Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Atlantic and Pacific
Report
OCS Advisory Board Meeting
Monday, April 9th, 2018
Atlantic/Pacific Report
Offshore Drilling
Interior says $160 oil won't help most areas; industry differs
A BP PLC oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico. BP/Flickr
Record high oil prices aren't likely to attract significant oil and gas drilling in the vast majority of
U.S. offshore areas targeted in the Trump administration's recent draft five-year oil and gas
leasing plan.
According to an Interior Department report, even if oil prices climbed to $160 per barrel, little or
no oil is likely to be pumped from the offshore Straits of Florida, the Oregon/Washington outer
continental shelf areas or 10 of the 14 Alaska planning areas identified in Interior Secretary Ryan
Zinke's 2019-24 leasing program.
Oil prices of $100 to $160 per barrel could boost extraction in the nation's most promising fields
in the central and western Gulf of Mexico and Alaska's Chukchi and Beaufort seas.
Only marginal drilling increases would occur at the $100 to $160 price level in offshore
Southern, central and Northern California; the North and Mid-Atlantic; and the eastern Gulf of
Mexico.
These estimates were outlined in a Bureau of Ocean Energy Management report released last
month together with Zinke's plan to make more than 90 percent of the U.S. outer continental
shelf open for oil and gas leasing.
That report evaluates how much undiscovered economically recoverable oil and gas is likely to
be extracted at oil prices of $40, $100 and $160 per barrel and natural gas prices of $2.14, $5.34
and $8.54 per thousand cubic feet.
BOEM's report also estimates the "net social value" of oil and gas development in the proposed
OCS planning areas — a value reached by subtracting the government's appraisal of the
environmental and social costs from the estimated economic value of the oil and gas.
Based on that equation, oil development in the Central Gulf of Mexico would have the nation's
highest value. At oil prices of $160 per barrel, the planning area's net social value would reach
$1.5 trillion. Exploration in the western and eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Chukchi Sea
planning areas would have net social values ranging from $200 billion to $600 billion.
But if oil prices fell to $40 per barrel, drilling off the shores of Northern California, the Beaufort
Sea and Alaska's Cook Inlet would have negative net social values. And development in the
Chukchi and South Atlantic planning areas would have "negligible development value."
BOEM didn't calculate the net social value of oil development in the Straits of Florida or 10
remote planning areas along Alaska's western and southern coasts, explaining that those regions
have "negligible development values" or "negligible resources."
Zinke's much-lauded draft leasing program targets a total of 1.7 billion acres along the nation's
shores, of which about 1 billion acres are located in the Alaska outer continental shelf. The
BOEM report calculates that 900 million acres of the Alaska outer continental shelf areas hold
insubstantial amounts of oil or gas (Energywire, Jan. 17).
Industry pushes back
Oil and gas industry officials are rejecting BOEM's
calculations, which they say vastly underestimate the
amount of undiscovered oil and gas likely to be
available along U.S. shores.
Nikki Martin, president of the International
Association of Geophysical Contractors, said that the
report ignores recent technological advances. She said
advanced high-tech seismic surveys could find
significant new pockets of oil and gas in previously
surveyed offshore blocks in the Pacific and Atlantic
outer continental shelf.
But in recent years, oil companies haven't been
allowed to assess those regions. "You can't know what
you can't see," Martin observed.
The oil industry continues to lobby for a chance to
explore along U.S. coasts. In comments on the draft
BOEM plan, Statoil ASA noted that "[a]s technology
improves and economic conditions change, leases once
deemed noncommercial evolve into viable drilling
candidates with commercial potential."
"Because of this evolution, it is important to allow innovative companies the opportunity to
pursue new leases and to test innovative geologic ideas and to employ advancements in
technology for drilling and production," the Norwegian multinational oil and gas company said.
In separate comments, BP PLC argued that "[d]evelopments in the Atlantic OCS will benefit
from the industry's latest advances and innovations in deep water technology."
"These technology advancements in real-time and remote monitoring, subsea infrastructure,
directional drilling, and seismic imaging, to name a few, have resulted in safer, more reliable
operations, increased efficiency, and smaller development foot prints."
For the near term, however, industry is taking a highly cautious approach to new oil exploration
projects, according to a recent report by Wood Mackenzie.
