« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Revisiting Obama’s ‘Tough Decisions’ on Offshore Drilling

I get it. By 'tough decisions' you meant 'forget about it', right, Mr. Obama?

Remember the State of the Union, way back in January? President Obama shared a vision of our nation’s energy future:

But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. That means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. …

Two months later, if you replace “making tough decisions” with “continuing to do nothing” in that sentence, you’ve got a clear picture of what’s happening.

Not only did the President make a disingenuous suggestion of a push to open new offshore areas (read: Virginia and the Eastern Gulf, off Florida) during the SOTU, over a year of foot-dragging by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar may jeopardize the regular annual leasing program in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico – that 15% of the Outer Continental Shelf that is currently open for leasing.

Last Thursday, 88 Republican House members sent a letter to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, calling for an end to the “Obama Moratorium” on offshore drilling.

Washington, D.C.– Today, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Doc Hastings (WA-04), House Republican Leader John Boehner, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor and 85 other Republicans sent a letter to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar demanding that the Administration begin to implement the 2010-2015 five-year lease plan for the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). This plan would open, for the first time in a generation, areas that were made available when Congress lifted the moratorium in 2008. After repeatedly delaying the original 2010-2015 OCS lease plan, Secretary Salazar recently said that the Administration would wait until 2012 to implement a new plan. The establishment of this new two-year “Obama Moratorium” is unacceptable to Republicans in Congress and defies the will of the American people.

Nick Snow, in an Oil and Gas Journal article points out that the Bush Administration attempted to accelerate the leasing program in response to the high energy prices of 2008.

As for preparing the next 5-year OCS program, which increasingly looks as if will cover its original 2012-17 time frame instead of the 2010-15 period which Salazar’s predecessor, Dirk A. Kempthorne, proposed when he “jump-started” its development in late July 2008, Birnbaum said: “We submitted a schedule which indicated we would begin scoping a programmatic [environmental impact statement] in April. That’s still on track.”

… House GOP members sent a letter to Salazar on Mar. 25 asking him to immediately implement the 2010-15 OCS schedule which was in its final comment period when Salazar took office and began a series of delays to broaden and redesign it.

Separately, in the O&GJ’s Washington Pulse blog, Snow adds:

After The Hill’s energy and environment Blog posted a story on Mar. 3 … quoting Salazar saying that the next five-year program would cover the 2012-17 instead of 2010-15 period, however, critics erupted. “Secretary Salazar has finally confirmed what had long been feared – that the Obama administration has no intention of opening up new areas for offshore drilling during his four years in office,” House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Minority Member Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said on Mar. 8.

When I contacted Salazar’s office for a statement, a spokeswoman responded: “Secretary Salazar will have a new five-year plan before the current plan expires.” That would be on June 30, 2012. If he expects to meet that deadline, he’ll need to start beginning to develop a programmatic environmental impact statement in the next few weeks if he expects to continue holding lease sales in the central and western GOM, let alone considering any in other parts of the OCS which were off-limits until Sept. 30, 2008.

[Emphasis added.]

Cross-posted at VladEnBlog.

COMMENTS

  • snowshooze

    We will still have the oil and gas.
    Ok, they might force us back to horse and buggy days, but we’ll still have it…a thousand years after everyone else runs out.

    • dmartin

      is that we are regulating ourselves into a state of weakness such that we will not be able to defend the energy resources that we have but refuse to allow ourselves access to.

    • dennism

      Who is this “we” that will have “it”? I guess you mean “we” in the collective sense. Cause I ain’t got none.

      This recalls to mind the good old days when people talked about withholding “our” wheat, corn and soybeans from people in the scary part of the world. “We” ain’t got no foodstuffs either unless “we” confiscate it.

  • Adjoran

    Whenever he says he will do something which is actually in our national interests, you can bet on nothing happening.

    • jojoe

      another Obama “snow job”.

    • voxoreason
  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    How can this be?
    It must be for our own good that the “O” has allowed gas prices to creep back up to over a dollar more a gallon… while raising taxes left and lefter…
    I cannot believe the “O” would like that!
    Has the “O” ever lied about anything else I ask you?
    What?
    “Ooooooooo”
    nevermind…

  • spinoneone

    How appropriate for this Easter season. Just go right ahead and crucify the entire country for the sake of the “new” religion – ecofascism. If you prefer, ecosocialism/ecomarxism/ecocommunism. It all works out to the same economic end for the U.S. – DOOM!!

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      I described ethanol subsidies as crucifying America on a cross of corn.

      It’s pretty much the same thing, that horrible, expensive subsidy was sold as being “green”. When actually it costs more energy than it creates.

