Long overdue and considerable developments have recently been made toward finally access the job-creating energy reserves that remain under the federal government’s lock-and-key along the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The Interior Dept.’s bureaucracy that oversees offshore energy production – MMS – gave a green light for responsible production in the beginning of December, as we’ve written about.

But that’s not stopping those who are opposed to creating jobs and economic activity through accessing the estimated 15 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from thwarting these commonsense efforts. Predictably, they’re heading straight to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Reuters reports this under the headline “Shell offshore oil drill plan in Alaska challenged”:

Environmental and Alaska Native groups have filed a legal challenge seeking to overturn U.S. approval of Royal Dutch Shell Plc’s plans to drill up to three wells this year off the shore of Alaska, representatives said on Wednesday.

Late on Tuesday, the coalition of groups filed its challenge to drilling in the remote Chukchi Sea. The petition in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals seeks to void the U.S. Minerals Management Service’s Dec. 7 approval of Shell’s plan for wells about 60 miles off Alaska’s northwestern coast.

Shell fired back, though, with actual facts, substance and coherence:

“It’s our belief the MMS was thorough in its technical and environmental evaluation of our 2010 Exploration Plan and that Shell has demonstrated its ability to operate in the Arctic in an environmentally responsible manner,” Shell spokesman Curtis Smith said in a statement. “A tremendous amount of work went into writing and evaluating this permit and we fully expect the MMS to be successful in defending its approval.”

Smith said “Shell has already completed four years of successful seismic and shallow hazard work in the Chukchi Sea – an area that could be home to some of the most prolific, undiscovered hydrocarbon basins in the U.S.“

Thankfully, Alaskans have a fighter for jobs and secure energy as their chief executive. UPI reports this about Gov. Sean Parnell’s ongoing efforts to expand Alaska’s energy economy under the headline “Drill, baby, drill, says Alaska’s Parnell”:

“We will draw on that timeless Alaskan strength and ingenuity to make it happen,” he said. “We will not settle for any less than maximizing recovery of Alaska’s gas for Alaskans’ benefit.”

He pointed to potential oil and gas discoveries in Alaska’s outer continental shelf as a further source of state revenue in a stagnant economy still crippled by the recession.

“I have made exploring and developing the OCS our priority,” he said.

Nearly 16 million Americans officially unemployed. “Real,” unofficial unemployment reportedly past 25 million. And another 11,000 Americans lost their jobs last month. You know what we need? We need a summit. That was the message offered by President Obama yesterday, joined at the White House by lots of folks who loved to be there (“Can I get a box of presidential M&M’s?!) – but not many who are actually on the frontlines of job creation in America today.

You know who is creating jobs, though? Creating jobs despite an aging workforce, winnowing access to resources, and the specter of confiscatory tax rates from the federal government? America’s energy producers. And even though that industry is responsible for more than nine million direct and indirect jobs in this country – and seven and a half percent of its GDP! – you’d have been hard pressed to find a single voice representing those interests at the White House yesterday. Wasn’t a single one of them there.

Guess it’d be sort of like convening a summit on annoying people and forgetting to invite folks like Joan Rivers and Carrot Top, are we right? Consider: One recent study found that 1.2 million jobs could be created if the Administration simply moved forward with a commonsense plan to unlock our nation’s offshore energy reserves.

Another study from the University of Alaska Anchorage study examined how many Alaskan jobs could be created if Washington would finally give us a green light to produce our energy resources safely offshore. Hope you’re sitting down while you’re reading this.

So, how are jobs are we talking? Economists say 35,000 — that’s more than 3 times as many jobs that were lost nationwide last month.

And in terms of payroll; ball park figure? Can you say $72 billion?

But what’s an enormous figure like that mean to every day Alaskans and Americans looking for work? These energy production jobs pay almost $110,000 each year — more than twice the national average income of $43,500.

