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.

Hey, maybe this is the way it’s always gone, but you tell us if you see anything wrong with this picture:

Federal agency (we’ve changed the names to protect the guilty) informs private companies that, after years of environmental assessment, areas offshore Alaska will be available for lease; private company makes good-faith bid for the right to lease that acreage, wins bid, and turns over billions to federal agency; after a few more years of wrangling, federal agency informs private company that exploration may proceed, albeit conditionally; a third-party doesn’t like that decision, and files a lawsuit to stop it; the conversation over the future of that lease now expands to include the third-party litigant, the courts, and the federal agency – but contracted to exclude the company that invested those billions of dollars in the lease in the first place.

Follow all that? In 114 words, that’s basically the situation as it presently exists up here in Alaska. On Dec. 7, we blogged on this very site that Secretary Salazar’s MMS agency had tentatively approved of Shell’s plan to do preliminary work on three of the wells it leased from the government in 2008 – not talking about anything major here, just drilling a couple of test wells to see whether the $2.1 billion investment it made in the area last go-round could potentially bear fruit.

Is it possible the anti-energy groups read that post? Tough to know for sure, but it sure didn’t take ‘em long to strike. Last week, two separate rounds of lawsuits were filed in San Francisco’s Ninth Circus court: one by a long-time anti-energy group here in Alaska supported by national environmentalists, and the other? Well, by those same national environmentalists themselves:

A coalition of environmental groups and Arctic communities has filed a second lawsuit aimed at blocking a Shell Oil subsidiary from drilling in the Beaufort Sea.

The group sued Tuesday, hours after a group that helps manage Eskimo whaling in Alaska filed a similar lawsuit.

Both suits aim to block plans by Shell Gulf of Mexico Inc. to drill two wells off Alaska’s north coast.

On one hand, none of this should’ve come as a surprise to anyone who’s been following this issue with any intensity. Back in September, we passed along some interesting numbers compiled by the Institute for Energy Research on how many energy-related leases have been the object of litigation from these folks over the past few years:

The number of suits filed in federal court to delay, defer or outright deny the development of domestic energy resources has grown more than 700 percent in the past decade; from 167 protests per year between 1997 and 2000, to 1,180 a year from then until now.

How amazing is that? 1,200 lawsuits a year – three-and-a-half separate instances of suit filed each and every day. It’s quite a racket this groups have going, if you ask us – and none plays the racket any better than the Crag Law Center in Portland, Ore. According to its own website, this outfit is responsible for locking up millions of acres of taxpayer-owned land, working to prevent dead trees and under-brush from being taken off the forest floor, and even filing suit to prevent a McDonald’s restaurant from opening its doors. Seriously, guys? You’ve never had the McRib?

In any event, folks who actually live here in Alaska and care about its economic future and well-being aren’t taking the news of these lawsuits lying down. By way of the Juneau Empire (did you know that Juneau’s the only U.S. state capital that’s inaccessible by roadway?), we get word from the governor’s office that the state of Alaska “will intervene” in the case:

Gov. Sean Parnell said the state intends to show its support of a federal decision allowing Shell to proceed with offshore oil exploration.

The governor said the state will intervene in a lawsuit brought by environmental groups challenging the decision by the Minerals Management Service.  Shell plans on drilling three exploratory wells in the Chukchi Sea next year off Alaska’s northwest coastline.

Environmental groups bitterly oppose drilling.

That last line has it right: these groups bitterly oppose both the process for, and the product of, exploring for American energy. We get that. Unfortunately, now that the folks charged with actually exploring for that energy have been cut out of the process, the conversation on how to proceed in the future is now limited to the entities on this list: 1) Groups that “bitterly” oppose exploration, 2) Courts that bitterly oppose it too, and 3) a federal agency headed up by a man who, though not bitter, seems to oppose it right along with the rest.

Oh boy: we can’t WAIT to see how this whole thing turns out.

Salazar: “A key component of reducing our country’s dependence on foreign oil is the environmentally-responsible exploration and development of America’s…resources”

Hallelujah. The Interior Department’s bureaucracy that oversees offshore energy production – the Minerals Management Services (MMS) – finally cleared the way earlier today for responsible, job-creating energy production in the Chukcki Sea. Well, not exactly. But, as Sen. Murkowski says: “This is progress.”

Secretary Salazar didn’t exactly wax poetic, but here’s what he said in a press release entitled “Salazar Conditionally Approves Shell’s Exploration Plan For Certain Chukchi Sea Leases”:

“A key component of reducing our country’s dependence on foreign oil is the environmentally-responsible exploration and development of America’s renewable and conventional resources,” said Salazar. “By approving this Exploration Plan, we are taking a cautious but deliberate step toward developing additional information on the Chukchi Sea.”

In 2008, Shell’s subsidiary paid $2.1 billion for leases during Chukchi Sea Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193. The 2008 sale was included in the previous Administration’s 2007-2012 Five-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program to cover leasing for oil and gas in the Outer Continental Shelf for that five-year period.  The Exploration Plan now approved allows Shell to drill up to three exploration wells during the July-October open water drilling season.

“Our approval of Shell’s plan is conditioned on close monitoring of Shell’s activities to ensure that they are conducted in a safe and environmentally responsible manner,” added Salazar. “These wells will allow the Department to develop additional information and to evaluate the feasibility of future development in the Chukchi Sea.

Sens. Murkowski and Begich were also quick to applaud Sec. Salazar and MMS’s for finally getting off their respective cans and moving forward with a commonsense plan that will create good jobs up here and help drive down foreign oil imports from unstable regions of the world.

