Rep.SaludCarbajal
This week, Representative Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24) announced the reintroduction of the California Clean Coast Act. The California Clean Coast Act was the first bill Congressman Carbajal introduced as a Member of Congress, demonstrating his longstanding commitment to protecting California’s coast from offshore drilling and the devastating impact of oil spills.
The California Clean Coast Act would permanently ban future offshore oil and gas leasing in areas of the Outer Continental Shelf off the coast of California.
“Santa Barbara knows firsthand how devastating oil spills can be on our marine ecosystems and coastline,” said Rep. Carbajal. “I’m proud to lead this bill to ban future offshore oil drilling in our state and ensure California’s world-famous coastline is protected for future generations to enjoy.”
“California’s spectacular marine life — including complex kelp forests and charismatic sea otters — and vibrant coastal economies rely on healthy ecosystems. This legislation could, once and for all, block offshore drilling activities along the continental shelf, and protect critical marine habitats along California’s iconic Pacific Coast,” said Pamela Flick, Defenders of Wildlife California Program Director.
“The California Clean Coast Act is critical to protecting our coast and climate from the threats of offshore oil drilling,” said Linda Krop, Chief Counsel of the Environmental Defense Center, which was founded in the aftermath of the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. “From the 1969 blowout at Platform A to the 2015 pipeline spill along the Gaviota Coast, the California Coast has suffered the devastating effects of offshore oil development on communities who live, play, and work here. We know that when it comes to offshore oil drilling, it is not a question of if – but when – another spill will devastate our beaches, our ocean, our wildlife, and our economy. The California Clean Coast Act will preserve our precious coast from the threats of future oil spills and climate change.”
Rep. Carbajal has been a staunch advocate to ban future offshore drilling off the Central Coast. At the end of the Biden Administration, Carbajal’s 8-year push to ban future offshore oil drilling came to fruition when President Biden invoked his authority to protect over 625 million acres of federal waters —including the entire East Coast, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, the Pacific coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California, and parts of the Northern Bering Sea— from oil and gas exploration. Congressman Carbajal was one of 12 members of Congress who wrote to President Biden requesting this action before the end of his term.
For the full bill text click here.
Many thanks, Congressman Carbajal, for standing up in support of what is important.
As always, thank you Salud, for thinking about ALL your constituents and our environment. If Orange Julius can ban new wind leases for the production of clean and sustainable energy from relatively harmless wind turbines, we Californians should be able to say NO to new filthy oil wells that just further decimate our planet.
Setting us back 50 years in renewable energy production is not the way protect our fragile planet. THIS will.
Very nice if they will be able to actually ban offshore drilling to save and preserve our coastline for eternity. Less oil extracted off our coast means an increase of production inland. Many other states like North/South Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, and Alaska are bumping up production. The bump in production isn’t a new phenomenon. The last year of Biden’s presidency netted the largest amount of oil production by far in US history (according to the US EIA). Those same states (aside from Alaska) that are currently producing most of our oil also are leading the way in wind-turbine energy production, along with California.
True, and there is already increases in oil production planned. It’s one thing to drill in open prairie, but quite another to drill offshore where oil spills and even routine maintenance or simple accidents can destroy far more.
Sure, we all know who’d going to come clamoring in shrieking NIMBY, but yeah. I am. I’d rather put the risk on a low density ecosystem that can recover far easier than our coast line.
“Low density ecosystem”? Interesting, never heard that one before. Hey, you just think your backyard is worth more than a “prairie” or any of those other states you think are just red a-hole wastelands. Own it.
BASIC – it’s because you’re incapable of critical thinking. Try really thinking about what those words mean.
As for “owning it,” uh…. I just did. See that sentence that starts with “I’d rather…?”
Maybe do yourself a favor and use your basic brain once in a while. It’s exhausting having to explain every simple sentence to you.
Ah yes, the wannabe CA elitist attempt to make oil drilling happen in the red states. I do understand your take. Election lost. And that’s a problem for your types.
