A leaked Dept. of the Interior (DOI) document will likely have little in common with the Draft Proposed Program (DPP, step 2 above). The DPP decisions will be made by the President, not by DOI staffers or managers.
According to media reports, the leaked document includes lease sales offshore New England, the Carolina’s and California. Unless the President revokes his own 2020 withdrawals, the Carolina’s are off-limits until 2032. Ditto for the Eastern Gulf within 125 miles from Florida. (See the map below.)
Including North Atlantic and offshore California in the DPP would unleash a firestorm of opposition. In the case of the North Atlantic, the acreage may not be sufficiently prospective to justify the fight.
To the extent that marine sanctuary determinations do not preclude California offshore leasing, the litigation and legislative battles probably would. In the unlikely event that a sale could be held, who would bid? Who wants to be the next Sable?
The Beaufort Sea is the most likely frontier area to be included in the DPP given plans to open ANWR, operational history, resource potential, and State support.
Assuming the South Atlantic withdrawal could be partially lifted, a small, targeted lease sale would be of great interest to petroleum geologists and could have significant economic and national security implications. The late Paul Post, the foremost expert on the petroleum geology of the US Atlantic, saw great potential in the paleo deep- and ultra-deepwater areas. He advocated exploration concepts proven successful in analogous West African and South American settings where massive discoveries have been made. Samuel Epstein, another prominent petroleum geologist, also believes the deepwater Atlantic has great resource potential.
Finally, the extent of the Florida buffer needs to be considered given the high resource potential of the Eastern Gulf. Be it 75, 100, or 125 miles, leasing beyond that buffer should be a priority.
Excellerate Hull 3407, the company’s newest floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU), will be delivered to Iraq in 2026.
Why would a major oil and gas producer like Iraq be dependent on LNG imports?
Pipeline infrastructure limitations
High flaring rates: Iraq flared 625 bcf in 2023 which is almost equal to their total gas consumption (682 bcf). Iraq plans to eliminate routine flaring by 2028 (delayed from earlier targets).
Risks associated with gas imports from Iran.
And the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Why would a state in the world’s no.1 gas producing country and not far removed from the massive Marcellus Shale reserves be importing LNG?
Firstly, Massachusetts is a wonderful place in many ways: beaches, mountains, islands, history, arts and culture, universities, charming villages, commercial fishing, recreational and professional sports, and more. I thoroughly enjoyed living on Cape Cod and was blessed to meet my wife there.
Pipeline restrictions have limited the flow of gas from Pennsylvania (Marcellus) and elsewhere.
Massachusetts is the only state with significant LNG imports.
Per EIA data, Massachusetts imported 13.2 bcf of LNG in 2023, accounting for about 87% of total U.S. LNG imports that year.
Most imports are through the Everett Marine Terminal near Boston. Imports through the offshore Northeast Gateway LNG terminal have been limited in recent years. (See map below).
Imports are seasonal, peaking in winter months, with most supply originating from Trinidad.
Recently, Governor Healy has made more encouraging statements regarding natural gas policy. She says she never stopped gas pipelines from entering the state and calls natural gas an “essential energy source.”
Attached is a court filing challenging Delaware’s approval of the Coastal Construction Plan for that project. Some interesting points from the filing:
Maryland local governments declined to allow the transmission lines from the Maryland Offshore Wind Project to come ashore in their jurisdictions.
The Governor of Delaware agreed to allow the transmission lines to make landfall at the Delaware Seashore State Park.
The transmission pipelines would then traverse the adjacent Delaware Bays, to an inland substation, from which the power would be sent to Maryland.
US Wind applied for a number of permits from the Delaware Department of Natural Resources (DNREC) specific to horizontal directional drilling, laying cable pipelines, and other coastal construction activity.
The approval process, including provisions for public input, was not consistent with State regulations.
The Secretary’s decision to issue the beach construction permit is supported virtually exclusively by documents which were submitted by US Wind after the close of public comment.
Decommissioning and financial assurance information, a favorite BOE topic for both wind and oil/gas, was submitted after the close of the public record.
In essence, the 3 Supervisors from South County (Districts 1-3) voted to euthanize an industry that is largely in North County (Districts 4 and 5). Those 3 supervisors, not the marketplace, are terminating a historically important industry. See the maps below.
District BoundariesOil Wells
Supervisors Laura Capps of the Second District, Joan Hartmann of the Third District and Roy Lee of the First District voted for the ordinance.
Ah, but it’s the industry’s fault according to Supervisor Hartmann. She asserted that companies have known since the 1950s about the dangers of climate change, and could have led the way to be part of the solution. How dare they respond to market forces instead of climate ideologues!
Of course, this is the same three vote coalition that is aligned with the Coastal Commission in opposition to the restart of the Santa Ynez Unit, which would benefit the County significantly.
Finally, note that the three supervisors voting for the ordinance represent the districts with the highest income levels and lowest poverty rates. Those opposing the ordinance represent the districts that will be most affected, and have the lowest income levels and highest poverty rates. (See the table below; Information courtesy of Grok AI.)
