Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2008-10-13 #JAGENDA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 13, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: David Carmany, City Manager FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE -STATUS REPORT RE: OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING ISSUES SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Receive and file Staff Report. Instruct Staff to forward to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information. BACKGROUND: Formal Citv Position repardina Offshore Oil Drillin On April 1, 1968 the City Council adopted resolution Number 1651 opposing ".. . drilling for, exploration, production or refining of oil or other hydrocarbons off the shore of the area protected by the Cunningham-Shell Acf' and further stating opposition ".. , to the repeal of any provision of the Public Resources Code relating to oil and gas leases on tide and submerged lands which would have the effect of allowing off-shore drilling for oil and gas in the legislatively recognized sanctuary areas presently existing in the tidelands or which would have the effect of eliminating the requirement of prior approval by the State Lands Commission of any leases made or proposed to be made by the grantee of tidelands." Please refer to Attachment A to review a copy of Resolution Number 1651. On February 12, 1996 the City Council adopted resolution Number 4440 supporting HR 2241 and HR 2242 which provides long term protection from future off-shore oil drilling in sensitive California waters and that is still the formal position of the City. Please refer to Attachment B to review a copy of Resolution Number 4440. Overview of Current issues Under Consideration: Staff has received or obtained several articles and documents relating to the issue of off-shore oil drilling and is providing the material as information items for the City Council to review and consider. As the issue of off-shore drilling appears to be Agenda Item ~ Receive and File: Sfafus Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 escalating as part of the presidential election, staff will continue to provide updates as appropriate. Provided for City Council information are the following documents: ^ Web page re: "Offshore Drilling Wong Address Nation's Energy Needs, Say Smart Growth Experts," Smart Growth Online, accessed August 6, 2008; ^ Web page re: "Drilling Won't Solve America's Energy Problem," Domestic Policy Watch Document, American planning Association, accessed August 4, 2008; ^ Web page re: "Antic National Wildlife Refuge: Why Trash an American Treasure fora Tiny Percentage of Our Oil Needs?', Natural Resources Defense Council, accessed August 4, 2008; ^ "The Destructive Consequences of Offshore Drilling," NRDC Legislative Facts, Natural Resources Defense Council, accessed August 4, 2008; and ^ Web Page re: "Annual Energy Outlook 2008," Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy, accessed August 4, 2008. A complete copy of the following documents are available at the Department of Development Services for review by interested City Council, Planning Commission or Environmental Quality Control Board members or citizens, but are not provided due to the length of the documents: ^ "Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge," Energy Information Administration, dated May 2008 (25 pages); and ^ "Annual Energy Outlook 2008 - With Projections to 2030," Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy, dated June 2008 (326 pages). FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. An eventual federal determination to allow for off-shore oil drilling could have either positive or negative impacts upon the City, based on the location of oil drilling sites and the safety of those facilities. Additional information on this concern would be provided based on future federal actions relative to offshore oil drilling policies that may or may not be implemented. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file Staff Report. Instruct Staff to forward to the Planning Commission and •Environmental Quality Control Board for information. DS -Staff Report - J -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues 2 Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED: ~-'~-~i e Whittenberg David Carmany Director of Development Services City Manager Attachments: 7 A. City Council Resolution Number 1651, adopted April 1, 1968 B. City Council Resolution Number 4440, adopted February 12, 1996 C. Web page re: "Offshore Drilling Wong Address Nation's Energy Needs, Say Smart Growth Experts," Smart Growth Online, accessed August 6, 2008 D. Web page re: "Drilling Wong Solve America's Energy Problem," Domestic Policy Watch Document, American planning Association, accessed August 4, 2008 E. Web page re: "Antic National Wildlife Refuge: Why Trash an American Treasure for a Tiny Percentage of Our Oil Needs?', Natural Resources Defense Council, accessed August 4, 2008 F. "The Destructive Consequences of Offshore Drilling," NRDC Legislative Facts, Natural Resources Defense Council, accessed August 4, 2008 G. Web Page re: "Annual Energy Outlook 2008 -With Projections to 2030," Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy, accessed August 4, 2008 DS -Staff Report - J -Off-shore OII Drilling Issues 3 Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NUMBER 1651, ADOPTED APRIL 1, 1968 DS -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues 4 • F z ~~ • 'i .r C RESOLUTION Nt]MBER ~ lv ~l A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL $EACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS OPPOSITION TO OFFSHORE DRILLING OPERATIONS FOR T1~ EXTRACTION OF OIL OR GAS AND FURT~R DECLARING A POLICY OF PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION OF CERTAIN TIDELANDS AREAS FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES. WHEREAS, The Legislature has declared that it is the public policy of the State of California to promote the conservation and use of the natural resources of this State for the purposes of health and recreatiaa; and WHEREAS, Article 4, Chapter 3, Part 2, Division 6, of the Public Resources Code, governs oil and gas leases on tide end submerged lands and beds of navigable rivers and lakes, ~"--" ~ ~ ~ arid-~as~'~amsaded~ iii1955 i~s male comnwnly known as t~ie~~ Cunninghan~Shell Act; and WI~EREAS, ,The Cunningham-Shell Act rovides that the