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.