Andrew Latham, Wood Mackenzie's vice president of research and global exploration, noted that
the number of committed explorers has dwindled, with those companies looking for the most
promising prospects.
"Looking to 2018, the industry will drill fewer, better wells focused on plays that are
commercially attractive," he said.
Conservationists fault forecast
Meanwhile, conservationists are criticizing BOEM's forecast of increased oil and gas leasing at
$160-per-barrel oil prices.
Ocean Foundation fellow Richard Charter said the idea that the price of a barrel of oil would hit
$160 over the five-year time span of the Trump administration's draft proposed offshore program
is a "pipe dream" (Energywire, Jan. 5).
And even if per-barrel prices climbed that high, oil would find itself "noncompetitive" with
offshore wind, concentrated solar and certain biofuels, Charter said. "All of those prices are
coming down," he said.
Meanwhile, the upfront cost of installing new offshore rigs remains a major barrier to entry,
Charter said.
Conservation lobbyist Andy Kerr agreed that new offshore oil endeavors would face competition
with comparatively cheaper onshore production. "Most of that oil offshore that Zinke's proposing
to lease is not economic, and it's not going to be," Kerr observed.
Interior Department Shelves Oil and Gas Lease off Atlantic
Coast
The administration moves forward with offshore plans for the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska,
but its removal of an Atlantic lease sale sparks sharp responses from industry.
While an environmental group called the offshore oil and gas leasing decision a “David vs. Goliath” victory, an
industry leader said it was “disappointing and mind-boggling.” Pictured is an oil platform in U.S. coastal waters. Credit: J. Stephen Conn, CC BY-NC 2.0
By Randy Showstack 17 March 2016
Stating that “now is not the right time” for offshore oil and gas drilling activities along the Mid-
and South Atlantic coast, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell on Tuesday announced that a
potential lease sale for that region has been removed from the agency’s proposed Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing program for 2017–2022.
The OCS proposal, open for comments until 16 June, alters a January 2015 draft version that
included an option for a potential lease sale off the shore of the Atlantic coast. The proposal, a
key component of the administration’s comprehensive energy strategy, recommends moving
forward with 10 lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, which the agency says is one of the most
productive basins in the world. It also evaluates three lease sales off Alaska, an area that Jewell
said “demands specialized planning and detailed considerations.” The proposal calls for no new
leases off the U.S. West Coast, where there has been strong opposition.
During a 15 March telephone briefing, Jewell said the agency heard from many people who
opposed the Atlantic lease sale, including local communities that depend on fishing, tourism, and
shipping activities.
“When you factor in conflicts with commercial and national defense activities, market
conditions, and opposition from local communities, it simply doesn’t make sense to move
forward with the Atlantic lease sale in the near future,” she said. “As a result, this one potential
lease sale in the Mid- and South Atlantic that was evaluated in the draft proposed program has
been removed.”
Jewell said that the Department of Defense (DOD) had raised concerns that oil and gas
development in the Mid- and South Atlantic could conflict with increased naval training
activities there. The removal of that lease sale would lower the projection of future U.S. oil
production by about 0.1% and would lower the U.S. natural gas production projection by 0.06%,
according to the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). “Thus,
the energy security of the United States will remain strong without offshore leasing in the
Atlantic during the 2017–2022 program,” BOEM states in the new OCS proposal.
Revised Plan Draws Praise and Criticism
The removal of the Atlantic regions from the OCS proposal drew widespread applause from
environmental groups and condemnation from industry groups.
“Coastal communities have won a ‘David vs. Goliath’ fight against the richest companies on the
planet,” said Jacqueline Savitz, vice president of U.S. oceans for Oceana, an international
environmental group.
Savitz urged the administration to stop seismic air gun use in the Atlantic and to stop new lease
sales in the Arctic Ocean, which she said put “unique and diverse ecosystems at risk.”
U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said he was struck by Department of Defense concerns about
incompatibility of offshore drilling with naval operations off the coast of Virginia, which BOEM
cited as one reason for its decision. “The DOD has been relatively quiet during this public debate
and has never shared their objections with me before,” said Kaine, a member of the Senate
Armed Services Committee and former Virginia governor. “I look forward to additional
discussions with DOD to understand its position.”