tide and P submerged lands that may be leased by the State are those extendi.r~g from the northerly city limits of the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, to the northerly boundary of the State of California; and further provides in Section 6878 of the Publf.c Resources Code that no city to which the State has granted tidelands shall enter any lease for the extraction of oil or gas from such tidelands located in any area enumerated in Section 6871.2 nor from those tidelands located in the area from the northerly city limits to the City of Newport Beach to the southerly boundary of the State of California until the State Lands Commission has made certain findings in accordance with the provisions of Section 6872 or Section 6872.1; and WHEREAS, Legislation has been introduced in the State Legislature on different occasions which would have the effect of repealing those provisions of tht Gunningham-Shell Act which create oil drilling sanctuaries off the coast of the City of Newport Beach and furthermore would eliminate the control over tide and submerged lands presently vested in the State Lands Commisaioa; and WHEREAS, The City Covacil finds that the best interests of the State of California will be served by excluding all opera- tions fQr the extraction of oil from the tide and submerged lands off the shore of the City of Newport Beach and by further developing and conserving those natural resources for health and recreational purposes; NOW, Tl~REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seal Beach, California, declares that the policy of the City of Seal Beach is to preserve and protect the recreational facilities along the tidelands of the Pacific Coast for the use and enjoyment ~^ Resolution Number • ---- a r of the public. B8 YT FLIRTFII;R RESOLVED that it is also the policy of the City of Seal Beach that no drilling for, exploration of oiI or other h ~ production or refiaing ydrocarbons shall be permitted off the ahoxe of the area protected by the Cunningham-Shell Act. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council declares that it is opposed to the repeal of any provision of the Public Resources Code relating to oil and gas leases on tide and submerged lands which would have the effect of allowing off-shore drilling far oil and gas in the legislatively recognized sanctuary areas presently exiatiiig in the tidelands or which would have the effect of eliminating the requirement of prior approval by the State Laude Commission of sup leases made or proposed to be made by the grantee of tidelands. PASSED, APPROVgD, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach, California, at a meeting thereof held on the First day of April, 1968, by the following vote: ASS: Councilmen ..NOES; Councilmen ABSENT: Councilmen A7.°fEST : _ c~C~ y Cler 1 Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT B CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NUMBER 4440, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 12, 1996 DS -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues rJ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE QTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING RENEWAL OF THE OFF-SHORE OII. DRII.LING MORATORIUM AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE LONG TERM PROTECTION FROM OFF-SHORE OII, DRILLING Whereas, the U.S. House of Representatives' Subwmmittx on Department of Interior Appropriations will consider lifting the current nationwide ban on off-shore oil drilling along environmentally sensitive areas of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); and Whereas, federal legish-tion has been introduced (HR 2241 and HR 2242), which es ~B term ptobec:tion from lutunr off-shone oil drilling in sensitive California waters; Whereas, technology does not exist to fully prevent, clean up, or contain oil spills for the types of ocean and wind conditions that are present throughout tbe year in the affected offshore waters adjacent m the City of Seal Beach coastline; and -- - - - - . - ... es-,-coastal dependent tourism•is•a mainstay..of~the local communities~of the ~ „"'.°-•- ~---~ -~-.. ..; _... .... - -- southern California coast, as well as other~caastal areas in California and elsewhere that would .. . be impactcd by a lifting of the drilling moratorium; and Whereas, cxitical commercial fisheries would be impacted by the oil drilling activities that would be permitted by the removal of the moratorium, and severe fishing conflicts could be expocbod to occur; and Whereas, estuaries and river mouths which serve as critical nursery and food source habitats (tha Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge is a local context) for commercial fish speaes and endangensd wildlife species would be in direct proximity to oil drilling activities permitted by a lifting of the OCS drilling moratorium, and would therefore be subject to significant adverse impacts in the event of a spill; and Whereas, continuation of the existing moratoria or a permanent ban will not aigruflcantly reduce the cxnmtry's energy production, as the federal OCS reserves in California ate estimated to be approximately 3/lOths of 196 of the nations oil reserves, while reserves for onshore production in California is estimated at approximately 14.696 of the nations o0 reserves; and Whereas, the City of 5ea1 Beach has traditionally taloen an active role in opposition to off-shore drilling proposals that could impact the City of Seal Beach coastline. Now, Therefore, be it Resolved, that the City of Seal Beach urges the U.S, House of Representatives to support HR 2241 and HR 2242. Now, Therefore, be it Further Resolved, that the City of Seal Beach urges the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Department of Interior Appropriations to include mtewal of the moraWria on Outer Continental Shelf oil drilling activities in environmentally sensitive coastal areas in this year's House Interior Appropriations &ll. Resolution Number !~~ PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal a mowing thereof held on the ~/.