Representatives from state agencies and local government met at Goleta City Hall on Thursday to discuss long-term clean-up plans for oil production facilities in the Santa Barbara Channel and Goleta Valley.
Led by Pedro Nava, chair of the California State Assembly’s Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, employees of the State Lands Commission, Department of Conservation, and Western States Petroleum Association attended an oversight hearing with Goleta City Council members.
The hearing included debates over who is responsible for orphaned oil platforms along the coast, as well as the pipelines, well casings, and other industrial debris protruding from Goleta’s shores. And, in the event of an explosion or spill, the participants discussed where the financial guarantees to cover local liabilities and losses will come from.
“No one’s taking interest in cleaning it up,” said Goleta Councilmember Roger Aceves. Since the oil companies responsible for the leftover structures aren’t around to pick up after themselves, Aceves said he believes the responsibility falls to the state of California, which owns and controls the land. Another solution he suggested was that “a portion of the financial revenue of the oil and gas harvested from (Goleta) tidelands be dedicated to cleaning up this mess.”
Nava also recommended that the funds to cover local damages come from the oil companies. Currently, California is the only state that doesn’t charge oil companies an oil service fee. Texas charges a fee of 12.5 percent per barrel, and Alaska charges 25 percent, Nava said.
By charging a modest 10 percent per barrel, California would produce $1.5 billion towards hospitals, education, and the environment, he said. “We just need the oil companies to pay more,” Nava said. “That’s the answer.”
But the representative of Western States Petroleum, David Smyser, disagreed. “I believe the funds are already there,” said Smyser. The oil industry creates more than 300,000 high-paying jobs in California, provides millions of taxes to the state, and pumps even more money back into the economy, Smyser said. Without the industry, California’s economy would take a serious hit in a time when it can’t afford one, he said. And, the Department of Conservation has bonds and programs available that localities can apply for and benefit from, said Elena Miller, the department’s State Oil and Gas Supervisor.
Nava said he was optimistic that something good will come out of these talks.


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace






Previous Month



Comments
Contrary to what David Smyser says, the real costs of impacts to the environment and human health caused by the petroleum and coal industries, coupled with these industries' blocking of real progress --for many decades-- toward the inevitably needed shift to an environmentally sustainable economy based on renewable substitutes for petroleum and coal---ARE MUCH HIGHER than the benefits he claims.
To mention one macro impact, it's disastrous the damage caused by the petroleum and coal industries to our atmosphere and the air we breathe. The concentration of CO2 in the air we breathe now is approx. 390 ppm; and growing by 2 ppm per year. It was around 300 ppm around the start of the industrial revolution. Scientists assert that a sustainable planetary level must be below 350 ppm. -->Visit 350.org for more information and to participate in the global event of 10/10/10 at 10:10.
mcheca (Miguel Checa)
October 2, 2010 at 9:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
“I believe the funds are already there,” said Smyser. The oil industry creates more than 300,000 high-paying jobs in California, provides millions of taxes to the state, and pumps even more money back into the economy, Smyser said.
,,, well, that goes for Texas and Alaska too, and still they pay the 12.5 and 25 percent per barrel there and love to work in and with these states...
jnm99 (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2010 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Smyser, on behalf of WSPA (Western States Petroleum
Association) agreed to help and participate in attempting to obtain funds from a number of sources to assist the City of Goleta in taking care of abandoned infrastructure. Kudos to Goleta Councilman Roger Aceves for bringing the issue to my attention. I was pleased to have been the 1st state legislative committee to have conducted such a hearing in Goleta.
pedronava (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2010 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree that Councilman Aceves has done a standup job on many issues for COG. He gets my vote.
sa1 (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2010 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So when is polluter Greka spokemans/apologist and State Assembly Candidate going to give input on this.
for sa1 only; Voting in Goleta? Why do you meddle in Santa Barbara so much. Is that where you were busted? Is that why you hold a grudge for SBPD. Why not ask retired SBPD Aceves about contracts since he retired with less than 30. I guess Goleta has gotten a pretty good deal.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2010 at 12:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nava's contribution to this thread is fluff. Well, ok, that's consistent with his tenure up in Sac City. Gawd, I can't wait till he's history.
/OT
SezMe (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2010 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)