”The removal of the Atlantic lease sale is “disappointing and mind-boggling,” said Randall
Luthi, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, a trade association representing
offshore energy and related industries. “The administration clearly places politics ahead of sound
science and wise energy policy.”
Luthi said that offshore oil and gas operations proceed safely around the world and described as
“a red herring” the administration’s use of the nation’s military concerns to partly justify its
decision. “Military and oil and natural gas activities have coexisted for years in the Gulf of
Mexico,” he said. “By removing the Atlantic sale, we are saying the military and industry can’t
figure out a way to make it work. That doesn’t even come close to passing the red-face test.”
Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the trade association American Petroleum Institute, said the
administration’s decision “appeases extremists who seek to stop oil and natural gas production
which would increase the cost of energy for American consumers and close the door for years to
creating new jobs, new investments and boosting energy security.”
Menendez, Booker Demand Local Voices Be Heard on
Trump Admin Plan to Expand Offshore Drilling
Senators call Interior Dept. public engagement ‘inadequate’, call for 60-day extension of
the public comment period, public meeting at Jersey Shore
Tuesday, March 6, 2018
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Bob Menendez and Cory Booker today joined a group of
22 senators requesting Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke extend the March 9, 2018 deadline to
submit comments on the Draft Proposed Program for the Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas
Leasing Program for 2019-2024 and on scoping for the required Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement.
“We believe a 60-day extension of the deadline for comments is necessary to allow for more
public hearings in coastal areas and to give the public sufficient time to submit comments on
offshore drilling proposed for nearly the entire U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS),
encompassing over 90 percent of total OCS acreage – the largest number of potential offshore
lease sales ever proposed,” the senator wrote in a letter to Secretary Zinke.
The letter also requests additional public meetings in rural and coastal communities in each
affected state and the opportunity for the public to offer formal oral testimony at public meetings.
“These public hearings are a critical opportunity for citizens to learn about and comment on the
Department of the Interior’s five year plan, and due to the geographic extent of the proposed
leasing program, it is imperative to provide adequate access for each region,” said the
senators. “We do not believe that the 23 currently announced ‘open house’ style meetings are
adequate in duration, location, nor format needed to meet the public input requirements.
Sens. Menendez and Booker helped rally New Jerseyans outside BOEM’s Feb. 14 open house in
Hamilton, N.J. In echoing the public outcry over the cynical decision to hold the information
session far from the Jersey Shore and on both Valentine’s Day and Ash Wednesday when few
residents could participate, the senators renewed their invitation to Secretary Zinke to meet with
constituents and business leaders who would be affected by Atlantic Ocean drilling and oil and
gas exploration, and to hold a real public hearing at the Shore.
Secretary Zinke recently announced that the offshore drilling plan will no longer include drilling
off the coast of Florida after personally meeting with Governor Rick Scott.
New Jersey’s coastal communities rely on a bustling tourism industry, which generates over $44
billion in economic activity and supports over 500,000 jobs—nearly ten percent of the state’s
workforce. New Jersey also has a prosperous commercial fishing industry, which generates over
$7.9 billion annually, and the state boasts one of the largest saltwater recreational fishing
industries in the nation. The state’s commercial and recreational fishing industries support nearly
50,000 jobs.
In January, Sens. Menendez and Booker joined a group of Senate colleagues from coast-to-coast
in condemning the Trump Administration’s offshore drilling plan. Both senators, along with
Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (N.J.-06), sent a letter urging Secretary Zinke to reject BOEM’s
plan to open the Atlantic Ocean to oil and gas exploration, which threatens the health of Jersey
Shore beaches and its thriving economy.
Sens. Menendez and Booker and Rep. Pallone led the charge in 2015 to remove the Atlantic
Ocean from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil
and Gas Leasing Draft Proposed Program (Five-Year Plan).
The New Jersey lawmakers also successfully convinced President Obama before leaving office
to permanently ban oil and gas exploration in areas of the Atlantic Ocean by exercising the
authority granted to him by Congress under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA).
In addition to Sens. Menendez and Booker, the letter sent today was signed by Maria Cantwell
(D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Ed
Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-
N.H.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tom Carper
(D-Del.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Angus King (I-
Maine), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Kamala
Harris (D- Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Dianne Feinstein (D-
Calif.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).
The full letter can be found below.