These economists also determined that “OCS-related employment growth could more than offset losses from the decline of petroleum production on state lands and could help sustain the economy for several decades.”

Here are few key excerpts from the study entitled “Economic Analysis of Future O!shore Oil and Gas Development: Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea, and North Aleutian Basin”:

Besides the direct jobs in the oil and gas sector, jobs would be created in other sectors of the economy; these jobs are referred to as indirect and induced jobs. These jobs are generated as a result of the multiplier effects of in-state spending—industry purchases from other Alaska businesses, government spending of OCS-related revenues, and household spending of wages and salaries.

It is estimated that total annual average employment from OCS development—including all the direct, indirect, and induced employment—could be about 35,000 per year on average through 2057, with a peak employment of over 50,000 in 2038. Total wages and salaries associated with OCS development over the 50-year period are estimated to be about $72 billion (2007$).

Thanksgiving is near. And while many families and friends will travel long and far to celebrate and give thanks for their blessings this holiday season, it’s safe to say that seasonal travelers will be universally unthankful for higher gas prices they will pay at the pump.

USA Today reports that AAA “expects 2% more travelers on roadways this year than last, for a total of 33.2 million people.” Under the headline “Higher gasoline prices greet Thanksgiving travelers,” America’s newspaper also reports:

Thanksgiving travelers will find gasoline prices much higher than last year with little hope for respite heading into the rest of the holiday season, oil and gas analysts say.

The national average for a gallon of regular gas was $2.64 on Monday, slightly less than a month ago but up 72 cents a gallon from a year ago, the auto club AAA says.

Increasing domestic energy production – especially in Alaska’s resource-rich Beaufort and Chukchi Seas – would help drive down and stabilize prices at the pump for every single American family. At the same time, safe, responsible, 21^st century energy exploration could create much-needed economic activity and hundreds – if not thousands – of good paying jobs at a time when they are most needed. With unemployment at a 26-year high, and real jobless rate near 17.5 percent, producing more homegrown energy cannot wait.

So how much energy do we have, and what’s stopping us?

Well, in a recent Washington Post column, George Will writes:

In 1914, the Bureau of Mines said that U.S. oil reserves would be exhausted by 1924. In 1939, the Interior Department said that the world had 13 years’ worth of petroleum reserves. Then a global war was fought, and the postwar boom was fueled. In 1951 Interior reported that the world had . . . 13 years of reserves. In 1970, the world’s proven oil reserves were an estimated 612 billion barrels. By 2006, more than 767 billion barrels had been pumped, and proven reserves were 1.2 trillion barrels. In 1977, scold in chief Jimmy Carter predicted that mankind “could use up all the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.” Since then the world has consumed three times more oil than was then in the world’s proven reserves.

But surely now America can quickly wean itself from hydrocarbons, adopting alternative energies — wind, solar, nuclear? No.

In his column entitled “Awash in fossil fuels,” Will adds this:

Today, wind and solar power combined are just one-sixth of 1 percent of American energy consumption.

Edward L. Morse, an energy official in Carter’s State Department, writes in Foreign Affairs that the world’s deep-water oil and gas reserves are significantly larger than was thought a decade ago, and high prices have spurred development of technologies — a drilling vessel can cost $1 billion — for extracting them.

Despite these huge, known energy resources – particularly in the Beaufort and the Chukchi – Washington and Secretary Ken Salazar’s Interior Department have failed to move forward with commonsense policies that will help realize America’s energy potentials.

And experts are speaking on this critical issue.

The American Petroleum Institute’s chief economist, Dr. John Felmy, writes about the economic benefits, the environmental safeguards and technological advancements the energy industry continues to make each day in today’s Fort Myers News-Press under the headline “Oil and gas drilling is the right solution for Florida right now”:

Today, rigs and operations are clean, green and safe. The oil and natural gas industry has reduced its environmental footprint and minimized any lasting impact on ecosystems or surrounding wildlife.

