"We cannot drill our way to sustainable prosperity and security"

That's the kind of statement that you usually hear from environmental groups opposed to offshore oil drilling. But this time, it came from retired Vice Adm. Dennis McGinn, a consultant on energy security issues, speaking at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography as part of a hearing by a state Senate committee on climate change designed to gather more information on how energy use affects national security.



Cutting Americans’ addiction to fossil fuel isn’t a tree-hugger issue but a national security one, McGinn told California lawmakers on Friday. Getting more oil within the United States is not a solution, he said. Top military leaders at the hearing told state senators that the armed forces are taking energy issues seriously — by working on ways to make their operations at home and abroad more efficient. In California and Nevada, conservation efforts by the military have reduced energy usage by 18 percent since 2003. The Navy is working on using biofuels in new ships, plus generating power from the sun and the wind on its bases.



More

Climate Legislation Should Exclude Proposals for Expanded Offshore Drilling

The following is a press release issued today by Oceana:

Oceana Cries Foul Over Rumored Expansion of U.S. Drilling from Coast to Coast

In response to the suggestion that the Kerry-Graham-Lieberman approach to climate legislation will include expanding offshore drilling into previously and currently protected areas, Oceana offers the following statement from senior campaign director Jacqueline Savitz:

“While we have not been privy to the actual legislation, we are extremely concerned and perplexed about reports suggesting that the climate bill will expand offshore drilling into areas that were previously protected, and even more egregious, into areas like the waters off Florida’s west coast that are currently protected by law.

Climate change is expected to cause devastating global impacts, including food and water shortages, severe weather and major ecological disruptions. In some areas, this will lead to territory loss, drought and famine, thus creating climate refugees and national security threats that concern U.S. military leaders.

These threats, caused by our consumption of fossil fuels, demand that we break our oil and gas addiction and shift to a clean energy future. The best solution is to focus on expanding renewable energy sources such as wind and solar.

While there is a continued need for fossil fuels today, there is plenty of oil and gas remaining and accessible in offshore waters that are already industrialized. According to the Minerals Management Service, there is more undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas in the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico than in the rest of the country combined. The U.S. Energy Information Agency has shown that drilling for oil and gas in previously protected areas will not make us independent of foreign oil. Besides, these fossil fuels won’t be available for many years. Instead, focusing now on clean, renewable energy sources would make this expanded offshore oil production unnecessary. According to government estimates, the oil in these areas will save consumers only pennies at the pump, if that.

We are addicted to oil. The push to open previously protected areas off the west coast of Florida and the entire east and west coasts of the U.S. is unnecessary. It represents a greedy grab by the oil industry. It’s akin to offering an addicted smoker more cigarettes and claiming it’s a way to help them quit. Instead, it makes quitting harder and worsens the effects. Expanding offshore drilling from coast to coast would make it harder to stave off climate change, while worsening its impacts.

Oceans can be part of the solution. By expanding investments in offshore wind development, the U.S. could expand its energy generation while reducing carbon emissions. These investments would also slow ocean acidification and the resulting damage to marine life.

There is no place for expanding oil and gas drilling in a climate bill. A climate bill should limit carbon releases, stimulate the development of renewable energy, and prevent hardship for those Americans who may be affected by increasing energy costs passed on by energy companies. The oil and gas reserves that remain in previously or currently protected areas, and oil in the fragile Arctic region, represent carbon dioxide that is not yet released into the atmosphere. We should leave it in the ground. Trading away healthy oceans and at the same time worsening the climate change problem with no clear gain to the American people is a fool’s bargain and one that we hope will not be in the legislation.”

No, Drilling at the Beach is Not the Answer Either!

The city of Hermosa ('beautiful' in Spanish) Beach, California is in an 11‐year‐old legal battle over a proposal for a massive oil‐drilling and production operation next to local residences, parks and businesses. The city has now requested that the California State Supreme Court review a recent California Court of Appeal decision in the ongoing litigation. The Court of Appeal ruled in the city’s favor by finding the Hermosa Beach City Council had the “discretionary power” to deny an oil drilling permit, if it found the oil‐drilling operation proposed by Macpherson Oil Company would endanger the health and safety of the community.

Macpherson Oil Company wants to drill up to 30 oil wells and place permanent tanks and production facilities on 1.3 acres of land at the corner of 6th Street and Valley Drive, next to the city’s popular greenbelt, a half block from South Park, a block from residences and about a half mile from the beach, pier and downtown.

Macpherson's slant‐drilling operations are designed to tap into offshore oil reserves. Oil and gas operations on and near the ocean are considered so risky that no offshore oil projects – including the type of slant‐drilling Macpherson Oil Company proposed – have been constructed in state waters since 1969. That was the year an offshore oil well blowout covered 35 miles of beaches with an oily goo that killed more than 10,000 sea birds and countless numbers of fish on the Santa Barbara Coast.