The Honorable Ryan Zinke
Secretary
United States Department of the Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
March 5, 2018
Dear Secretary Zinke,
We write to request an extension of the March 9, 2018 deadline to submit comments on
the Draft Proposed Program for the Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing
Program for 2019-2024 and on scoping for the required Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement.
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) provides for a 60-day comment period
following the release of the Draft Proposed Program. Given the large scope of the Draft
Proposed Program, we believe a 60-day extension of the deadline for comments is
necessary to allow for more public hearings in coastal areas and to give the public
sufficient time to submit comments on offshore drilling proposed for nearly the entire
U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), encompassing over 90 percent of total OCS acreage
– the largest number of potential offshore lease sales ever proposed. These public
hearings are a critical opportunity for citizens to learn about and comment on the
Department of the Interior’s five year plan, and due to the geographic extent of the
proposed leasing program, it is imperative to provide adequate access for each region.
Section 18 of OCSLA provides for the development of an oil and gas leasing program
that considers “economic, social, and environmental values” of the resources of the OCS
and the potential impacts of oil and gas exploration on the marine, coastal and human
environments. Upon consideration of the comments received during the Request for
Information comment period last year, this Draft Proposed Program identifies a
preliminary list of OCS planning areas and schedule for proposed lease sales during the
2019-2024 period. We are very concerned that this Draft Proposed Program includes the
Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and Eastern Gulf of Mexico that were rightly
excluded from the 2017-2022 program.
The previous 2017-2022 program was developed over three years, and incorporated over
a million comments from the public, scientists, industry, business owners, and other
stakeholders. The exclusion of the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and Eastern Gulf
of Mexico was a reflection of the significant economic, social, and environmental risks
posed by oil and gas development in those areas, as well as strong community opposition.
Local and regional concerns over offshore oil and gas activities have only grown since
the 2017-2022 program was finalized, with over 150 East and West Coast municipalities
formally opposing offshore drilling activities off their shores, including seismic airgun
surveys.
The opportunity for the public to provide input on the Draft Proposed Program is critical
given the new, large scope of the Draft Proposed Program and its potential impacts on
coastal communities and economies, the marine environment, and climate. We do not
believe that the 23 currently announced “open house” style meetings are adequate in
duration, location, nor format needed to meet the public input requirements. Several of
the public meetings were postponed and rescheduled later in the public comment period,
which does not leave adequate time for stakeholders to learn details about the DPP at the
public meeting and submit meaningful comments before the comment period ends.
There should be more meetings in coastal communities, large and small, in all areas
included in the Draft Proposed Program, as well as non-coastal areas to allow for as
many impacted voices as possible to raise their concerns. In addition, formal oral
testimony, as opposed to an “open house” format, would better ensure that people’s
concerns are heard and recorded publicly.
We respectfully request a full and fair opportunity for the most directly impacted
stakeholders to provide feedback on the Draft Proposed Program and on scoping for the
Programmatic EIS through an extension of the comment period deadline to at least May
8, 2018, additional meetings in rural and coastal communities in each affected state, and
the opportunity to offer formal, oral testimony.
Sincerely,
Opponents To OffShore Drilling To Rally in Concord
March 5
By NH Sierra Club News release
Opponents to offshore drilling are planning to rally outside the official public meeting today
(Monday, March 5) outside at the Holiday Inn, from at 3 p.m. until 4 p.m. at the corner of Main
and Centre Streets in Downtown Concord.
Additionally, the public is encouraged to participate in the public meeting hosted by federal
agency at the Holiday Inn from 3 p.m until 7 p.m. organized in a science fair format with rolling
admission that will allow participants to speak with Department of the Interior’s Bureau of
Ocean and Energy Management officials directly but not as a group.
CONCORD, NH – A tidal wave of bipartisan opposition to the Trump administration’s
controversial plan to expose America’s waters to offshore oil and gas drilling and exploration has
come to New Hampshire.
The draft proposed drilling plan unveiled by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke in January would
drastically expand offshore drilling in nearly all of America’s public waters, including new areas
of the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and Arctic, and auction off areas that were permanently
protected under the Obama administration.
A public meeting hosted by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean and Energy
Management (BOEM) fails to afford the public an opportunity to speak and hear the concerns of
their neighbors, and as such, has attracted vocal criticism from across the nation, including New
Hampshire.
