During a recent dive survey at Platform Holly off California’s coast, scientists from the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) had to pause fieldwork because dozens of sea lions took shelter around the structure.
The reason? A pod of killer whales had been spotted hunting near another offshore platform in federal waters.
These real-time encounters reveal more than marine drama. They highlight the ecological role that offshore platforms can play as part of the seascape. UCSB’s work is part of our ongoing study, Understanding Biological Connectivity Among Offshore Structures and Natural Reefs, which explores how marine life moves among natural and manmade habitats.
Inexplicably, BSEE’s ROD designates the most environmentally harmful, unsafe, and costly alternative as the “preferred alternative.” The decision is contrary to the opinions expressed by the leading experts on the ecology of California offshore platforms, most notablyDr. Milton Love of the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Why did BSEE select alternative 1 (complete removal) when their $1.6 million EIS acknowledges that alternative 2 (partial removal) is environmentally preferable? Was their decision influenced by activists who support the alternative that is most punitive to the industry they despise?
“On December 7, 2023, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) issued a Record of Decision (ROD) recommending the full removal of California’s 23 offshore oil platforms in federal waters, following a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) conducted to assess decommissioning options for platforms, pipelines, and other related infrastructure. However, upon close review, the PEIS and ROD appear to have reached misguided and detrimental conclusions due to critical oversights in their analyses.” Asher Radziner, Montecito Journal
Platform Holly, California State waters in the Santa Barbara Channel, formerly operated by Venoco
Platform Holly sits immediately offshore from the Univ. of California at Santa Barbara, and UCSB scientists have studied the platform and surrounding ecology extensively. Multiple studies have shown that production from Holly reduced natural seepage and methane pollution from shallow formations beneath the Channel. Platform Holly was thus a “net negative” hydrocarbon polluter.
The natural seepage in the Santa Barbara Channel was important to the earliest inhabitants of the area. The Chumash used the tar for binding and sealing purposes, including caulking their canoes. Since Holly shut down in 2015 following the Refugio pipeline spill, offshore workers and supply boat crews have reported a considerable increase in gas seepage.
Earlier this month, it was reported that well plugging operations at Holly had now been completed, but decisions regarding the final decommissioning of the platform remain.
Venoco declared bankruptcy in 2015 and the State of California became the platform owner. According to the State Lands Commission, Exxon will pay the costs for decommissioning the platform. This is because Exxon acquisition Mobil operated the platform from 1993-1997 before Venoco became owner.
The most recent Holly development is that Venoco has settled its law suit with Plains, the company responsible for the 2015 Refugio pipeline spill that halted production from Holly. Terms of the settlement have not been disclosed.
Note: As an aside, I’m curious as to whether Mobil provided a decommissioning guarantee as part of the sale to Venoco or whether the State is simply holding ExxonMobil accountable as a legacy owner. If it’s the latter, why isn’t bp (bp acquisition Arco was Holly’s operator from 1966-1993) also liable? Is it a matter of Mobil being the more recent predecessor owner?
Guardian: Juvenile rockfish seen on an oil platform off the coast of Santa Barbara. For the scientists who study them, preserving these accidental marine ecosystems has become a moral issue. Photograph: Scott Gietler
Excellent Guardian article featuring my former colleague Dr. Ann Bull and Dr. Milton Love from the University of California at Santa Barbara.
According to a 2014 study they (Bull and Love) co-authored, the rigs were some of the most “productive” ocean habitats in the world, a term that refers to biomass – or number of fish and how much space they take up – per unit area. The research showed the rigs to be about 27 times more productive than the natural rocky reefs in California.
The Marine Science Institute of the University of California Santa Barbara has completed a 6-year study to investigate the differences between the types of fish that live around offshore oil and gas production platforms off the coast of California and the species that inhabit natural reefs in the same geographic area. This research strengthens and confirms observations made in previous studies. Among the important conclusions (full study linked here):
There is very extensive diversity in the species assemblages around the oil and gas platforms of California. Factors driving this variability include A) location around the platform, B) geographic location of the platforms, and C) bottom depth of the platform.
Around each platform, there are three, unique, fish assemblages: midwaters, bottom, and shell mound. While a suite of rockfishes (of 43 species) dominate most platform assemblages, a number of other taxa (e.g., lingcod, combfishes, sculpins, and seaperches) are also important.
Midwater fish assemblages tend to be similar across platforms; there are substantial differences among those found at bottoms and shell mounds.
In general, the assemblages of platforms and natural sites are different. These differences are primarily based on differences in species’ densities rather than the presence or absence of taxa.
The role that habitat complexity plays in structuring platform fish assemblages should not be underestimated.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 