      Remember the socialists seized upon green as a way to sell socialism. At the time they did not realize that they would have an opportunity to install real unadorned socialism.

    • CincoSolas_del_Bronx
      • Icythus

        Who are you saying it cheapens? Jesus Christ or William Jennings Bryan (Cross of Gold speech)?

        • CincoSolas_del_Bronx
  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    but then, Bryan shouldn’t have used the analogy either, and it doesn’t bear repeating.

    Analogy invites the assumption of a high level of correlation between not only some aspect of a source and subject, but also the scale of the two.

    To imply, for whatever effect, that economic difficulties of a particular nation–”a drop from a bucket” at that–are in any degree, scale, magnitude, duration, intent, purpose, effect, necessity or uniqueness, correlative to the voluntary, sacrificial, justifying death of the Lord Jesus Christ, eternal Son of God, is indeed cheapening to its object.

    Why not rather “America is being put in the ovens” or something like that? Oh I forgot, there are rules* about things like that.

    *and rightly so, for the very reason listed above

    • Icythus

      and here I was all set to disagree with you.

      Well-argued, sir.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    The US has more fossil fuels than any other nation on the planet according to the US government via the Congressional Research Service. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34233

    There is simply no reason whatsoever for us to be importing oil or to be denying ourselves the financial windfall from using our own resources. The GOP needs to get out in front of this and let the pubic know just how wealth we are in terms of energy and let them know just who it it that is denying it to us and why.

    • Richard Mullins

      Not just with Shale but that gas find off the Coast of Louisiana. BTW, Vlad I haven’t ask you about the “Davy Jones” find? 3 Trillion Cubit Feet of Nat. Gas and some oil. I’m wondering what’s your opinion on that.

      • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

        That means wells are difficult to drill and evaluate. Bottomhole pressures exceed 25,000 psi and temps are something like 440 deg F. Those are very challenging conditions.

        Bottom line is each well is a $100million + venture (maybe well over that). I’ve heard that the wellhead alone for one of these wells weighs a million pounds. Monsters.

        It will take several years to do the delineation drilling & bring it all on line. In the meantime, the companies with interests in it can put out press releases touting TCF reserves to get you to buy their stock.

        Good luck to them. It’s not easy money and it just reinforces my point that the days of the cheap, easy stuff are largely behind us.

        • Richard Mullins

          That takes a lot of Guts to do. Just the thought of lots of Nat. Gas and some oil out in the Gulf and not that far away is more proof that we have the resources we just need to drill. I think I’m going to have to dig up the link to this on the Houston Chronicle unless you have a link on the Times-Picyune.

          • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

            Arthur Berman has a nice article at The Oil Drum.

  • johnt

    only that it would take a tough decision.

  • spepper

    What is tough about deciding about offshore drilling? Unless you’re either A) a dimwit or more likely B) you are pushing a not-so-hidden agenda…………welcome to Soetoro aka Obama’s world………..

    DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW

  • Castor

    The price of oil will go through the roof until the gulf of Hormuz is swept of mines.
    DRILL, BABY, DRILL !!!

  • horseshowfreak

    i’ve read somewhere that there is no practical limit to the amount of oil under America. and really, why would God give us land where we would run out of the natural resource so much of our free market economy is based on? it just doesn’t make sense. the key to our future is drill baby drill! if we run out of oil in shallow wells, we drill deeper ones. problem solved! i once heard an argument made by a liberal progressive enviro wackadoodle on larry king that it costs more to get oil from deeper wells, but that doesn’t make sense because there is more pressure down there to push the oil up to the surface.

    if we keep drilling we can eventually have more oil than the middle east. and then we can tell saudi arabia to go %%%%%% themselves.

    also we can give our deep drilling technology to israel and they can become the new saudi arabia of the middle east.

    • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

      The cost to drill goes up geometrically with depth. The optimum depth for oil accumulation is about 12,000 ft so once you get past that depth there are diminishing returns.

      Domestically, the cheap, easy stuff is gone. There are virtually limitless amounts of tar sands in Canada and oil shales in the Rockies, but those are costly to exploit & there are environmental issues.

      Our best bet is natural gas – cleaner, more plentiful & nearly 100% American.

  • horseshowfreak

    is that it brings even more enviro wackadoodles out of the woodwork. i saw something somewhere where they were complaining about fracking the rock to allow the gas to escape (that’s not the the battlestar galactica expletive, it’s short for fracturing at great depth). the enviros were saying it mixes chemicals with the well water and they even showed someone’s tap water catching on fire. i think that was in some really remote part of the country where not many people live anyway.

    but seriously the econazis in the government would never let things get too bad with the water and all that stuff and even if it did – doesn’t everyone drink bottled water these days? i know i do. i don’t trust the government with the water i drink!