Monday, October 22 , 2018, 5:19 pm | Fair with Haze 66º

 
 
 
 

Bruce Allen: How About a County Action Plan That Actually Cleans Up the Environment?

The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors recently voted to adopt a Climate Action Plan as a symbolic gesture to reduce greenhouse emissions in portions of the county. The practical effect of their plan is to increases taxes, regulations, home inspections and expenses on county residents even though their action plan actually does nothing to improve the county’s environment or citizens’ health. It does, however, succeed in building a bigger county bureaucracy.

Bruce Allen
Bruce Allen

One particularly glaring omission in the county staff report was to not list any emissions of the county’s second largest greenhouse gas emission source: the prolific natural offshore methane gas and oil seeps that are California’s largest methane emission source. Methane is 21 times more potent a greenhouse gas than Co2. The seeps also leak approximately 80,000 barrels of oil pollution into coastal waters and beaches every year.

The offshore seep greenhouse gas emissions dwarf all other county emissions except transportation. The reason given in the staff report for completely omitting the offshore seeps in their inventory was that the county has no influence over them. The county does, however, have the ability to influence policies that do affect the seep emissions. The county did include transportation sources even though it has no regulatory power over transportation sources, since those are regulated at the state level.

At the Board of Supervisors’ hearing, the board refused to even consider an SOS California Action Plan strategy to improve the long-term environment for residents by reducing one of the largest hydrocarbon air pollution and greenhouse gas emission sources in the county: the offshore oil and gas seeps, which release approximately 400,000 tons per year of Co2-equivalent greenhouse gas emissions, and 6,200 tons of reactive organic gas air pollutants (and the 80,000 barrels of oil per year into our marine environment).

The Board of Supervisors’ Climate Action Plan omission of all of the offshore seep gas pollutants and seep greenhouse gas emissions inventory was even more glaring in that the seep gases dwarf all of the sources of greenhouse gas emissions the county plan actually intends to tax and regulate. At the same time, it never acknowledges the fact that legacy offshore oil and gas production has significantly reduced the offshore oil and gas seep pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions in Santa Barbara for the last 40-plus years.

How do we know the offshore seeps are a major source of local air pollution and greenhouse gases? The most detailed air quality study ever conducted in the county (Journal of Applied Meteorology & Climatology, May 1991) identified the seeps and transportation as Santa Barbara’s two dominate air pollution sources with quantitative estimates. The county’s staff report oddly only referred indirectly to the offshore seeps in a section of the report titled “biological sources,” even though the 1991 Santa Barbara air pollution study found through chemical signature analysis that biologicals only contributed 4 percent to the county’s air pollution.

Would additional targeted offshore oil and gas extraction actually further reduce the offshore seep pollutants? UC Santa Barbara studies led by professor (emeritus) James Boles and Scot Hornafius have shown offshore seep pollution has been significantly reduced by offshore oil and gas production and that the most active remaining seeps are in unleased areas. The remaining prolific seeps and their pollution could be reduced by targeted offshore extraction.

This issue raises a fundamental question for the community and elected officials: Is it more important to oppose any additional offshore oil production, or is it more important to have a cleaner environment for the long term even if the only way to reduce the offshore seep pollution is through additional targeted oil extraction?

It should be noted that by making California more dependent on foreign oil for the next several decades we are actually increasing foreign tanker transportation greenhouse gas emissions by several million tons per year, in addition to sending additional billions of dollars overseas. These are billions of dollars we won’t have to help build and invest in renewable infrastructure or to fund important educational programs.

Anyone walking our beaches the last 50 years has seen the large reduction of tar and oil on their feet from offshore production, but didn’t know a major air pollution source was also being reduced. Some have argued that the link between offshore oil production and seep reductions is not “proven,” yet the linkage is strongly correlated given long-term seep study conclusions, geologists and petroleum engineering opinions, and a lifetime of observations by thousands of Santa Barbara residents (including mine) watching the presence of oil and tar on our beaches slowly diminishing over the last 50 years as oil production continues to drain the adjacent seep zone areas.

The hundreds of birds that are oiled and killed every year by local natural oil seepage don’t seem to be acknowledged or addressed in any of the Board of Supervisors’ previous action plans. Neither do beachgoers and surfers who are frequently tarred by seepage pollution.

Why do some members of the Board of Supervisors, other elected officials and some local environmental groups never support county hearings on action plan options that would evaluate offshore production’s ability to reduce offshore natural seepage pollution long term while generating revenues and jobs for county residents, schools and services?

Boles has stated publicly that there is no question the seeps are a large source of coastal pollution, they are reduced by adjacent offshore production, and many of the remaining active seeps would likely see their pollution reduced by targeted offshore production. Much of the production could even occur with existing infrastructure.

California is seeing a transition to renewable energy sources with cars like the Tesla Model S, and ever increasingly efficient solar technologies like Sunpower’s new X-Model 21.5 percent efficient PV panels, but California will be highly dependent on oil and gas for many decades. Much of the oil consumed in California will continue to be used for nontransportation purposes.

Let’s encourage a majority of the Board of Supervisors to hold a hearing to consider an action plan that actually reduces local beach and air pollution for the long term. Reducing the seeps through extraction would reduce oil imports, stop a future county bankruptcy, reduce never-ending seep-oiled bird deaths, and clean up Santa Barbara’s air and water for the next 1,000 years. Environmentalism in Santa Barbara should be about the long term. That’s a Climate Action Plan worth considering.

— Bruce Allen is co-founder of SOS California, a Santa Barbara-based nonprofit organization devoted to public education on offshore oil and gas, environmental and renewable energy issues. He is the author of Reaching the Solar Tipping Point.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.