BASIC – I don’t want ANY oil drilling. But yeah, if it’s going to happen, which it will, I’d rather it be done where the risk of destroying massive and complex ecosystems is less. How is this so hard for you to understand? Aren’t you an ecologist? Do you really think it’s better to risk the vast and delicate ecosystem along our coast than to do drill where there is less wildlife? Like it’s mind boggling how you don’t get this.
Not my fault that the generally barren and more desolate parts of our country are red states.
You need to get over the the left losing the election as an “explanation” for opinions you disagree with. Although, I’m not sure how a self proclaimed aquatic ecologist or biologist (hard to keep up with all your jobs) and supposed fisherman/surfer and supposed “local” could truly believe oil drilling and the immense risks of pollution and disaster that accompanies it would be better off our coast line than in areas inland with less biomass at risk.
Mind-blowing really.
So. have you ever actually been on the ocean? Have yo ever seen how oil moves on the ocean?
Yes, it floats!
Isn’t that fascinating? And do you know what happens when you include wind, swell and tide?
Yes, it breaks up into millions or billions of tiny blobs and moves around!
And have you ever seen what oil does when poured on dirt?
That’s right!!! It doesn’t move around. It just sits there. Kind of like a guy in an office taking phone calls.
And you know what that means?
Yeah!!!!! That’s right!!!! It means that it is harder to clean up an oil spill in the ocean and that such spills cause far more damage than those on dirt.
So, rational and calm thinkers would deduce from this that it is better to focus oil drilling in places where the risk is the lowest.
Now do you understand?
ALEX – the oil moves like that because we haven’t accepted that we lost the election.
That’s all obvious. What’s also obvious is you want drilling done anywhere but here. Enjoy your Saudi oil. Those guys are real upstanding when it comes to civil rights! And you must know how they get it here…on the open ocean…
But hey, we can risk an oil spill off the coast Mexico or hey, LA even – anywhere but here – who cares! You won’t have to see a dead seagull on local TV.
I’ll say it again here. Are you actually incapable of understanding that some types of extraction and some places of extraction carry a higher risk?
You seem to think that the oil pulled out of the ground in California is used by Californians, or other Americans before oil from other countries is used. That’s not how it works. I’m sure you know that oil is used for thousands of different products besides gasoline. Do you also know that only some kinds of oil can be economically made into gasoline? And guess what: the oil here isn’t good for that, it’s used for other stuff, and it gets sold and traded internationally. We might not use any of it, so preferring its extraction not ruin our environment isn’t “hypocrisy”. It’s logical, one might even say “basic”.
Not at all. Every statement you made is an assumption of what you WANT to think that I think. I believe in shared responsibility and risk across our country for energy production. Oil production involves risk wherever it’s going on. Pushing it off into someone else’s backyard/state isn’t fair at all. We all need oil for various uses, of course not just gasoline.
It’s as simple as that.
We are under no illusion that thinking plays a part in your comments.
“That’s all obvious. What’s also obvious is you want drilling done anywhere but here.”
Yeah, you still don’t get it and just making up new things now despite the very simple things I’m saying.
Hey, maybe this is too difficult for you. Maybe best to stop responding to each and every one of my comments until you’re able to hold a coherent, intelligent conversation without lying and making up fantasies to argue against.
3 strikes, you’re out.
My response was to Alex, bud, not you. That should be apparent.
Alex is saying the same exact thing so it makes no difference, bud. And you still don’t get it.
Bend those knees!
Just so you know… California’s reliance on imported oil has increased due to declining in-state production and policies that limit domestic oil production. The California Energy Commission indicates that the top foreign sources in 2023 were:
Ecuador: 17.69%
Saudi Arabia: 16.42%
Iraq: 15.80%
Brazil: 8.03%
Guyana: 7.99%
That’s over 60%. So what’s the plan, Salud? Keep paying other countries to keep the supertankers coming?