Offshore rigs are located far from the horizon, and advanced technologies enable nearly pristine development and delivery of natural resources.

After decades of investment and billions of dollars spent on research, companies can now access previously unreachable depths.

Informed lawmakers and pro-drilling advocates have it right.

Let’s protect our economy — and our shores — through safe, clean energy exploration.

Some state legislative leaders right here in the Last Frontier are working to encourage more oil production, even though our state’s offshore reserves – which would generate taxes, revenues and royalties, helping to fund schools, roads, bridges and hospitals – are largely controlled by Washington’s far-away, forceful grasp.

The Anchorage Daily News recently editorialized about the multi-tracked energy plans being advanced in Juneau. Under the headline “What now on energy?,” the paper writes this about the Senate energy proposal:

Other goals on the Senate’s list include promoting a North Slope gas pipeline, encouraging more oil production, preventing energy price gouging, and coordinating the state’s various energy programs. Few would argue with those goals, but Alaskans don’t necessarily agree on how to achieve them.

It’s not every day (or millennium) that we get to comment on some good news on this blog, a function not of our generally misanthropic outlook on life, but rather: the fact that good examples of good news are so darn tough to come by.

But there’s just no way to pooh-pooh the breaking news today from the Interior Department. Turns out that after five years of back-and-forth in the courts, in Congress, and in and around the executive branch, Shell has finally been told that its offshore energy plan in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea is ready to go – paving the way for the company to begin developing exploratory wells next year on two leases in the area.

The Associated Press has the most thorough wrap-up:

A federal agency announced approval Monday of a plan by Shell Offshore, Inc.’s to drill exploratory wells next year on two leases in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s north coast … The Minerals Management Service said Shell must meet certain conditions, including federal air and water quality rules and marine mammal protection requirements.

Shell Alaska vice president Pete Slaiby called it a positive step toward drilling next year.

Keep in mind that these areas were first included for lease by the Interior Department way back in 2002 – and as readers of this blog should know by now, tracts don’t end up in the five-year plan by accident, not without years of pre-study, analysis and, unfortunately, litigation.

All of which is to say: It’s been a long, hard fight for Shell up here, but it seems to be one they’re willing to continue. Seriously: This is a company that has invested billions of dollars to create permanent jobs here and work with and accommodate native communities – all for the opportunity to risk even more money in the pursuit of American energy resources offshore. But no matter how hard bureaucrats in Washington or judges in San Francisco make it to do that work, these guys just keep coming back for more. Good for Shell. And good for Alaska’s Senate delegation for recognizing how good a piece of news this is:

Alaska’s two U.S. senators praised the announcement. Republican Lisa Murkowski called it an encouraging sign that Alaska’s oil and natural gas resources will continue to play a major role in America’s energy security.

Democrat Mark Begich said the decision showed that Interior Secretary Salazar and the Obama Administration recognize the importance of Alaska’s abundant offshore oil and gas resources, including safeguards for important subsistence resources.

Sure, we can talk about how this is just a drop in the bucket; how so much more offshore acreage in Alaska remains under agency lock-and-key; how Shell, BP and others continue to get the run-around in the Chukchi; how the plan approved by Interior essentially forbids exploration activities for the entire months of September and October. But we won’t do that. Today’s a day to tip a cap, and so consider this a formal doff.

UPDATE: You know what they say: When it rains, it pours. Just a day and a half after Interior gave the go-ahead for Shell in the Beaufort, the agency finally came through with an announcement today that the company’s environmental plan for the Chukchi is “complete” along with it. Here’s the latest from the Anchorage paper:  

The federal Minerals Management Service this week deemed Shell Oil’s application to drill exploration wells in the Chukchi Sea next year to be complete.

That triggers a 30-day deadline for the MMS to review the plan and decide whether to approve it, reject it or require changes.

A previous Shell plan for drilling in the Chukchi was rejected by a federal judge, who ordered a new analysis of the impacts of the drilling.