~? ~ day of 1996, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: J ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH ) I, Joanne M, Yco, City Clerk of Ses1 Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing zesoIution is the original copy of Resolution Number on file in the office of the City Clerk, passod, approved, and the City Counci of the f Seal Beach, at a regular rn thereof held on the day of 1996. v Ci i~ L MAY Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT C WEB PAGE RE: "OFFSHORE DRILLING WON'T ADDRESS NATION'S ENERGY NEEDS, SAY SMART GROWTH EXPERTS," SMART GROWTH ONLINE, ACCESSED AUGUST 6, 2008 DS -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues 6 Offshore Drilling Won't Address Nation's Energy Needs, Say Smart Crrowth Experts Smart Growth Online A SERVICE OF THE SMART GROWTH NETWORK HOME ABOUT SMART GROWTH SMART GROWTH NETWORK NEWS Browse by Location Browse by Date Free weekly a-news Suggest a News Resource RESOURCES CALENDAR CONTACT US SITE MAP EMAIL TO A FRIEND NEW RESOURCES ~ Green Craftsman Series: Green Building Plans ~ Land Trust Alliance Factsheets ~ Municipal Green Building • Policies ~ Smart Housing Zones ~ Regional Equity and the Quest for Full Inclusion more DATEBOOK Smart Growth Speaker Series [TBA]. Speakers Audio Archive Other Smart Growth Events: annoos: Green Homes and Sustainable Communities arrizoos: Urban Growth Management Workshop ~ Smart Growth News National Read more about National smart growth. Offshore Drilling Won't Address Nation's Energy Needs, Say Smart Growth Experts Page 1 of ~~ Sll~lmrraari~s Search: _ . GO r ~ IN THE NEWS ' Subscribe Now for free weekly a-news Have a news article tip for Smart Growth Online Click here. The only sure way "to reduce our vulnerability to skyrocketing gas prices is to reduce our need to consume oil and gasoline," which requires Investment in transit and in pedestrian-friendly mixed uses around transit hubs, not the proposed "offshore oil drilling as the panacea" for pain at the pump, write Transportation for America Campaign co-chairs, Smart Growth America President and CEO Geoff Anderson and Reconnecting America President and CEO Shelly Poticha, at the Hufflngton Post web page, pointing out that drilling off Florida or in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife ~Refuge'(ANWR) would "do nothing to help Americans cope right now with the cost of gas," but it would "deepen our oil dependence," because it Ignores "the underlying reasons why each generation drives more than the last." Should Congress lift the drilling ban today, they note, the offshore oil would reach the market in perhaps 10 years and supply the nation for just 18 months, while the ANWR oil would reduce the pump price by about four cents -- the "gimmicks, false hopes or continuation of failed policies" frustrating consumers and prompting them to take the lead. "We're hopping buses, boarding trains, and slipping on our walking shoes," Geoff Anderson and Shelley Poticha write. "We're looking for houses In walkable and bikable communities with access to public transportation, where our life savings won't be held hostage by each uptick in the cost of gasoline. We're finding innovative and clever ways to Ilmit our fuel consumption on a dally basis, consolidating our errands and carpooling to work." Transit ridership' reached its highest point in 50 years; Americans drove 1.4 million highway miles fewer this April than a year ago, the first drop in almost 30 years; and in a survey of more than 900 Coldwell Banker real estate agents, 78 percent said gas prices heightened client interest in city living. "But as we look for ways to reduce our gas bills, we are discovering disconcerting truths about America's landscape and transportation networks," the two smart growth and transit campaign leaders continue. "Many of our public transportation systems, short-changed over the years and facing their own high fuel bill, are having a hard time keeping up with the rising demand. The supply of homes -- whether stand-alone houses, townhouses or condos -- in convenient locations near jobs is far below the demand. And many of us -- the majority, in fact -- find ourselves living in a drive-only landscape, where we must burn gas even to reach a metro rail or subway stop, if one exists in our area." Although encouraged by an overwhelming U.S. House vote for the Saving Energy Through Public Transportation Act, which authorizes $1.7 billion over two years "to help transit agencies stave off fare increases and keep pace with ballooning ridership," they call it "only a minor down-payment" in the context of overall network demand, stress the Cluster Development Would Create Rural Villages, Protect Rural Heritage in Boone County more Memphis-Shelby County Land Use Control Board --~ `Js;ppro4e's Amerided Wal= Mart Proposal more Developer Announces Plans for 9300-Unit Mixed-Use Brentwood Project more Open Space Protection, Resource Conservation Highlight Mass. Gov. Patrick's New Commonwealth Capital Policy more Editorial: High Fuel Costs Mean It's Time to Invest in Transit and Downtown Centers more Eastern Lebanon County School District May Abandon Historic Local Schools re "Americans are not dumb: given the real choice, we would much rather invest in well-located real estate than in gasoline." -- Smart Growth America President and CEO Geoff Anderson and Reconnecting America President and CEO Shelly Poticha. co-chairs of TransQOrtation for America http://www.smartgrowth.org/news/newsman.asp?art=6747&state=52&res=1280 _ 8/6/200 Offshore Drilling Won't Address Nation's Energy Needs, Say Smart Growth Experts urgency of relief for small cities and rural areas, and restate the importance of smart development patterns. "We need to make more of our streets safe and convenient for walking and biking to work, school, shops and public transportation stops," they conclude. "We have to create incentives for developers to invest in our close-in suburbs and urban centers, to meet the huge demand for affordable homes in convenient locations. Americans are not dumb: given the real choice, we would much rather invest in well-located real estate than in gasoline." -- Huffngton Post 7/22/2008 Click here to view the source article or here to view the source publication. ® E-mail to a Friend ~ View Printer-friendl~paae GET MORE SMART GROWTH RESOURCES ' •. .'