in three environmentally sensitive areas, two of which are off the California coast from Santa Barbara and Marin counties.

Energy Commission Chairman Charles R. Imbrecht said later that “our position is we don’t believe any energy option should be foreclosed,” including offshore oil. But he said the development of onshore resources may pose fewer problems than offshore sites.

“We spend a lot of both time and energy debating offshore resources when we have onshore resources that can be developed in an environmentally acceptable fashion,” Imbrecht said.

The task force winds up its hearings while Congress is debating offshore drilling in general. The House this week approved a measure that would shut down drilling along much of the nation’s shoreline, including all offshore drilling in California. The fate of such legislation is in doubt, however, because it is opposed by the Bush Administration.

In Sacramento, Bilas told the task force that reserves in the Central Valley are made up of heavy crude oil, requiring high-pressure steam to retrieve. Because of the cost of the recovery process--called “thermal enhancement”--the onshore reserves have been tapped in the past primarily when oil prices on the world market have risen, Bilas said.

“But now, in light of the environmental concerns, it makes sense to get the thermally enhanced oil first,” he said after the hearing.

Some groups opposed to offshore drilling because of the danger of oil spills say the thermal enhancement method of onshore production is not only safer for the environment, but also has other advantages.

A fringe benefit is that heat from the recovery process can be used to generate electricity, said Gerald Meral, executive director of the Planning and Conservation League. “It is turning out to be a major source of electricity,” he said.

According to Energy Commission figures, 59% of California’s oil supply comes from in-state sources, 33% from Alaska and 8% from foreign sources. Bilas said, however, that oil from Alaska may account for as little as 20% by 2005 as that state’s resources decline. Because of the expected change, California will have to continue to develop its own reserves, he said.

“California does not want to be forced into relying more on foreign imports to meet its petroleum requirements,” Bilas said.