There are just two days left for the first public comment period on the five-year offshore oil and gas plan proposed by the Biden administration. The plan includes 11 total oil and gas lease auctions, with 10 in the Gulf of Mexico and one off the coast of Alaska. Already, hundreds—if not thousands—have made their voices heard and pushed back against the plan, which was released a day after the prior five-year plan had run its course. That means there’s no present policy in place to allow for more offshore oil and gas lease auctions to continue, but if this latest plan does get adopted in its current iteration, it will spell climate disaster.
It’s not just a matter of opposing the five-year plan; as much as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provides crucial funding to reach net-zero goals, it includes provisions tying offshore wind development with fossil fuel leases as well as provisions for onshore fossil fuel development tied to solar development. Per the plan, “DOI’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) may not issue a lease for offshore wind development unless the agency has offered at least 60 million acres for oil and gas leasing on the outer continental shelf.” Some of the five-year plan’s lease auctions could satisfy this requirement, but that doesn’t guarantee there will be much development, nor will it guarantee that polluters will be able to satisfy National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) criteria.
Campaign Action
There’s a lot still up in the air in the days ahead for offshore oil and gas lease sales and development, but one thing is clear: Putting the future of offshore activities in the hands of fossil fuel companies is clearly the wrong bet. A recent Center for American Progress (CAP) report makes that abundantly clear:
“Offshore wind has proved itself to be the most efficient and cost-effective use of [Outer Continental Shelf] leasing acreage. The benefits for the domestic economy to taxpayers, and to workers and energy consumers, are unmatched by offshore wind’s crude oil and natural gas counterparts—the environmental, health, and financial costs of which are a drain on livelihoods and monetary resources. Publicly owned ocean resources should be leased in a manner that results in the greatest returns to the taxpaying public. Wind energy offers a greater return on investment for the public and increases revenue as well as social value.”
CAP’s analysis found that “the average acre from an offshore wind lease sale brings in nearly 12,500% more revenue for taxpayers than one acre of oil while providing enough electricity to drive an electric vehicle almost 65 times farther than a gasoline-powered vehicle.” The research organization also found that offshore wind lease sale bids are significantly higher than in the oil and gas sector and, in turn, generates more energy once developed and online. Offshore wind produces 40.8 megawatt-hours per acre of energy compared to just 34 megawatt-hours for natural gas.
There’s still a lot in play that could allow oil and gas development to move forward, but there are also ways to show the Biden administration that fossil fuels are the wrong move for our future. Opposing the proposed five-year offshore oil and gas leasing plan may be the first step in this battle to bring a more just transition without the country stuck being beholden to polluters.