~ . Y y~ .F ~.':r ~. ~.. ii~~» fiK •~o `»~l ~4. ~~ S : ~ . _ Getting._to.. ..Smart Growth This Is Smart IVew Partners Smart Growth In Action: ~~ ~ ~ ~ Growth ~~ or S ar# • ~'" ~ ~ II: 100 •Morg Case Studies ~• ~ Gro Policies for PowerPoint Implementation Presentations S•211AR1r CR(7i'Vq'T,~,~ This web site is a subset of htta://www.sustainable.org, developed and maintained by the Sustainable Communities Network (SCN), and supported with funding from the US EPA. Disclaimer Copyright m 1996-2008. All Rights Reserved. http://www. smartgrowth. org/news/newsmail. asp?art=6747&state=52&res=12 8 0 Page 2 of 2 Camoaion Click Here for More Smart Growth News on the Web L J 8/6/200f Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT D WEB PAGE RE: "DRILLING WON'T SOLVE AMERICA'S ENERGY PROBLEM," DOMESTIC POLICY WATCH DOCUMENT, AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION, ACCESSED AUGUST 4, 2008 DS -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues 7 Domestic Policy Watch r~m~.rlcan Pla«nin~ Ass€~cialion i~takrtg „rrat :v-manrxirtit.•rt Aa~Jjrrrr July 2008 Domestic Policy Veatch W. Paul Farmer, FAICP APA Executive Director Page 1 of 3 Print Now This article is one in a series that will examine the federal domestic agenda. As planners, we have views about issues of public policy. APA's adopted policies maybe found at www.p/anning.org/policyguides. The purpose of this series is to add to the discourse about issues of great importance. These are not partisan issues. Rather, they are fundamental issues that will influence our communities for decades. APA Advocate, APA's electronic update on federal initiatives, is free to APA members. To read APA Advocate, click here. To read other issues of Domestic Policy Watch, click here. Member responses to this article are encouraged and will be posted on the APA website. Click here to respond. Drilling Won't Solve America's Energy Problem How a few decades can change one's perspective! In 1974, lines at gas pumps were long, tempers occasionally flared -and the United States was ending its era as a net exporter of petroleum. We called it an "energy crisis" and it helped turn a president into asingle-termer. After the nation briefly turned its attention to energy conservation, and planners briefly flirted with issues such as solar access, it was soon back to business-as-usual for both the country and our profession. We increased our oil consumption and, bit by bit, decreased both our petroleum reserves and the share of oil we produced within the U.S. Consumption soared. Prices stayed low. Why worry? In 2008, it's gasoline prices that have soared, both at the pump and on the global commodities market -and the United States is a net importer of petroleum. Isn't it interesting that we are in our eighth year of a presidency in which an energy policy was produced behind closed doors and led to legislation passed by a compliant Congress? Isn't it interesting that we now face a true energy crisis after the president and his allies had been given virtually everything they requested? Now, faced with the likelihood that gas prices will never come down again for any prolonged period of time, Americans are finally beginning to break their SUV habit. Both Ford and General Motors are reeling from monumental misreading of their markets and their susceptibility to Big Oil's big prices. Now, the president, whose energy policy also badly misread the world situation, wants us to believe that expanding domestic oil production can solve the problem of high gas prices. Just this month President Bush lifted an executive order prohibiting drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf. The order was originally put in place by his father in 1990 and was to have been in effect through 2012. The move has no real impact since Congress has its own prohibition in place, but the political message is unmistakable: If we drill more, the era of cheap energy will return without our having to change behavior. Drill, drill, drill said the CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to a meeting that I attended in June. Drill off the coasts of New England, the Gulf states, California, and in Alaska too, said Tom Donohue, adding that he had been to Alaska and could attest to the worthlessness of land that a few would protect. It's probably no coincidence that less than a month after the country's biggest lobbyist had advocated drilling, our president was announcing his intentions to drill, drill, drill, promising that quick passage of his newest energy policy would lead to a decline of prices at the gas pump. Oil companies currently hold leases on 68 million acres (35 million of which are offshore) where drilling and exploration could be conducted, but aren't. The administration would ignore that fact and turn over vast new public land holdings to those very same companies. Somehow, that would lead to an immediate decline in prices at the pump. In fact, it appears that the president's latest gambit is nothing more than an attempt to use voter fear and anger to force through policies that would help the oil industry while keeping Americans locked into an oil-dependent economy. Sound familiar? Perhaps our president doesn't want to trouble himself with any understanding of the relationship between long-term land leases and current pump prices. But he does seem to be very adept at understanding the value of turning http://www.planning.org/domesticagenda/2008/ju108.htm?project=Print 8/4/2008 Domestic Policy Watch Page 2 of 3 over more land for future exploitation to those favored friends who were instrumental in producing the first Bush-Cheney energy policy. Remember -that was the one produced when climate-change scientists were being marginalized and industry-lobbyists-turned-administration-staffers were changing scientific reports. Now, we have a White House that begrudgingly modifies its position in the face of mounting evidence and worldwide scorn of the formal U.S. stance on climate change, yet hurriedly stages a Rose Garden ceremony to announce a new policy of drill, drill, drill. The real impact of expanded OCS drilling is much different. Federal geologists estimate that there may be up to 17.8 billion barrels of oil in restricted areas. But we currently consume about 21 million barrels of oil per day. At best, we could obtain only a little more than two years' supply. Of course, that assumes we could even get it. The oil companies themselves say that if the ban were lifted tomorrow it would be a decade or more before additional supplies would be flowing. Limits on equipment and technology, not to mention inadequate mapping, make drilling in these new areas unlikely to yield new supplies until years in the future. (Click here for the Energy Information Administration's 2008 Energy Outlook. Click here for EIA statistics about crude oil