Speaking of off-shore drilling - it looks to me like there's some sort of attempted swindle going on.
Background
Twenty-two years ago Chevron had done far more exploration work offshore California than other oil companies. than other companies off-shore California. When the BIA held an auction of the off-shore tracts, Chevron bid ten to twenty times as much as other bidders and won almost all of the west coast off-shore oil exploration tracts. Chevron has made the annual payments required for these tracts in addition to their upfront bid. Waiting for a time when either technology or oil prices will make development of these tracts politically acceptable.
In the interim the Bush administration has placed prohibitions on further drilling in ChevronTexaco's tracts offshore California. ChevronTexaco has sued the Federal government to remove this ban.
Current Events
Local Los Angeles news interviewed Bush Interior Secretary Gale Ann Norton who is trying to either invalidate or buy back the oil and gas leases from the oil companies so these tracts can be placed in a "conservation zone" "to protect the environment". She said the oil companies are fighting this taking in the courts. They (basically ChevronTexaco) are seeking a payment of more than 100 times what she has offered for this eminent domain action.
I'm sure that Ms. Norton, who supports oil production in national wilderness areas and the ANWR in Alaska, is the most dedicated sort of environmentalist. ha ha ha
So what is this really all about?
Ms. Norton said the Bush administration wish to reallocate drilling leases to those states which want to proceed with active production, so they're closing out California leases so they can proceed in other states. Huh? How does that make any sense?
ChevronTexaco and its executives donated a total of only $5,000 to the Bush re-election campaign. Is the Bush administration so corrupt that they are willing to effect a $150 billion theft to punish a company that didn't pay them a large enough bribe?
Is the Bush administration acting on behalf of ExxonMobil who later found out the results of Chevron's exploration wells drilled offshore California? On-shore oil in California is very heavy, which sells at a low price. But the off-shore oil is very high quality, light, low-sulfur oil which will sell at a premium. Steal ChevronTexaco's oil lease under the pretense of environmental concerns, then turn around and sell them to ExxxonMobil which made major donations to Bush?
Expect to see far more about this story in the coming weeks.
*******************
waterconserve.info
Oil companies holding the undeveloped California leases have filed a breach of contract lawsuit against the federal government because of procedural hurdles that have prevented drilling from proceeding. It was a similar lawsuit that led to settling the drilling dispute off the Florida coast.
The administration has yet to take a position on whether the government should buy back the California leases.
At the White House, deputy press secretary Scott McClellan insisted there is no inconsistency in the president's policies toward the leases in Florida and California.
"The president believes it's important to consult with local and state communities to address local concerns, whether in Florida or in California," McClellan said.
Congressional sources said that the purchase of the California leases could be far costlier--in excess of $1 billion. |