Elected officials, including NH Governor Chris Sununu, Congressional Representatives Kuster
and Shea-Porter, and U.S. Senators Shaheen and Hassan, have opposed offshore drilling because
of the threat it would pose to New Hampshire’s fishing industry, public and private lands, marine
wildlife, and tourism economy. State representatives from both inland and seacoast communities
also provided clear arguments for opposition.
According to data from the National Ocean Economics Program (NOEP), the direct ocean
economy generated $1.4 billion in GDP. With over 53% of the state’s ocean economy in the
ocean tourism and recreation sector alone, even a small oil spill off New Hampshire waters
would decimate the state’s economy by negatively impacting visitation to the state’s beaches, the
Hampton/Seabrook and Great Bay estuaries and open waters.
State Rep. Suzanne Smith, Hebron, NH (Grafton Co Dist 8) and member of the State Park
System Advisory Council: “I oppose drilling off our coast for the love of wildlife. The Isle of
Shoals, five miles off the NH coast is home to nesting populations of several seabirds. We’ve all
seen photos of birds covered with a black oil slick from spills from Alaska to Mississippi.”
Rep. Renny Cushing, Hampton, NH (Rockingham Dist 21): “Drilling for oil off our precious 18
miles of seacoast is a threat to our state’s public health and economy. Hampton Beach is New
Hampshire’s Crown Jewel and it should not be sacrificed to the oil companies. We will fight to
protect our homes and our livelihoods.”
Rep. Mindi Messmer, Rye, NH (Rockingham Dist 24): “The Trump Administration’s plans to
open nearly half of all coastal waters to offshore drilling and exploration is a threat to the
environment and public health. The plan would expose the American people to potential public
health threats in every coastal state caused by releases like the Deepwater Horizon oil spill that
caused widespread environmental damage. The damage was caused by the spill itself but also the
chemicals used to attempt to clean up the devastation caused by the uncontrolled release turned
the Gulf of Mexico into a giant experiment with unknown long-term effects.
The plan also ties the national economy to fossil fuel energy sources that contribute to climate
change and sea level rise – which experts warn could create tens of millions of climate change
refugees. U.S. Military and security experts warn that the number of climate change refugees
will dwarf the number of refugees that have fled the Syrian conflict.
The time for bold action is now. As a nation, we have to commit to ending our reliance on fossil
fuels and transition to clean, renewable energy. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s H.R.3671 to get us
#OffFossiFuels Act to transition the U.S. to 100% renewable energy by 2035.”
Rep John Klose, Epsom (Merrimack Dist 21), an avid fisherman: “Don’t drill off the coasts
anywhere.”
Catherine Corkery, Senior Organizing Representative and NH Sierra Club Director: “The effort
to sell off New Hampshire’s coastline to the oil and gas industry is a threat to our coastal
economies, wildlife, our climate, and our communities. Put simply, offshore drilling is a bad idea
in Alaska, it’s a bad idea in Florida, and it’s a bad idea in New Hampshire. We’re here today to
send a message to the Trump administration: No offshore drilling anywhere.”
Jonathan Scott, of Clean Water Action and a longtime Granite Stater: “For anyone still
wondering about the corrosive and corrupting influence the oil and gas industry’s lavish political
spending is having on this Administration, this short-sighted drilling policy is about as clear a
case of democracy run aground as you’re ever likely to see. New Hampshire’s coastline may be
small, but its voters are mighty. We expect there will be a heavy political price to pay this fall for
those who support the idea of putting our economically invaluable and ecologically irreplaceable
coasts up for sale to the highest bidder.”
Tom Irwin, Vice President and Director of Conservation Law Foundation New Hampshire: “Oil
or gas drilling on Georges Bank has never made any sense, not the first time it was proposed and
judicially blocked in 1978 by CLF and not now. The value of New England’s continental shelf
for fish and shellfish is too critical to expose to any risk, in particular a fossil fuel. Fossil fuel use
is already doing enough damage to New England’s waters from increased water temperatures
and acidity.”
Melissa Gates, Northeast Regional Manager for Surfrider Foundation: “Recreation and tourism is
the heart of New Hampshire’s ocean economy. Not only would drilling and exploration for
offshore oil and gas resources devastate the marine ecosystem, but it would also decimate our
economy, and our coastal communities.”