production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.) Even if these supplies were immediately available and we could be assured of no negative ecological or environmental consequences, this additional drilling still isn't a realistic solution to high gas prices or our dependence on foreign oil. Facts, as John Adams famously said, are stubborn things. First, no amount of new domestic oil extraction will solve our energy crisis. The United States accounts for a little more than 2 percent of global oil reserves, but we account for 25 percent of global consumption. So long as that imbalance exists -and particularly given rapidly rising demand in China and India - the United States will remain energy-dependent and gas prices will stay high. Second, energy efficiency offers far greater and more quickly realized impacts on both our oil use and savings. According to anew analysis from the Natural Resources Defense Council, energy efficiency savings could be 500 percent higher than drilling output in 2030. Savings from energy efficiency could trump drilling by 1.2 million barrels per day in 2015 and 4.7 million barrels per day in 2030. The United States could save more oil by expediting already approved changes in fuel economy standards than exists in the OCS. (Click here for more NRDC energy information.) President Bush was right in saying we have an "addiction" to oil. That addiction is creating a growing economic disaster for both the nation and individual families. The United States is paying $625 million a day for imports -the largest transfer of wealth in history. Oil imports account for more than half of our trade deficit. Beyond the macroeconomics, real people are hurting too. Transportation costs -second only to housing costs for the typical household -are rising fast as people realize they are too often left with no alternative to driving. The spillover impact of higher transportation costs is affecting -and increasing -the price of food and other commodities. The best way to attack our oil dependence is to reduce demand. There is tremendous potential for demand reductions in transportation from vehicle efficiency and diminished auto use and congestion. Some models suggest that U.S. gasoline demand could be cut by nearly two-thirds simply through increased vehicle efficiency and reduced vehicle miles traveled. Unlike offshore drilling, these technologies are not decades away. They are at hand today. High gas prices already have grabbed attention on Capitol Hill, especially in this election year. Proponents of new drilling see an opening to advance their agenda with Americans who are more worried than ever about rising costs. Like the president, they believe that opening up more land will not only reduce prices but also allow us to maintain current transportation and development practices. The political theater of drilling has proved so irresistible that the entire appropriations process in the House has stalled (and is unlikely to move forward until after the election) because drilling proponents want a series of showcase votes on amendments. I grew up in the oil country of Louisiana and Texas, where I heard that "oil and politics smell the same." Some positive legislation has emerged. Passenger rail looks likely to get a boost, with new legislation and funding for Amtrak and intercity rail projects moving forward. The House of Representatives passed the Saving Energy through Public Transportation Act by a lopsided 322-98 vote. The bill authorizes $1.7 billion in fiscal years 2008 and 2009 for capital and operating funds for transit. The measure also increases the federal share to 100 percent for clean and alternative fuel transit equipment and vehicles. However, unlike SAFETEA-LU programs funded through the transportation trust fund, this program would require revenue from the general fund, and that's very far from a certain prospect. Still, passage by such a large margin is an encouraging sign for transit supporters in Congress. This is probably a reflection of public demand for transportation choices and the incredible growth in ridership. Transit use is at its highest levels in more than a generation Because $4-plus-per-gallon gas is pushing people to alternatives. Many citizens now realize exactly how limited their options have become after six decades of auto-dependent sprawl. Transit is a critical part of any solution to our energy crisis. A study released in March found that public transportation reduces vehicle miles traveled by American households by 102.2 billion miles a year and saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline, an amount equal to three times our annual imports from Kuwait. http://www.planning.org/domesticagenda/20081ju108.htm?project=Print 8/4/2008 Domestic Policy Watch Page 3 of 3 Other measures have been introduced that offer important new approaches. Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) has introduced the Green Resources for Energy Efficient Neighborhoods Act, H.R. 6078. This legislation recognizes the link between how we build our communities and our use of energy. Among the bill's key provisions are the promotion of location-efficient mortgages, green building requirements for HUD programs, and resources for local governments to plan and implement more energy-efficient residential development. The bill is a bold and fresh approach to energy policy. Another new bill advancing innovative approaches, from Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) and Chris Shays (R-Conn.), is aimed at offering new tools and incentives to increase travel options and reduce oil dependence. The bill, the Transportation and Housing Options for Gas Price Relief Act, creates a grant program to support community investments in transportation alternatives and travel-demand management strategies, improves tax and employer incentives for transit, and encourages policies like parking cash out programs. Despite the encouraging legislation, narrow majorities and determined opposition from the White House have led to gridlock on some common-sense energy policies. During the debate over the most recent energy bill that raised fuel efficiency standards for the first time in 30 years, a proposal to shift massive tax breaks for oil companies to incentives for renewable energy was thwarted in the Senate. Likewise, attempts to require utilities to meet higher targets for renewable energy were stopped. Planning will be