Well, the day has finally arrived. Later this afternoon, around COB over at the Interior Department in DC (which, if we know how those folks work, might be as early as 3:30 PM), the agency will officially close down the comment period attached to the Draft Proposed five year offshore energy plan.

This comment period, our readers can attest, has gone on for what seems like 130 years. In reality, though, it’s only been in place a little more than eight months, just enough time for Secretary Salazar to rally his forces in opposition to it, and thus provide himself all the justification he needs to receive these comments with a smile, thank everyone in earnest for sending them in, and then toss ‘em straight into the furnace downstairs.

The foundation for that effort started to be laid last week, when he told a group of reporters that, in “a legal sense,” he wasn’t obliged to lift a finger on this thing for another three years. Later today we’ll hear how many Americans piped up over the past six months to implore the secretary to actually do his job, but this morning we got word for more than one-third of the U.S. Senate that any effort to pocket veto this plan and continue the de facto ban on responsible offshore energy access would not be abided.

The letter, which includes five Democrats and was directed to Sec. Salazar, brings some serious heat. Here are a couple excerpts:

It is more important than ever that the federal government allow for development of domestic offshore energy supplies made available in the [Draft Proposed Plan]. By offering new leasing opportunities, the DPP is appropriately expansive and provides the Department with maximum flexibility to properly utilize our nation’s domestic resources.

Ok – it wasn’t as scorching as we made it out to be. But we’re talking about the U.S. Senate, after all – the cooling <insert appropriate kitchenware here> of democracy.

Complete listing of who signed this bad boy can be found below. If you’re in a spot to thank these group of forward-looking men and women – which includes both of Alaska’s senators, fwiw – please do it.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Lead), Byron Dorgan, Lisa Murkowski, Blanche Lincoln, Kit Bond, Richard Burr, Mike Enzi, Jim DeMint, Richard Shelby, Jeff Sessions, John McCain, Saxby Chambliss, Jim Risch, Mike Johanns, Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Bob Corker, David Vitter, George Voinovich, Sam Brownback, Lamar Alexander, James Inhofe, John Barrasso, John Thune, Roger Wicker, Jim Bunning, Charles Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Pat Roberts, Johnny Isakson, Tom Coburn, Robert Bennett, Mark Begich, Ben Nelson, and Mark Pryor.

Oh, and lest we forget – not to be outdone by their colleagues in the House of Lords, House Democratic energy leaders also got together to send their own fine letter to the secretary, this one a bit more focused on what might happen if Mr. Salazar decides to sit on his hands. To wit:

Without significantly more production, commodity prices can be expected to rise dramatically. The effects of sudden energy price increases are acutely felt by my constituents, many of whom live in poor and rural areas. Offshore exploration can help alleviate these pains by ensuring a more constant fuel supply.

In case you’re having trouble reading the signatories on that one, we’ve gone ahead and done the hard work for you below:

Reps. Dan Boren (LEAD), Mike Ross, Jim Matheson, Solomon Ortiz, Charlie Melancon, Gene Green, Bobby Bright, Jim Costa, Henry Cuellar, Chet Edwards, Jim Marshall, Collin Peterson, John Salazar, John Tanner, Harry Teague, and Tim Walz

We weren’t entirely sure this moment would ever arrive – and who knows? It still might not – but in just four days, the comment period on the Interior Department’s five year energy plan for 2010 to 2015, barring hell, high water or holy hand grenades, will come to an end.

It’s a comment period that started in January, was extended by an additional six months by incoming Secretary Ken Salazar, and, if Salazar’s statements today are any indication, it’s a comment period that won’t get us a single step closer to gaining reasonable access to new offshore energy, at least anytime in the near future.

