Rigs-to-reefs is closer than ever to reality.
That’s because the State Legislature has approved a bill that would let certain offshore oil platforms remain partially in place once they’re decommissioned. The bill, AB 2503, which was authored by Assembly Speaker John Pérez, sailed through the statehouse; the State Senate voted 31-1 in favor last week, and then the Assembly approved it on Tuesday 68-2, with Santa Barbara’s Assemblymember Pedro Nava voting against the bill. It now sits on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk, awaiting his signature.
The bill would let the state take over the rigs once the oil companies lop off the top 85 feet for navigational safety purposes and also set up a conservation fund where the companies would donate a percentage of the associated savings; full removal of all rigs is estimated to cost more than $1 billion, but partial removal could save more than $650 million. Each rig would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and the program would only be implemented if leaving a particular platform in place results in a “net environmental benefit” and “substantial cost savings.” Some rigs are expected to be ready for decommissioning as soon as 2015, with the majority coming due by 2030.
Similar programs run by the federal Minerals Management Service in conjunction with the states of Louisiana and Texas have been welcomed with mostly open arms in the Gulf Coast since the mid 1980s, except for complaints from the shrimpers and trawling fishermen whose nets can snag on the underwater debris. But the Gulf of Mexico’s sandy bottom is particularly lacking in reef-like fish habitat, so the dozens of old, repurposed rigs — which include both abandoned deepwater platforms and, more commonly, rigs that have been taken apart and relocated to an official reef zone — have become havens for recreational fishermen and SCUBA divers.
But in Santa Barbara, the idea is still met with uncertainty. The Environmental Defense Center’s Linda Krop, who has fought the Rigs-to-Reefs legislation before and also participated in full rig removals in the mid 1990s, says the purpose is to save money for the state and for the oil rig owners. “Do we want to clean up the ocean or do we want the money in exchange for allowing these platforms, which are surrounded by huge piles of contaminated debris, to remain in place?” she asked recently, while she watched the bill move through the statehouse. “Are we going to set a precedent that other industries can use the ocean as their dumping ground as well, especially if they give their money to the state?”
Krop and like-minded critics argue that the reef-lined ocean floor off of California already supports enough fish habitat; that the rigs are much more problematically immense that most of the ones in the Gulf (almost 30 percent, in fact, are deeper than 400 feet, and one is taller than the Empire State Building at nearly 1,200 feet, making for the largest proposed rig removals ever); and that the potential liabilities for future rig-related accidents — whether happening to divers or commercial fishermen, who fear a snag could capsize their vessels — are still too nebulous and dangerous for the state to assume.
But many scientists think otherwise, including UCSB’s Milton Love, who’s spent the past 15 years driving his submarine beneath these very rigs to determine whether fish indeed like to call them home. His data shows that each rig is “quite different” but that the platforms tend to be adding to the overall fish population, especially for economically important species such as rockfish. “That’s not because anyone has sprinkled magic pixie dust on them,” said Love a few weeks ago. “It’s because they are extremely large structures, so that when young fishes are drifting around, they encounter platforms more easily than they would encounter a natural reef.”
The bill is also beloved by recreational fishermen like Tom Raftican, president of The Sportfishing Conservancy. “AB 2503 does an incredible job of providing habitat for a number of California’s at-risk fish populations and at the same time will provide an awesome marine legacy for the governor and legislators,” he said on Thursday. “This bill will create an endowment to help fund the management and enhancement that our marine resources desperately need.”
The bill’s author John Pérez, from Los Angeles, has said that the bill represents a “creative approach that protects our marine habitats while generating a permanent new funding course for environmental protection and regulation.” Citing “an enormous body of science” showing the reefs are actually good and not bad for the environment, saying they create “sustainable economic opportunities for coastal communities,” and lauding the establishment of a new state conservation fund, Pérez has argued, “[It’s] a winning prospect for our entire state.”



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





Previous Month



Comments
The 13 oil platforms comprise about 10 sq km of potential rockfish habitat. The Southern California Bight has about 7000 sq km of rockfish habitat. It's not about habitat.
Frodo (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps Miss Krop was no longer able to fight rigs-to-reefs because she lost so much credibility with her support for off shore oil drilling. She has been speaking out of both sides of her mouth for so long she doesn't know what the truth is. OCS is unsafe (which it is) except for PXP, then it is safe. PXP can terminate its lease and stop drilling but the other oil companies who say they want rigs to reef as an incentive to stop drilling can't do that because only the new MMS can allow that. You can't say one thing one time and the exact opposite the next and then expect people to listen to you
GOOfy (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2010 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Linda Crop was actually way ahead of other so called "enviros" Pedro N and Susan J with the PXP deal. The deal was a win-win solution with a time certain date to shut down the Rig off Lompoc forever. Sadly, folks like Pedro Nava were just plain wrong to disagree, and say it was not enforcable etc. Pedro's camp did not offer any help to make the deal better, or other options except stay the course of old thinking and try to kill PXP with one million knife cuts using the govn process. They would prefer to continue to wrap up PXP and EDC in red tape with old outdated enviro thinking instead of making a deal with the private company that owns the rig.
Thank you Linda for being visionary and for really trying to remove the Rigs using new more modern enviro thinking. Unlike Linda, Pedro N has not a 10 year plan to stop oil drilling, just political buz words, that did not work too well in the election. In fact, his style only encourges PXP to stay the course and produce a few hundred barrels a day for many years to come. Linda and EDC's deal would have allowed PXP to add more straws to "get the oil out" sooner than later, then PXP would shut down in ten years and get 4000+ acres open space to the public. Now you know why Pedro and Susan Jordan did poorly in the last election: Because they have nothing new to offer only old out dated "just say no" & "stay the course" messages using polictics to fight PXP. Just who's side are they on?
You go Linda Crop and EDC!!
Dont_mess_with_Goleta (anonymous profile)
September 4, 2010 at 4:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The SB enviro group are so full of hate for the oil companies that they can't recognize an environmental benefit when they see one.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2010 at 8:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Have always thought that leaving platforms in place would be a good thing. Krop is well-educated on the subject but with the con views here, I can see this isn't an easy answer. Matt - On the Pulse - Kettman, you wrote another outstanding article = Thanks !
Could we see photographs of the contamination or pollution she noted “...surrounded by huge piles of contaminated debris, to remain in place?”
What do they look like? What are they comprised of? What happens when the debris breaks down? A picture is worth a thousand words. Yo Wellman, get out your scuba gear.
MediaPro (anonymous profile)
September 7, 2010 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)