vital to this effort. Although it is too often overlooked, the way we build our communities is the biggest determinant to how much energy we use and how we use it. Development and density are as important to any genuine debate on energy as renewables and new technologies. Simply put, better planning leads to better energy efficiency. Good planning gives people choices. People are already changing their behavior to decrease fuel costs: taking fewer trips, keeping their cars tuned, even trading in their gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient models. More needs to~be done to ensure that consumers have transportation and housing options that reduce their reliance on single-occupancy vehicle trips. The market for more energy-efficient locations is emerging. Many people in exurban locations are seeing their transportation costs explode while property values sag. Research published by APA suggests that homes in more dense, efficient locations are holding their value at a much higher rate than those in lower density, far-flung areas. The economic impact of expanding options can be dramatic. For example, when gasoline costs $4 per gallon, American families can save $5.6 billion each year on gasoline costs by using transit. A typical bicycle commuter annually saves an average of $1,825 in auto-related costs, conserves 145 gallons of gasoline, and avoids 50 hours of traffic gridlock. It is certainly true that we can both reduce demand and find opportunities to increase supply, but the danger in focusing on drilling and expanding supply is that it obscures the need for more systemic change -the kind of change that is necessary to achieve the goal of energy independence and build new engines of economic growth. Planning can, and must, join with those willing to lead this change. The era of cheap energy that aided and abetted decades of dumb growth is over. With better policies, wiser investment, and a commitment to building communities of lasting value, we can embrace a future that provides new choices and opportunities. It is tempting to be seduced by those who argue that more of the same will solve the energy challenge we confront, but as planners we must push for policies that offer a new path and real solutions. We squandered the last three decades' opportunities; neither our economy nor the world can tolerate squandering today's. Responses by members are encouraged and will be posted on the APA website. Consistent with APA publications policy, they may not be anonymous. Click here to send a response. ©Copyright 2008 American Planning Association All Rights Reserved http://www.planning.org/domesticagendaJ2008/ju108.htm?project=Print 8/4/2008 Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT E WEB PAGE RE: "ART/C NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE: WHY TRASH AN AMERICAN TREASURE FOR A TINY PERCENTAGE OF OUR OIL NEEDS?", NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, ACCESSED AUGUST 4, 2008 D.S -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues $ NRDC: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Why Tras -Flash Player Installation NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL NRDC THE EARrNS afiSr DEFENSE ,~C' ~EMer Search Here jfE}yg ]BgyyS Policy Green Li.ina Gran Busiena ~~ About lfa ~fpa ]Zp~R Take Action The Neturel Resoumas Defense CounGl works to prated wiklllfe end wild places and tc ensure a healthy envronment for a9 BPo on earth. IN THIS SECTION ISSUES: WILDLANDS Main Page Globat Warming Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Why Trash an American Treasure for a oil a Energy Tiny Percentage of Our Oil Needs? Dr1111ng for oil in Amenca's premier wildlife sanctuary would deface the prlsttne Atr landscape and threaten Alaskan wildlife. Ocean Water Dn the northern edge Ot IX!r COntklerx, atretdung from the ARC71C REFUGE LAND GRAB Wildlands peaks of the Brooks Range across a vast expense of tundre to the Beaufort Sea, lies Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife wRdlite Refuge. An American Serengeti, the Arctic Refuge cantinuea Heaah , to pulse with million-yearok! ecological rhythms. It is the ' Envlrorvnental ~~ greatest living remirxler that conserving nature in its wild * , ' stela la a core American value. M dM e U.S. Law & Polley ao.... whe Upp eau a Nuclear weapon, waste B In affirmation of that value, Congress and the American ExPI oRE THE ARCnc E"Q"A' . people have eonaiatemty made clear their desire to protect smart Growth this treasure and rejected claims that drilling for oil in the , ~, 'v~ intemanonai lgrres Arctic Refuge is any son OF answer to the nation's dependence on foreign oil. Twice in 2005, Congress acted Green ~'~ explicitly to deferxl the refuge from the Bush administration and pro-drilling forms, with House leaders removing provisions that would have alkwved far dnlling from a massive budget bill, and the Senate withstanding an attempt by sea aw.ua• ahaw Republican leaders to open up the Arctic. $inCe (haft, 00rICBRied Americana have continued t0 push MORE INFO FROM NRDC Congress to thwart retxJrring efforts to see the refuge spoiled. Apslp a.n,p. +"+ But in the face of soaring gee pnces, President Bush has once again offered up Arriie dnlling es a solution for n,. awn E"°'°" w.p a America's energy crisis, despite evidence from the Am.°"'a puma to°d` govemmem itself that drilling wouldrit make a dent In the Am.nox ou va~paa _ NROC price we pay at the pump. Instead, the president is again P°''°" °a4e1E iprionng the science end valuing oil acid gas interests over Amenca's precious naturel heritage. In this continuing battle, Amenca's premier wildlife sanctuary Ia ct stake. Ameneans Nave SNNxtlly Opposed DAlling the Arotle Natlonal WIIdIHe Refuge The controversy over drilling in tfie Arctic Refuge -the last piece of America's Arctic raastline not already open to oil exploretlon -isn't new. Big Oil has long sought access to the refuge's coastal plain, a fragile swath of tundre that teems with steggenng numbers of birds and animals. Dunng the Buah administretion'sfinst term, repeated attempts were made to open the refuge. But time after time, ttie American public rejected the idea. Congress has received hundreds of thousands of emeils, faxes and phone calla from ckizens opposed to drilling in the Arctic Refuge, an outpouring that has helped make the difference. And polls have consistently shown that a majority of Ament.ans oppose