The Washington, D.C.-based trade pub E&E News (subs. req’d) was out first with the gory details:

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar today said it remains unclear whether offshore leasing plans his agency is crafting will supplant the existing 2007-2012 outer continental shelf program or take effect afterward. …

That [current] plan is in place until 2012. So, in a legal sense, we have until 2012 to redo a plan on the outer continental shelf,” Salazar said this morning. “Whether we take that long or not is something we’ll decide based on the information we collected and the analysis that’s been done during this period. I haven’t yet reached a decision yet on what the next steps are going to be.”

For teachers of seventh grade civics class who previously believed that only the president could execute a pocket veto, observe the maneuver that Secretary Salazar is trying to pull off here. Back in February, when he needlessly extended the comment period by an additional 180 days (on top of the 60 days already established), the real objective was extending the de facto ban on offshore energy exploration beyond the Gulf of Mexico that Congress had kept in place for 27 years, but was forced to let expire in 2008.

Now, with the time for reckoning fast approaching, Salazar informs us that the clock never mattered in the first place. You thought the comment period was six months? Think again: The law says we don’t have to even read those comments for another three years – and assuming we don’t, we’ll have been able to effectively continue the offshore ban that the American people THOUGHT they had gotten Congress to remove in 2008.

Salazar might claim membership in the Democratic party, but, to the extent he decides to sit on these comments and do nothing to accede to the will of the American people (and Congress) on offshore energy exploration, it’ll be quite the undemocratic act, indeed. Let’s hope he doesn’t do that, but let’s prepare as if he will.

Look and you shall find, find and you shall see, see and you shall know – if that’s not contained in some ancient Hindu urtext somewhere, it probably ought to be. But despite being profound, it also happens to be true.  And news this week out of the Gulf of Mexico of BP’s massive new oil find got us to thinking what might kind of energy resources might be lying in wait up here in Alaska as well.

But first, let’s give our friends in the Gulf their due:

British energy giant BP has made a “giant” oil discovery in the Gulf of Mexico after drilling one of the industry’s deepest-ever wells, it said Wednesday, in a further boost for crude supplies.

“BP announced today a giant oil discovery at its Tiber Prospect (well) in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico,” the company said in a statement.

“The Tiber well was drilled to a total depth of approximately 35,055 feet (10,685 metres) making it one of the deepest wells ever drilled by the oil and gas industry,” it added. …

The discovery is larger than BP’s Kaskida discovery in the same geological area three years ago, which contains around three billion barrels of oil.

Talking about a lot of oil in that field – but still, only a relative drop in the bucket compared with what might be available in Alaska. Of course, we’ll never know either way if a few well-connected bureaucrats in DC win the day.

But oh – imagine the possibilities if producers up here were able to unleash new seismic technology that allows them to see 4-D imagery (you thought there were only three dimensions, didn’t ya?) of energy-bearing formation underground. 4-D’s got all the axes covered, that’s a given – but it also allows scientists to observe the flow of energy over time, sometimes in near real time.

That way, we not only know where oil and gas was tomorrow and is today – we have a good chance of pinpointing where it’s going to be tomorrow.

And not for nothing, but we’re likely talking about an epic amount of energy that remains under de facto lock-and-key here. Last spring, the Bureau of Land Management put a conservative number on it:

According to a new Bureau of Land Management (BLM) report, vast untapped oil and natural gas resources exist on public lands in the U.S. These public lands are estimated to contain 31 billion barrels of oil and 231 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, but are presently closed to energy production.

Many of those formal bans have been lifted, but an informal prohibition on accessing those vital resources remains very much intact today. Chief among those informal bans: Interior’s institutional ennui when it comes to discharging its responsibilities in Alaska.

First, the good news. Last week, a federal court issued a ruling that will allow offshore energy exploration to resume in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea. While the ruling is partially welcomed, and increased access to valuable, job-creating resources is helpful to securing our energy security and stabilizing energy prices, the court did not address the ongoing efforts to keep Alaska’s Chukchi Sea region off-limits. That’s the bad news.

