Schwarzenegger still wants to drill off Santa Barbara

May 1, 2010

Despite the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill that threatens coastline from Louisiana to Florida, considered by experts to be the worst U.S. ecological disaster in decades, members of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s administration continued to call for new drilling off Santa Barbara. [San Francisco Chronicle]

The attitude out of Sacramento stands in stark contrast to the Obama administration, which announced yesterday that it was putting all new federal drilling on hold until the cause of the BP gulf disaster could be determined.

“This doesn’t really change anything, because we’re looking at a platform that’s already in operation,” said Jeff Macedo, the governor’s spokesman.

Schwarzenegger has long championed the proposed Tranquillo Ridge drilling project off Santa Barbara. Macadeo said Friday that the project remains attractive because the oil company behind the project has agreed to end drilling off the coast in exchange for a permit to do so for the next 14 years.

Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara), an opponent of the Tranquillon Project, said the BP spill is “the perfect example of why the oil industry and the term ‘state of the art’ should never be used in the same sentence.”

Some political experts are predicting that the images of the severe ecological damage from the April 22 oil rig explosion could turn public opinion against the governor’s proposal.

More than 200,000 gallons of oil per day are spewing from a blown-out well, a mile believe water, five times the amount originally believed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The recent legislation requiring all new manufactured vehicles 2011 and 2012 to be capable of 35.5 miles per gallon on the highways and this incident will support gasoline prices to go up soon, brace yourself, it wiull incrementally go up, really up little by little..


Azusresees, buddy, they are going to crusify you for speaking the truth. ;-)

I couldn’t agree more. For everybody that will hit the down arrow on his arguement, give us a better alternative that is ready to go tomorrow. Not two years, five, etc. TOMORROW. Nothing uh. Doesn’t say you have to like it but as I stated on previous oil discussion, look on net and see what products are made from oil. It is a whole hell of a lot of everyday items. We are linked to the devil like it or not.

BTDT – I often see thumbs down on posts that I would think no one could possibly disagree with. I don’t approve of off shore drilling, I immediately gave azuresees a thumbs up. I’m not certain if he is pro or con on the subject but he did speak the truth. What’s sad is that we have moved along at a snail’s pace seeking alternative energy sources. As long as there is money to be made in oil, the large corp’s will continue to push their agenda’s right up to the last drop and they will pick the last $$ out of our wallets as oil becomes more scarce and they will simply “create” shortages when they want to boost their bottom lines, which means we will wait in lines. Eastern Oil / US Oil, doesn’t really matter because it isn’t sustainable. Regardless of “what soil” we drill on , very few American’s will realize a financial benefit. Don’t know what else is avail right now besides wind and sun, which I have to laugh when I think that PG&E is attempting to put forth a proposition that will restrict where we purchase that energy from! . Corn and sugar cane aren’t realistic and I would say that we aren’t making much headway where a solution to our dependency is concerned. Funny how SUV’s are so popular , sometimes I shake my head just to be certain that I’m not the one with the sand falling off.

In the mean time , there seems to be little (certainly not enough) concern for protecting our oceans and sea life but now that I went that far, here comes the thumbs down. Doesn’t matter, this is NOT a popularity contest.

Right on Cindy. And to the bloated ‘we need oil so shut up’ folks-read Cindy’s article again.

Recall how we have continually ignored seeking conservation, alternative energy and perhaps, gasp, getting by with less. We cannot despoil the planet just to serve our selfish interests. We have too many people using too many resources, we waste too much, we are and have been idiots to ignore pursuing alternative sources of renewable energy sources.

Just touting ‘we need oil’ is childish nonsense. Of course we need some until we can replace it but our attention and commentary should be directed in that direction instead of pandering to the status quo like blind automatons.

So, BTDT, your silly challenge and smug assumption of no response from actual thinking people only appeals to the idiot teabag fools whom I assume are besides themselves with glee with your assertion and arrogant self congratulation.

I like the comment I read that Lindsey Graham said this week.

“We’ve had problems with a car design but you don’t stop driving”.

“The Challenger accident was heart-breaking but we went back to space”.

Hell if I left it to your way of thinking we would still have Lewis and Clark sitting back on the East coast because it wasn’t worth the risk and we would be driving cars like the Flintstones!

So again talking about reading something (go back and learn how to read) I am up for alternative ideas. My point was is that it is goint to take TIME!!!

If you build a Solar for example in the interior areas of Calif. not only do you have to build the Solar plant, you have to build the infrustructer (i.e. High tension lines from the plant to the grid etc.) That also takes TIME and MONEY. So then when the electric company raises rates, all the liberal whiners will complain about that.

So in conclusion no I think with my brain and not just my gut and feel good slogans like liberals.

Well, after our little mutual bashing here is the answer; always has been, is now, and always will be. Heavy conservation with everyone participating–across the board. Then Manhattan style crash project to get serious about alternatives, with everyone getting less until we find more (cleaner energy).

Those pesky neo cons and teabaggies always preach conservation with government spending-well, how about all of us getting real and using less, spending less, doing more with less? Right now.

I don’t know if I agree on heavy part but for the most part I agree that yes if we all conserve it helps. I think we have come a lot of way in a lot of areas since the ’70s. Cars still get horrible mileage but compared to sevenites, we are a little better and now with smog devises (that we didn’t have) that has gotten better. We recycle more than we ever have. People are cutting back on electricity through fluorescent lights, street lights have gotton better, appliances are more effiecent, etc.

Can we keep moving forward like this. Yes. In the short term it doesn’t look like we have done much but in the long term (and bigger picture) we have come quite a long way. Does that mean we are done? No but it will take patience in getting to our objectives as a country.

I don’t think that conservatives (at least the ones I know) are against conservation. Maybe not as on a quick time table as liberals but hey if at least we all agree and are doing something towards the end goal, their is hope. Heck again use the early seventies as a comparsion to now. It is getting better isn’t it??

Despite the collision of two airliners inTeneriffe that ida, considered by experts to be the worst air disaster in history, people still want to fly.

Despite the Twin Towers being flown into by the worst attack on US soil in history, people still want to live and work in NYC.

And guess what: Despite the biggest oil spill, people will still want to use oil. Until someone comes up with something more than a low amp, low hour battery, we will need that oil…