In 1998, an independent analysis found the massive oil‐drilling operation would pose the following risks:

• 1 in 3,000 risk of a fatality
• 1 in 700 risk of one or more serious injuries to the public
• 4% likelihood of an offsite flash fire with potential for human casualties
• Risk of 31 leaks, 2 major releases and 1 rupture over the 35‐year life of the project

What do you suppose the risk of leaks or major releases would be for an even larger offshore drilling project?

Arctic Spills, Florida Drills and Peak Oil

ALASKA

Shell could face more delays on offshore plans
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/030510/loc_img10_001.shtml

Federal Government To Pay Bill For Oil Drilling Risk Research
http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/06/federal-government-to-pay-bill-for-oil-drilling-risk-research/
Yesterday, Amy Merten of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, warned of the consequences of a lack of adequate research on how to deal with oil spills from offshore drilling in the Arctic. “We know that we will have a spill in the Arctic. It’s just a matter of when,” she said.

FLORIDA

P.C. military officials give views on oil drilling
http://www.newsherald.com/news/drilling-81988-military-officials.html

South Walton County man takes fight against offshore drilling to Facebook
http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/walton-26587-offshore-beach.html

Offshore oil exploration numbers don’t add up for Florida
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2010/mar/07/offshore-oil-numbers-dont-add-up-florida/

Another push for offshore oil drilling looms
http://www.bradenton.com/2010/02/28/2090186/another-push-for-offshore-oil.html

NATIONAL

Sustainable Energy or Offshore Oil?
Will More Drilling Result in Lower Prices at the Pump?
http://international-environmental-affairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/offshore-oil-drilling

Gas Crisis 35 Years Later – No Difference – Who Remembers Gas Crisis of 1973
http://gasoline.doodig.com/2010/03/07/gas-crisis-35-years-later-no-difference-who-remembers-gas-crisis-of-1973-2/

Peak Oil
Have we reached a tipping point in the global oil supply?
http://www.takepart.com/issues/peak-oil/17009

Lots of good references and "take action" tools here

Resolved Against Drilling in FL

View Resolved Against Drilling in a larger map

New Surfrider Fact Sheet Regarding Offshore Oil Drilling.

 Extra, extra!  Read all about it!!

Learn more here

Despite Reports of Little Oil and Little Support from Coastal Residents, Florida Moves Closer to Offshore Drilling

FLORIDA

Oil drilling bill introduced in Senate
http://legislaturetoday.blogs.heraldtribune.com/10023/oil-drilling-bill-introduced-in-senate/
Read the bill: http://flsenate.gov/cgi-bin/view_page.pl?Tab=session&Submenu=1&FT=D&File=sb2622.html&Directory=session/2010/Senate/bills/billtext/html/
Senator Haridopolos introduced this legislation over the weekend. It would allow drilling within 3 miles of the coast and would take effect on July 1, 2010.

House will ban drilling platforms visible from shore
http://www.news-press.com/article/20100301/GREEN/100301023/1075/House-will-ban-drilling-platforms-visible-from-shore

Offshore oil bill is viewed as risky
http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20100228/NEWS01/2280316/1006

Offshore Florida oil: Not much there, there
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2010/02/offshore-florida-oil-not-much-there-there.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+news%2Fpolitics%2Fpoliticalpulse+%28Central+Florida+Political+Pulse%29
“A new report says drilling in Florida waters would “have no discernible impact” on gas prices or the nation’s dependence on foreign oil, but could pump millions into state coffers. […] However, the report also said that the state’s estimated oil reserves – less than 100 million barrels – would satisfy the U.S. demand for oil for less than a week.”

Report says oil supplies in Fla. waters negligible
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6887948.html
“Estimated reserves in Florida waters would provide the United States with less than a week's worth of oil and have no discernible effect on prices at the pump or U.S. reliance on foreign oil, says a report released Friday as part of a state Senate review of whether a ban on offshore drilling should be lifted.”

In Florida, support for offshore drilling depends on where you live
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/02/28/1504466/in-florida-support-for-offshore.html
“When it comes to drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, it's as if there are two Floridas. The people who live and work along the Gulf Coast tend to oppose it. Counties and cities around the state's western rim -- including Pinellas County, Largo, Tarpon Springs, St. Petersburg and Safety Harbor -- have passed resolutions opposing offshore drilling. Much of the support for the Legislature lifting the state's longtime ban on offshore drilling is coming from the state's inland areas, where no swimmer will ever encounter a tarball.”

CALIFORNIA

PXP and EDC: A Grand Plan
http://www.independent.com/news/2010/mar/01/pxp-and-edc-grand-plan/