Not at all. The rational way forward is to stop guzzling oil.
As a Trump voting Rep I just want to weigh in that I oppose drilling for oil on either coast . Even without the spills , which are bound to happen, the rigs offshore are an eyesore. Placing the CA shoreline, a treasure, in jeopardy is not worth it! Plenty of oil inland. As for stopping oil consumption? Cannot be done as of yet. A nations economy is based on inexpensive abundant energy sources, of which fossil fuel is still THE main one. If and when we figure out a cheap abundant replacement, only then will we be able to get off oil without hurting our standard of living. Stop pushing the wind turbine stuff, it is killing the whales. That plus petroleum is used for far more things in our lives . It is indispensable as of the moment. A big plus would be more nuclear reactors to power the electric grid, but the environmentalist do not want that either.
CHUFF – glad to see you oppose offshore oil drilling. Beyond me how a supposed local and “fisherman” could support it!
As for wind turbines killing whales, that didn’t happen. It was pro-oil propaganda that was widely debunked by scientists. Those whales did not die because of the turbines.
True, wind energy production does kill some wildlife, but it’s FAR LESS than oil production kills. Moreover, just beacuse it’s not perfect yet (oil never was) doesn’t mean we should abandon it. Wind and solar are already surpassing coal and oil production in some countries and contribute a HUGE amount to our national energy consumption. While it’s not ready on its own to fully replace oil, we can’t keep banning it because of propaganda.
The many flaws of oil production (pollution, wildlife death, etc) never stopped us or even slowed us down, so why should a far less flawed energy source be abandoned?
We’ve recovered very well from the spills, hard for some people to handle as they were. I’m not “pro-drilling”, I’m anti-hypocrisy. We need a lot of oil in this country. That ain’t changing real soon. NIMBY’s are loud and always screaming for “no drilling here, I don’t wanna see an oil rig, birds have been piled and died”….
Hypocrisy. Take a look at other sources of oil and how far away they are, how much carbon footprint it takes to bring your oil here from the other side of the globe. Risks are everywhere. Lots of those countries have far worse environmental regulations and safety than us. Big picture.
We have in no way recovered from the spills, unless you only judge that visually from afar.
And, in the rest of your screed, you’ve provided excellent motivation for halting the extraction of fossil carbon to burn as a fuel.
Of course, you had to add the lemming reaction at the end.
You’re either a liar or a terrible “ecologist” if you think it’s hunky dory now.
If you’re not in support of drilling offshore here, why TF are you wanking and crying about those of us who are?
Get a hobby bro. Complaining about everything everyone says all the time every day here must be exhausting. I know it sure is tiresome having to explain elementary reasoning and English to you.
So you literally can’t comprehend the fact that there are varying levels of risk with different approaches and area of extraction?
You just can’t comprehend it? Or is it that hard for you to agree with a “lib”. So red team blue team, so predictable.
A far greater need to protect our coastline from oil tanker spills. Everyday two massive oil tankers from the Middle East come into our ports along our coast. This is an Exxon Valdez waiting to happen every day. This would be devastating to our beaches and marine, far greater than the small Plains Pipeline oil spill in 2015. This one was only 2,400 barrels of oil. A oil tanker spill would be 500,000 barrels of oil. Yet nothing is being done by the politicians because so much money is being made this way. Time to protest.
Revised: Huge oil tankers from the Middle East come into the ports along the CA coast every day. These are Exxon Valdez events waiting to happen every day. An oil tanker spill would be devastating to our beaches and marine life, far worse than the small Plains Pipeline oil spill in 2015. That one was only 2,400 barrels of oil. A oil tanker spill would be 500,000 barrels of oil which is 200 times more oil than the Refugio Spill. Yet nothing is being done to stop this by the politicians because so much money is being made by tankering oil into CA. Why doesn’t Carbajal say anything about this threat? Time to protest.