Alaska’s NBC affiliate – KTUU – reported this:

A ruling Thursday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has cleared the way for Shell Oil to resume its exploration and development in the Beaufort Sea.

The court’s ruling says the Bush administration was correct in not demanding a new environmental impact assessment for the company’s drilling leases.

The suit filed by the North Slope Borough and the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission alleged that the Minerals Management Service was supposed to have included additional environmental work in its studies before a lease sale took place in 2007.

The court rejected those claims.

The decision allows Shell Oil to continue exploration and development of off-shore oil prospects in the Beaufort, but it does not affect Shell’s leases in the Chukchi Sea, which are tied up with a separate lawsuit by environmental groups and the village of Point Hope.

And while the legal system and punitive lawsuits continue to take aim at safe and environmentally-sound offshore energy production in Alaska, other proposals moving forward in Congress are no treat either. Cap-and-trade, the criminalization of carbon emissions, would deliver a major blow to much of Alaska’s energy economy and to working-families throughout the state. Alaskans are fighting back, though.

This from the Anchorage Daily News:

At Monday morning’s downtown rally, Alaska business leaders and political conservatives argued that the bill will cook Alaska’s goose: future oil and gas production, both onshore and offshore. The rally was sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute and 40 to 50 local organizations, according to local organizer Willis Lyford. The API is sponsoring roughly 20 similar rallies in cities around the country.

Nearly one-third of Alaska’s workers owe their jobs to the oil industry, warned Vince Beltrami, president of the Alaska AFL-CIO, citing a recent University of Alaska Anchorage study.

“This legislation will cost jobs in the long term,” Beltrami said.

For those who continue to cling to the argument that oil and gas exploration is allowed to take place en masse without proper environmental assessment or oversight – or that permits issued by the federal government are a mere formality – consider the press release that just popped into our inbox today from MMS.

“MMS Determines Shell Exploration Plan for Beaufort Sea Complete,” the statement reads. Well, that’s a relief. What kind of plan are we taking about, exactly?

Shell proposes activities limited to the far western area of Camden Bay, including use of one drillship with one tending ice management vessel drilling two wells over the course of one year.

Two wells in the far western end of Camden Bay? Itself located in the remote Beaufort Sea of northeast Alaska? Not exactly a pell-mell rush to drill the peak of Mt. McKinley, is it? Wonder if there’s any way to determine when Shell originally submitted this plan for consideration to MMS.

Gotta love the Internet. This comes from a story published on February 1, 2007:

In a Beaufort Sea exploration plan filed with the U.S. Minerals Management Service, Shell Offshore Inc. has proposed to drill … in the Camden Bay area of the Beaufort Sea … Sivulliq, formerly called Hammerhead, lies due north of Flaxman Island on the western side of Camden Bay. The prospect contains a known oil pool penetrated by two exploration wells drilled by Unocal in 1985 and 1986.

So let’s see if we have this straight: Two-and-a-half years after Shell submitted its exploration plan to MMS, the agency is finally getting around to acknowledging its receipt. At least, though, the work of producing Alaska’s energy for the American people can begin now in earnest, right? Now that MMS has deemed the plan to be “complete”?

Not on your life. In addition to waiting for Interior secretary Ken Salazar to “review [the plan] carefully to ensure that it is technically sound” before being allowed to move forward, the MMS press release lays out just a few last minute things that need to be addressed as well:

Before MMS would allow activity to proceed, Shell must also meet the coastal zone management requirements of the State of Alaska, air and water quality rules by the Environmental Protection Agency, and Marine Mammal Protection Act requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service.

Got all that? Keep it in mind the next time someone tells you that oil and gas companies are marauding about the landscape in Alaska, dropping wells wherever they please. Only if they’ve got the requisite 3,153,032 permits in place first, it seems. And even then, they should expect to sit back and wait a couple years for the bureaucrats to review their application.

Good thing our nation doesn’t have any serious energy challenges to confront…or else a system like this might be seen as downright silly!