Page 1 of 6
Posted on June 17 at 9:18 p.m.
And question two, according to Wiki Plains was the company that negotiated (some say collaborated) with many local environmental groups represented by Environmental Defense Center to allow them to drill from their platform in Federal waters offshore of Vandenburg into an oil field in State waters. The issue was very complex and met lots of resistance ultimately being denied by the State Lands Commission. EDC reportedly was paid by Plains some $100,000 to arrange the 'deal'. All local politicians supported the deal. So why has this Plains/PXP deal been off the radar of late? Embarrassing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plains_Exploration_%26_Production
On Tear-Licking Dogs
Posted on June 17 at 9:01 p.m.
Kudos to Nick for doing the only investigative reporting on this spill I have seen in the media. Several questions are still hanging out there though. It seems the County case in court to regulate Celeron's pipeline was lost because it was an inter-state pipeline going all the way to Texas. One could understand the difficulty with having every jurisdiction along the route regulating with their own set of regulations. But in the late 1990's the link to Texas was shut down and later sold to El Paso Gas. That meant that the oil portion of the pipeline was wholly in California. So could the county have sought then to reassert it's right to regulate the operation of the pipeline? If that was an option why wasn't it pursued? Was it a political decision not to? Is so who made it? I personally think this story has the potential to lead down the rabbit hole. http://www.sbcountyplanning.org/energ...
Posted on June 6 at 6:29 p.m.
Not to defend Plains, but the reason for welding in a new section of pipe is because, for now, the pipeline has to have a 'smart pig' sent through it to determine if corrosion exists in other places. Can't do that unless it is sealed up, even if only temporarily.
On Political Reaction to Refugio Oil Spill Continues
Posted on May 22 at 12:15 p.m.
Nick's article is good reporting but hardly 'investigative'. That the Plains pipeline was under State/Federal monitoring should be common knowledge. One thing Nick failed to mention is that Plains and the company that owns and operates the four platforms off of Point Conception, PXP, were one and the same a few years ago. And that PXP was at the center of a controversial proposal to drill horizontally into State Tidelands from an aging Federal Platform Irene off shore of Vandenburg. PXP's proposal was vigorously supported by EDC, who crafted the deal with PXP (behind closed doors), GOO, CEC, and other environmental groups as well as virtually all local politicians. The 'Deal' was killed by the State Lands Commission when member John Garamendie voted against it. Moral....be careful who you crawl into bed with.
On Huge Oversight Gap on Refugio Pipeline
Posted on April 3 at 11:36 a.m.
What an incredible waste of taxpayer money. Rather than prohibit building on questionable land why not let the landowner rebuild with a deed restriction the indemnifies the City from any responsibility should the home slide down the hill. Put the onus on the owner, not the City.
On Court Says Homeowners Can Rebuild
Posted on March 19 at 10 a.m.
While it's great that Gibraltar Rd gets fixed how about Refugio Road? Public Works said it was highest on the list decades ago and all they do is cold patch the old potholes. I doubt if 20% of the original road surface is still visible. The rest is patches.
On Gibraltar Road Closing for Major Repairs
Posted on February 19 at 11:54 a.m.
Any geologist can tell you that this ranch, like all the ranches in the foothills, does not sit on a pocket of ground water. Rather water runs underneath it from higher to lower. Essentially the ranch is entitled to what rain water soaks into the aquifer from their 780 acres. It would be highly unlikely that more than a small fraction of that rain water penetrates through to soil and rock to the deep aquifer. Hence most of the water is not theirs to begin with. If this goes to court it could set an interesting precedent. There are several large ranches in the area that have drilled deep wells and horizontal wells that tap water that is not theirs.
On Lamentations of a Dog Denied
Posted on December 18 at 12:38 p.m.
The City of Goleta inherited this mess from the County. The County allowed Exxon in the late 80s to site a huge oil processing facility in Los Flores Canyon between El Capitan and Refugio State Parks. It was called a 'Consolidated Facility' and was to be where all the oil and gas from the Gaviota area was processed and pumped out via pipeline. Unfortunately Exxon never wanted to share the facility and made the 'rent' so high no one else, like Venoco, can afford to use it. The County, always gun shy of lawsuits, has declined to enforce the provisions of the Consolidated Facility Ordinance and the terms of their agreement with Exxon. And to top it off Venoco recently installed a pipeline to Los Flores for it's processed oil to be shipped via the Exxon Facility pipeline to La and SF. If anyone is to blame, it is squarely the County.
On State Lands Approves Ellwood Oil Well
Posted on November 18 at 12:04 p.m.
Wilderness is great but that said it does complicate the job of fighting wild fires. Something we all know all to well here in Santa Barbara.
On No Extra Wilderness for Los Padres
Posted on November 10 at 2:22 p.m.
Lloyd is the 'got-to-guy' for impossibly difficult projects. Once a surveyor for Penfield and Smith, he saw where the real money is......developing consultant. He was Osgoods main man in the fiasco of the Naples Development that went belly up.
On Drought Emergency Persists Despite Trick-or-Treat Rains