dnlling, even in the face of high gas prices and misleading daims from oil Interests. A June 2008 poll by the research firm Belden Rusaonello 8 Stewart found that 55 percent of the American public supports continued protection for the Arctic Refuge, and onty 35 percent of Americana believe that allowing oil companies to drill in the refuge would result in lower gas pries for American wnsumers. DespMe repeated failure and stiff opposRion, dnlling proponents press on. Why4 They believe that opening the Arctic Refuge will turn the comer in the broader national debate over whether or not energy, timber, mining and other industries should be allowed into pristine wild areas across the country. Along wRh the Arctic, oil interests are now targeting America's protected coastal waters. Next up: Greater Yallowetona? Our Waetem carryonlands? The drive to drill in the Arotrc Refuge is about oil company profits and lifting bartiers to fuWre exploretion in protected lands, pure and simple. tt hea nothing to do with energy independence. Opening the Arctic Refuge to energy development is about transferring our public estate lino corporate hands so that K can be liquidated for a quids buck Arctic Refuge Oil la a DlsVactlon, Not a Sdutlon Whet would America gain by allowing heavy industry into the refuge? Very little. Oil from the refuge would hardty make a dent in our dependence on foreign imports - Irving ola economy end way of life just sa exposed to wild swings in worldwide oil pricae end supply as d is today. The truth is, we aimpty can't drill our way to energy independence. Although dnlling proponents often say there ere 16 billion Bartels of oil under the refuge's coastal plain, the U.S. Geological Service's estimate of the amount that could be recoveretl economically -that is, the amount Ilkety to be profltabty extracted and sold -represents less than a year's U.S. auppty. , R would take 10 years for any Arctic Refuge oil to reach the market, and even when production peaks - in the diatom year of 2027 -the refuge would produce a pakry 3 percerm of Americana' daily consumption, The U.S. govemmem's own Energy Infortnetion Agency recemty reported that dnlling in the Arctic would save lase than 4 cents per gallon in 20 years. Whatever oil the refuge might produce is aimpty irtalevam to the larger issue of meeting America's future energy needs. Handing On to Future Generetlons a Wlld, Prlstlne Aretle? Priceless. Oil produced from the Arctic Refuge would come at an enormous, and irteversible, cost The refuge is among the wand's last true wildemeesea, aril 0 is one of the largest sanctuaries for Arctic animals. Traversed by a dozen rivere and framed by jagged peaks, this spectacular wildemeas is a vital birthing ground for polar beers, gr~lies, Arctic wohrea, caribou and the endangered shaggy musk ox, a mammoth-like survivor of the last Its Aga. "`....1 Page 1 of 2 ~; Ad•N Fltla• r dal• 1~. __...~» !x __..__._.. ~ TAN asM•M wgW,a Ad•M Fled, iid~~' . PUpra. Wald ye• Ike b Indall a aavR i . r.~~® SIGN UP FOR OUR MONTHLY NEWSU:ITER mail Atldress Here TAKE ONLINE ACTION NOW! • Protect Vellowstnne and the Grcsrcr Roekfes RELATED NRDC PRESS RELEASES S/8/2008 2/B/2aoe Fmlronmental Safe•usrds Under Attack 2/4/2008 Bush B et Rewards Relic Industries. Strapped Naturcl Resources Take a H1t More , RELATED STORIES Alter flghting sueeessfully for yean to keep destructive b49in8. hydropower and mining protects out of their Veditbnal territory. the people of Poplar River src now worMng W secure permanent protection for their boreal forest homeland. Greet Bear Rainforest Onx throaterxd with lraerise end destructive bgging, now 5 m8lton acres of the Great Bear RaiMorcst arc protected. RELATm LINKS • NRDC Annual Report: Wlldlends • Recommended Wlldlands Wehshes http://www.nrdc.org/land/wilderness/arctic.asp 8/4/2008 NRDC: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Why Tras -Flash Player Installation Page 2 of 2 For a sense of whet Big OiPs heavy machinery would do to the refuge, just look 60 miles west to Prudhoe Bay - a gargantuan oil complex that has fumed 1,000 square miles of fragile tundre into a sprawling industrial zone containing 1,500 miles of roads and pipelines, 1,400 producing walla and three jetports. The resuR is a landscape defaced by mountains of sewage sludge, acrep metal, garbage and more then 60 contaminated waste sites that eordain -and often leak -acids, lead, pastilles, aohrertts and diesel fuel. While proponents of drilling insist that the Arctic Refuge could be devebped by disturbing se IitUe as 2,000 acres within the 1.5-million,arre mastal plain, an NRDC analysis reveals O Natural Rasouroes Defense Couppl Home I About UWContaG Us ~ See Map ; Jobs~Ptivacy ~ ReferenrslLinks i Subscriptions ~ RSS tst" el ici ~ dl~g ® s ma © tab stumbleuoon FIND YOUR FAVORITE NRDC WEBSrtE NEWS a BLOGa: Qy~eQp I ,$~Qhp4>3rp I Nature's Vo~g ACTNISM: ~,g~ I polar Bear SOS OCEAN PROTECTION: rho r Oceans GLOBAL WARMM6 b ENERGY: Seat the Heal (pdgve Amaflca 8evond,Qy HEALTH i GREEN LNINO: $1mB19. Steps ~ ~g Glean Lae ~ Gten Paws FOR BUSINESS: Buiklmo Green ~ Market Innovation ~ Emdmnmamal En raoren - ~rs ( ~1 NRDC COOL SITES: a's yeur Nature ~ Greennav+NRDC FOR KIDS: Green Ssuad this to be pure myth. Whys Because U.S. Geological Survey studies have found that oil in the refuge isn't concentrated in a single, large reservoir. Rather, it's spread across the coastal plain in more than 30 small deposds, which would require vast networks of roads and pipelines that would fragment the habitat, disturbing and displacing wildlife. (See a mapped scenano m odf.) A Responsible Path to Energy Sacurlly The solution to America's energy problems will be found in American ingenuity, not more oil. Only by reducing our reliance on oil -foreign and domestic -and irnesting in cleaner, renewable fanny of power will our country achieve true energy sacultty. The good news is that we already have many of the tools we need to accomplish this. For example, Defrok has the technology right now to produce high-pertartnance hybrid ears, trades and S Ws. If America made the trerrettion to these more efficient vehicles, far more dl would be saved than the Arlie Refuge is likely to produce. Doesn't that make far more sense than selling out our nature) heritage and expbRing one of our true wilderness gems? RaL4d NRDC Pawn Aresc Rxuea 101. Few aheem - Pleln-lenewea 111ooduoaona Oo the Muea'e extraordinary mpW plain, to 61p dh impact m Prudhoe Bay and otaar NoM Slope area, antl m anxar emeanry's edvamepes wx mon dnarg. She Aretle Neeonel wildlde Refuse. PoLw Reearh and AnelveM - In-tlsptl1111fam1aoon from NRDC'e IaWyM, agarNad antl aneym The Arotlc Natlonal Wlldllfe Refuge is an NRDC J91oGem, '~~~'` Save Wfid Planes: BIUGBMa Vlsith~UCs61~aTtsvd:o~e (ax rawaetl 07.79 W http://www.nrdc.org/land/wilderness/azctic.asp 8/4/2008 Receive and File: Status Report re: Ofifshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT F "THE DESTRUCTIVE CONSEQUENCES OF OFFSHORE DRILLING," NRDC LEGISLATIVE FACTS, ~ NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, ACCESSED AUGUST 4, 2008 DS -Staff Report - Offshore Oil Drilling Issues 9 The ®estructive Consequences of Offshore Drilling ca N .