District
Approx. Median Household Income (2022)
Key Areas Included
Notes
1
$120,000–$140,000
Carpinteria, Summerland, Montecito, parts of Santa Barbara
Affluent coastal communities; high home values (~$1.5M+ median)
2
$95,000–$115,000
Santa Barbara city, Goleta, Isla Vista
Mix of urban professionals, students, and tech; university influence lowers median slightly.
3
$80,000-$95,000
Santa Ynez Valley, Buellton, Solvang, Lompoc
Rural/agricultural with tourism; moderate incomes from wine industry and military base
4
$70,000–$85,000
Lompoc, Vandenberg area, parts of Santa Maria
industrial and defense-related; higher poverty rates (~15–20%).
5
$60,000–$75,000
Santa Maria, Guadalupe
Agricultural North County; majority Latino population; lowest incomes due to farm labor.
Poverty rates: ~8–10% in Districts 1–2 vs. 18–25% in Districts 4–5
“Only in California! Newsom is blocking oil production off California’s coast from reaching their own refineries, driving gasoline prices even higher for Californians! Now, this oil production will have to be shipped elsewhere, lowering gas prices for other areas— just not for California! This is the opposite of common sense!”
BOE was a fan of Chris Wright long before he became Energy Secretary, and I agree that the resumption of Santa Ynez Unit production is economically desirable for California and the nation. However, his comment implies that OS&T processing and tanker transport is a realistic option, and I do not believe that is the case.
John Smith and I have discussed Sable’s OS&T announcement on a number of occasions, and we don’t see a reasonable path forward for this option. In addition to the significantly higher capital and operational costs and the need to acquire and retrofit a suitable floating production, storage, and offloading vessel (FPSO), the legal and permitting challenges could be even more complex than for the pipeline option (as daunting as that may sound).
The OS&T option would require a revised development and production plan, and the associated environmental review (almost certainly an EIS). An EIS would not favor this option, and the California Coastal Commission would surely rule that the OS&T/tanker alternative was inconsistent with their CZM plan. (Keep in mind that the SYU/OS&T production in the early 1980’s was approved prior to the passage of the Coastal Zone Management Act.) The Secretary of Commerce could overrule the Commission’s consistency determination, but legal objections to the override would likely delay the project for years and have a good chance of success.
Onshore processing and pipeline transportation using existing facilities is clearly the environmentally and economically preferable option. The only reasonable path forward for Sable or Exxon is to continue to pursue the onshore pipeline approvals. Federal attention should focus on jurisdiction over that pipeline, which is inherently an interstate line because it transports OCS production, and State actions that are blocking interstate commerce.
Finally, keep in mind that the SYU would still be producing today were it not for the entirely preventable pipeline rupture and the resulting Refugio oil spill. Plains Pipeline, the party responsible for this ugly incident, is no longer the owner, but that doesn’t comfort coastal residents; nor does it absolve the companies that transported their oil through the line from all responsibility.
The Refugio spill will be discussed further in an upcoming post.
The carbon disposal industry, which overplayed its hand on the OCS, has managed to alienate traditional oil and gas industry supporters, sparking grassroots opposition in conservative areas of Louisiana. Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) is also opposed by climate activists and the environmental justice movement.
The Advocate has nicely summarized opponents concerns: “land rights; the impact on underground aquifers if CO2 leaks; skepticism of climate change; skepticism of its effectiveness in fully capturing CO2; and opposition to the use of federal money and tax credits to finance the effort.”
Gov. Landry issued an executive order on Oct. 15 in an apparent attempt to calm the opposition. Following 34 “whereas” clauses intended to justify carbon disposal in Louisiana, the EO directs a pause in the review of new Class VI CO2 disposal wells. As evidenced by the attached press release, Save My Louisiana and other opposition groups are far from satisfied.
To the planners behind the scenes in Glasgow, Edinburgh, and London who draw borders with maps but never set foot on the land they destroy.
To the investors who calculate profit and pretend it’s about the planet.
And it’s addressed to all who love Scotland, to those who still believe that the Highlands are sacred ground, that wilderness is not a void, but the pulse of something ancient and irreplaceable.
To those who once walked through moorland and silence and felt that rare sense of belonging to something pure.
And to those who now see it slipping away, amidst noise, steel, and greed.
Let’s stand together for what we love! Before it’s too late!
Beyond the Kyle of Sutherland the heart of the Highlands is being remade not by nature, but by contracts, cables, cranes, and lots and lots of money!
For example: In Invershin and Golspie they plan to house 400 workers, 150 here, 250 there, for five years of construction, working around the clock. (As in numerous other places in Scotland)
Diesel trucks will thunder down our single-track roads,shaking cottages and scaring sheep.
Quiet valleys will become supply corridors.
The night will be lit by headlights and engines.
And when they’re finished, silence will not return, because the monster turbines will remain, and with them, endless power lines will be built in the name of the price of progress.
