County Issue Offshore Oil Drilling

President Bush banned new oil leases off 99% of the California coast last June until the year 2000 but excluded 87 tracts in the Santa Barbara Channel and the Santa Maria Basin, where leases will be allowed after 1996. With the threat to U.S. oil supplies from the Persian Gulf, should oil drilling be allowed off the coast?

Peter Cantle

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District The district is not in a position to make a discretionary decision on whether oil drilling should or should not be allowed. That is up to the governing agencies. Our job is to control the air quality on whatever development has been approved. Our position would be, if drilling is allowed to go forward, it has to be done in terms that are equal to development of onshore drilling. It is possible to substantially reduce the emissions from platforms and boats and other equipment by electrifying the platforms or using onshore power sources. If a project is going to be built offshore to drill and produce oil and gas reserves, the technology exists to make that a clean project, and I believe that that has to be implemented. Those standards have not been implemented in the past. We have a couple of projects now using electrified platforms. It is probably more costly than going with dirty platforms, but from a pollution district standard, it is a matter of fundamental fairness.

Gary K. Hart

State Senator D-Santa Barbara No. We can respond to the Middle East crisis much more effectively from an energy-dependent standpoint than by promoting offshore drilling. There is a bill pending on the Senate floor authored by Sen. Richard H. Bryan (D-Nev.) which would increase the automobile fuel-efficiency standards in terms of miles per gallon. This bill is being fought by the Bush Administration and the auto manufacturers. We can bring about an immediate savings through those kinds of methods rather than through offshore development that for the most part would take five to 10 years to bring on-line. I’ve always said that, if we have a war, or if Iraqi President Saddam Hussein blows up all the oil fields, then yes, it would be a national emergency, and I would support oil development. But that is not the situation now, and it is not likely to be in the foreseeable future. We are an adaptable people, and I think we can make changes, learn to conserve. But if this crisis blows over soon, I think we’ll return to business as usual and not make an effort to decrease our dependency on oil.

Robert E. Kallman

Adviser to the Secretary of the Interior My opinion is basically the same as the President’s, and that is that offshore drilling should proceed as long as it can be done in an environmentally safe manner. In areas where there are environmental concerns, they must be addressed before any drilling can resume. I am also concerned that the existing platforms be allowed to produce as quickly as possible to help make up the shortfall from the Middle East. I am referring specifically to the Point Arguello platforms off Santa Barbara County, which are being delayed because of transportation concerns. The county and the Coastal Commission want the oil from those platforms transported by pipeline, and the companies say they gladly will do this when one is available. But they want to use tankers until that time. There is no question in everyone’s minds, including the oil companies’, that a pipeline is safer and therefore should be used when possible. At the same time, all of the oil that comes into California from other places is tankered. If we don’t allow California oil to be tankered, it will simply be tankered in from other sources.

William Mount

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Basically, the district’s position has never been that offshore oil drilling should be precluded. Our position is that the offshore facilities for oil production should be equivalent to controls for onshore facilities. There is in the Legislature now a bill proposing a new federal Clean Air Act, and in it are provisions requiring offshore facilities to be subject to the same emissions standards as onshore. Ventura County has one of the worst ozone problems in the nation. If onshore drilling facilities are subject to rigid standards, then offshore should be subject to the same level of regulations. Also, we’re hoping that authority to regulate emissions will be transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Environmental Protection Agency. Because the Department of the Interior is responsible for developing drilling sites as well as regulating emissions, it is sort of like the fox guarding the henhouse.

Stan Devereux

Western States Petroleum Assn. Yes. Our industry has opposed the congressional moratoriums on offshore drilling because they are harmful to the economy. They lead to a decrease in domestic production, more dependency on OPEC, more tanker traffic and the export of jobs and investment overseas. We said California ought to be opened up even prior to the Iraqi situation. We see very clearly now our nation’s dependency on foreign oil and the impact it has on all of us. The Interior Department believes that areas offshore California contain billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that could be produced economically and safely for the benefit of all Americans. Locking up these energy-rich lands at a time when our dependency on foreign energy is escalating is a serious mistake. Ten years ago, there were 4,600 rigs operating offshore and onshore throughout the nation. About 1,000 rigs are operating today. Supplies, towns, people have all been disbanded. And now, to get that domestic supply, it’ll all have to be put back together again.