~ d J For more information, please contact Roberta Elias at (202) 289-6868. NRDC Tx[ Fa[Tx'~ a[[T D[/[xs[ www.nrdc.org/policy July 2008 ® Natural Resources Defense Council Printed on recycled paper Offshore drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS} could do serious, irrepazable damage to our oceans, coastal communities, and mazine life. Some consequences of drilling in the OCS include: Damaging coastal lands, economies, and communities Offshore oil and gas operations have detrimental effects onshore. These operations require roads, pipelines, and processing facilities ro be built on Americas beaches, wetlands, and coastal azeas. Current drilling projects in the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico have destroyed more wetlands than exist between New Jersey and Maine. These activities hurt local wmmunities and damage economies that depend upon these resources for tourism, coastal recreation, and fishing. Endangering ocean health Offshore drilling and production create huge quantities of waste that contain toxic and radioactive pollutants, which can contaminate fish and marine 1'tfe consumed by humans. ^ Drilling muds and cuttings removed from wells contain roxic metals, including mercury, lead, and cadmium. Each well creates 180,000 gallons of this waste and most of is is dumped untreated into surrounding waters. ^ Each well also dischazges hundreds of thousands of gallons of "produced water." Studies of this byproduct have detected radium, an extremely radioactive material; toxic pollutants, such as benzene, arsenic, lead, radium, naphthalene, zinc, and toluene; and petroleum hydrocarbons in waters down- current of the discharge. Polluting air and emitting greenhouse gases Offshore wells emit air pollutants that are known carcinogens, cause respiratory problems, and are greenhouse gases. For example: ^ Emissions from drilling an average ezploration well include 50 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 13 cons of carbon monoxide, 6 rons of sulfur dioxide, and 5 tons of volatile organic compounds. ^ Emissions from drilling an operational OCS platform include 50 tons of NOx, I 1 tons of carbon monoxide, 8 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 38 tons of volatile organic hydrocazbons each year: Seismic surveys harm wildlife Seismic surveys can seriously affect gray whales, sperm whales, beaked whales and bowheads, and can injure fish at substantial distances. Fish are particulazly vulnerable to heazing loss that can significantly threaten their survival. Many fish, including salmon, which are endangered in portions of the United States, have swim bladders that can rupture when exposed to intense sounds like those emitted through these types of surveys. Oil spills There have been 187 large oil spills on the OCS, each emitting more than 2100 gallons into the Gulf of Mexico, between 1981 and 2005. As storms and hurricancs have intensified, the number of oil spills has increased. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita alone resulted in 125 spills of petroleum products from platforms, rigs, and pipelines on the OCS, totaling 685,000 gallons. Oil is toxic for most mazine species and, according to the National Academy of Sciences, cleanup methods can only remove a small fraction of oil spilled in marine waters. Receive and File: Status Report re: Offshore Oil Drilling Issues City Council Staff Report September 22, 2008 ATTACHMENT G WEB PAGE RE: "ANNUAL ENERGY OUTLOOK 2008 -WITH PROJECTIONS TO 2030," ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ACCESSED AUGUST 4, 2008 DS -Staff Report -Off-shore Oil Drilling Issues ~ 0 EIA - 2008 Annual Energy Outlook ~'~ Energy fnfor~~~iOn Adr~ir~is~ra~ion Official Energy Si~afi~tlcs from t~i~e tJ.S. ~GQV~rnment Home > AEO 2008 Annual Energy Outlook 2008 Report #:DOEIEIA-0383(2008) Release date full report: June 2008 Next release date full report: February 2009 The Annual Energy Outlook 2008 (AE02008) presents projections and analysis of US energy supply, demand, and prices through 2030. The projections are based on results from the Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System. The AE02008 includes the reference case, additional cases examining energy markets, and complete documentation. Analytical Overview: Energy Trends to 2030 In preparing projections for AE02008, we evaluated a wide range of trends and issues that could have major implications.for U.S: energy markets between today and 2030. The overview focuses on one case, the reference case....see full Overview Section The full range of alternative cases are included in the analysis of other sections of AE02008 - '® Market Trends in Economic Activity '~ Energy Demand Projections '~ Electricity Projections '® Oil and Natural Gas Projections Coal Projections Emissions Projections '® Issues in Focus '~ Legislation and Regulations "~ Comparisons with Other Projections Projection Tables (results from the National Energy Modeling System for AE02008) c: Reference Case Regional and other detailed tables (Reference Case Supplement) High Economic Growth Case Low Economic Growth Case ~.'. High Price Case Low Price Case Page 1 of 1 Glossary `'search°'!. Download the Report m let [2,807 KB] Tables [408 KB] ICI Aooendixes [2,005 KB] Preface List of Acronyms Notes ~ Sources Contact authors Related Material's ~ AE02008 Assumotions LJ Graphic Data - AE02008 NEMS Documentation AEO Retros eo dive [8,219 KB] Past AEO Editions 2008 EIA Conference Related Press Releases Contact Us • Feedback • Privacy/Security • Careers • About EIA Fedstats • USA.gov • Dept. of Energy http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/ 8/4/2008