They will stand like giant steel soldiers, an eternal monument to power and greed in the middle of our once pristine nature!
From Spittal to Beauly, a high-voltage line will soon run through the heart and soul of the North, right through forests, moors, and nesting grounds.
They call it a necessary connection. But why?
Because they produce more than they can transport! Because their greed is limitless!
To make a profit, to export, to a faraway market.
This isn’t about clean energy for Scotland.
It’s about feeding the industrial grid, at the expense of our ecosystems, our wildlife, our peace.
The osprey, the golden eagle, the bats that hunt over rivers, all will suffer from what you call development in the name of progress.
Migratory birds will collide with turbines taller than our churches.
Red deer will lose their habitat.
The once living soil will be buried under concrete.
What they will take from us
They will drain the peat bogs our greatest natural carbon stores, and turn them from the lungs of the Highlands into scars.
They will clear forests for turbine foundations and access roads.
Thousands of trees will fall in the name of green energy!
They will carve paths through river valleys where salmon once leaped and otters played.
They will pour thousands of tons of concrete into living soil.
And if you call it green energy I ask:
How green is a forest without trees?
How clean is a wind that smells of diesel?
The Death of the Dark Night
They will fill our skies with red, flashing lights,visible for miles!
A constant warning, the cold heartbeat of industry.
But for the creatures that live here,that light is death.
Bats are disoriented. Birds are drawn to their doom.
And for us, who once saw the aurora dance, it is deep sadness. It moves me to tears to think of what we will lose!
The Milky Way will disappear behind their towers.
The silence of darkness will be gone forever.
The darkness of old gives way to a constant blinking that neither man nor beast can rest.
Their promise of green jobs for us who live here—all false!
They bring contractors, workers, and convoys.
We locals are left with rising electricity prices, broken roads, and a never-ending hum. Radiation pollution day and night! Sound waves are our constant companions! Our houses are rapidly plummeting in price and becoming unsellable!
Instead of Highland idyll, construction noise!
The people of the Highlands are experiencing industrial colonization disguised as green energy. Communities are shrinking while wind turbines are growing.
In the Kyle of Sutherland, there will soon be almost one turbine per inhabitant.
Imagine that: one person, one monster turbine!
A land once characterized by loneliness, now trimmed by rotor blades and power pylons—all climate-neutral, of course!
They call it renewable. But what is being renewed? The money is in their pockets!
An endless hunger for more, disguised as green miracle energy!
A question for the powerful
Do you know what it feels like to live under a sky that never sleeps?
To feel the hum of the power grid in your bones?
To lose the stars one by one and call it progress?
You don’t live here.
You don’t walk these hills in the rain.
You’ve never seen the mist dance or watched the owl fly in the dark night.
You don’t stand by the river at dusk and listen.
You don’t know the natural sounds of the night or the silence when everything is asleep!
You don’t know the starry sky, a wonder with millions of lights that guide your way. You don’t feel the magic when the Northern Lights dance and enchant everything around them.
You only listen to the voice of money.
But let me tell you!
Scotland is not your factory.
The Highlands are not your testing ground.
You cannot pave the North with steel and call it salvation.
You cannot blind the sky and call it clean.
Look up.
The blinking lights that you love so much are not progress.
It is the wilderness’s last breath.
And when the final aurora fades behind your towers, remember:
It was not nature that failed you.
It was you who failed it.
I will fight for every blade of grass and every tree to save the Highlands a piece of their soul!
A Voice from the Highlands, for all who still believe that beauty and silence are worth defending.
The SAS data indicate that the number of wind turbine incidents has risen sharply in recent years (see chart below). The increased number of turbines worldwide, and perhaps better news coverage of incidents, presumably contributed to the sharp increase. Nonetheless, the growing number of incidents is disconcerting, as is the absence of industry and government summaries and reports.
SAS acknowledges that their list, which is dependent on publicly available reports, is merely the “tip of the iceberg.” For example, the list does not include the June 2, 2025, Empire Wind project fatality.
The SAS list does capture the 2018 collapse of the Russell Peterson liftboat, which was collecting data offshore Delaware for a wind project. One worker died and another was seriously endangered. The Coast Guard never issued a report on this tragic incident. Serious questions remain about the positioning of a liftboat in the Mid-Atlantic for several months beginning in March when major storms are likely, the liftboat’s failure mechanisms, the operator’s authority to be conducting this research, and the actions that were taken in preparation for storm conditions.
What they will take from us
The Death of the Dark Night
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 
Interesting case: Delaware litigation on approval of the Coastal Construction Permit for the Maryland Offshore Wind Project
Posted in decommissioning, energy policy, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged Coastal Construction Plan, court filing, decommissioning, Delaware litigation, Maryland Offshore Wind, public comment, US Wind on October 29, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The Dept. of the Interior is currently reconsidering approval of the Construction and Operations Plan for the Maryland Offshore Wind Project (US Wind).
Attached is a court filing challenging Delaware’s approval of the Coastal Construction Plan for that project. Some interesting points from the filing:
Read Full Post »