Rob Werner, NH State Director of the League of Conservation Voters: “New Hampshire citizens
have spoken strongly in opposition to the Administration’s offshore drilling proposal. The
message is clear – the social, economic and environmental impacts due to a possible oil spill to
our coastline is too great a risk.”
Local actions to oppose the plan were sponsored by drilling opponents: NH Sierra Club,
Surfrider Foundation, the League of Conservation Voters, Conservation Law Foundation,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Clean Water Action, Environmental Group of The
Resistance Seacoast, the Seacoast Science Center, and others, highlighted statements of
opposition regarding the negative impacts of the proposal on New Hampshire’s coast and the
Gulf of Maine.
Further Background Information and Resources:
With the backing of scientists, economists, clean energy leaders, local businesses, and the vast
majority of Americans, the Obama administration permanently protected most of the Arctic
Ocean and a chain of deep sea canyons in the Atlantic Ocean, stretching from the Chesapeake
Bay to Canada’s border, from dangerous and destructive offshore oil drilling. The entire Arctic
and Atlantic was also removed from Obama’s five-year leasing plan, which the Trump
administration has since scrapped, wasting taxpayer dollars and agency official’s time in
restarting what is projected to be another two-year draft plan proposal process for Trump’s new
five-year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
Americans are turning out in large numbers across the U.S. already to reject the Trump
administration’s move to expand dirty and dangerous offshore drilling and energy exploration.
That opposition includes tens of thousands of local businesses and hundreds of thousands of
commercial fishing families that depend on clean coasts, as well as the majority of Americans,
over 150 coastal municipalities, many Alaska Native communities, bipartisan lawmakers at the
local, state and federal levels, and a host of faith and conservation leaders.
Opponents to offshore drilling are encouraged to rally outside the official public meeting today
outside at the Holiday Inn, from at 3 p.m. until 4 p.m. at the corner of Main and Centre Streets in
Downtown Concord.
Additionally, the public is encouraged to participate in the public meeting hosted by federal
agency at the Holiday Inn from 3 p.m. until 7 p.m. organized in a science fair format with rolling
admission that will allow participants to speak with the BOEM officials directly but not as a
group, reminiscent of The Northern Pass “public meetings” not too long ago.
THE DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS ON THIS BOEM PROPOSAL IS MARCH 9
at 11:59pm ET.
API: New studies project offshore energy development to
bolster U.S. economy 3/12/2018
WASHINGTON -- Opening the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to offshore oil and natural
gas development would be an economic catalyst—promoting U.S. jobs, investments, and
increased tax revenue—for states across the country, according to new economic studies.
“The oil and natural gas industry is a major contributor to the American economy and helps meet
America’s constantly increasing energy needs. We support more than 10.3 million U.S. jobs and
contribute $1.3 trillion to the U.S. economy - benefits that are felt across the country,” said API
Director of Upstream and Industry Operations Erik Milito.
“With more than 94% of the total acreage in federal offshore waters currently inaccessible,
opening the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to safe and responsible offshore energy development
could further advance our energy renaissance—including more higher-paying jobs, investments
in local communities, additional state revenue for public education and infrastructure, and long-
term energy self-sufficiency,” said Milito.
According to the four regional studies by Calash and Northern Economics which analyze the
potential economic impact of oil and natural gas development in the OCS by region, the U.S.
could see significant economic gains, including:
Atlantic OCS
• Projected $260 billion total cumulative spending over the twenty-year period
• $22 billion spent per year by the oil and natural gas industry twenty years after initial
lease sales
• Nearly 265,000 jobs supported across the nation within twenty years
Pacific OCS
• Projected $160 billion total cumulative spending over the twenty-year period
• $25 billion spent per year by the oil and natural gas industry twenty years after initial
lease sales
• Over 300,000 jobs supported across the nation within twenty years
Eastern Gulf OCS
• Projected $118 billion total cumulative spending over the twenty-year period
• $14 billion spent per year by the oil and natural gas industry twenty years after initial
lease sales
• Nearly 165,000 jobs supported across the nation within twenty years
Alaska OCS
• Projected $53.4 billion total cumulative spending over the twenty-year period
• An estimated nearly $2 billion spent on average per year by the oil and natural gas
industry
• Support up to about 13,500 jobs per year across the nation over the twenty-year
period.