US Sen. Lisa Murkowski

“This is progress,” Murkowski said. “Today’s announcement from the MMS is an encouraging sign that Alaska’s oil and natural gas resources can continue to play a major role in America’s energy security.”

“While this represents a step forward, significant hurdles remain before exploration can advance in the Chukchi,” Murkowski said.

US Sen. Mark Begich

“This is another positive step for Alaska’s oil and gas industry. While challenges remain, approval of this exploration plan demonstrates Alaska will continue to play an important role in helping meet America’s energy needs.”

“I will continue to work with Interior Secretary Salazar to include protections that address concerns Alaskans and the rest of the nation have to develop these resources in a responsible manner,” Begich said. “The successful development of these reserves and those of the Beaufort Sea are key to the long term viability of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and the future of the Alaska natural gas pipeline.”

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.

In a letter this week from Alaska Senators Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich and the state’s at-large congressman, Don Young, to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, the delegation writes:

We write in support of Shell Oil’s application for the 2010 Chukchi Sea plan of exploration (POE). As you are well aware, the Chukchi represents what is certainly among the largest conventional, unexplored oil and natural gas fields in the U.S. Shell has spent years of work and billions of dollars to satisfy the complex logistics, planning, and permitting process required by law. We have previously communicated to you this significance of this energy resources to Alaska’s economy, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, and domestic energy security.

So how much has Shell spent? Well, according to the delegations release:

Shell Oil, which early last year spent $2.1 billion for exploration rights in the Chukchi, has been unable to proceed with plans to drill up to two exploratory wells on its leases in 2010 because Interior officials have failed to complete a court-ordered environmental assessment in a timely manner.

The delegation didn’t mince words and was straightforward in their release.

Sen. Murkowski

“This delay has gone on long enough. It’s time to get development of Alaska’s resources back on track.”

Congressman Young

“Natural resources are the lifeblood of any developed country and the Chukchi Sea has some of the largest potential in the U.S.”

And in a separate release, under the headline “Begich Pushes Alaska Oil and Gas Development with Top Obama Officials; Calls for Aggressive OCS Development, Gasline Construction,” Alaska’s junior senator says:

“Alaska has long served as this nation’s energy storehouse and with responsible oil and gas development off our coast and a gasline, we can create thousands of good-paying American jobs, supply American homes and factories with clean-burning energy and improve our energy security.”

Sen. Begich’s release also noted that he’s not afraid to buck the party line and full-court press the administration on responsible, job-creating Alaskan energy development:

Begich urged approval of outer continental shelf (OCS) leasing in Alaska’s Chukchi Sea and said construction of an Alaska gasline project can create more American jobs than any single project on the horizon, at a meeting in his office with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Carol Browner, special assistant to the president at the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change.

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.

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.

Depending on what you count, when you count it, and who’s doing the counting, the operating budget for the state of Alaska tends to fall within the range of $9 – $12 billion a year – 85 percent of which is tied to the discovery, production, and delivery of Alaskan energy resources. Throw in the wages, royalties, and spin-off jobs related to the sector, though, and one starts to get the picture awfully quick that an active, efficient energy industry is key to ensuring basic social services are offered, and basic individual needs met.

Now, the vast majority of those resources are generated either through onshore energy production, or in Alaska’s state-controlled energy acreage just a few miles offshore. Virtually none of it flows from Alaska’s massive energy resource base along its portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). And why is that? Because for 27 years, the Interior Department didn’t let us explore up there. Then the ban was lifted in 2008. And the Courts picked up where Interior left off, denying us basic access once again.

All of that would be fine, we guess, if the area was too remote — and the proposition too risky — for anyone out there to give a damn. After all, ban or no ban, if the area doesn’t have a whole lot of promise, or if the investment needed to find out one way or the other is too great, then it wouldn’t really matter that Interior and the Courts were teaming up to keep the area under lock-and-key.

But there is interest, and it does matter. An article appearing late last week in the Alaska Journal of Commerce tells us just how much:

Shell’s investment in its Alaskan Arctic offshore exploration program has now far exceeded $3 billion, with the company yet to be able to turn a drill bit … About $2.2 billion of Shell’s money is tied up in bids for federal Outer Continental Shelf leases in the Chukchi Sea that are now in limbo because of a U.S. Court of Appeals decision in a lawsuit brought by environmental groups, Pete Slaiby, Shell’s vice president for Alaska, told the Anchorage Builders and Managers Association.

One company, on one project, in one state — $3 billion in investment. Or between a third and a fourth of the entire state budget of Alaska. Pretty amazing, isn’t it? And that doesn’t even take into account the money that companies like BP and Exxon are investing in similar projects above the Arctic Circle as well.

All of this gets us back to the fundamental question at hand: What’s the hold up? How can an energy producer place a bid on a lease offshore, win that lease, pay for that lease, and still not be allowed to drill so much as a test well on that lease?

The Interior Dept. blames the Courts. But, as Shell’s Pete Slaiby tells the AK Journal of Commerce, the Court doesn’t seem to take that position – all it wants, according to Slaiby, is for MMS to send it the right assessment document…which apparently it already has completed!

Slaiby said one positive thing is that the Fifth Circuit Court found the environmental baseline data for the 2009-2012 Arctic sales to be adequate, the major defect in the agency’s work being the environmental risk assessment. The MMS plans to submit a revised environmental assessment to the court this fall.

No problem, right? MMS will send over the revised assessment sometime “this fall,” and we’ll be off and running along the Alaskan OCS. Except one thing:

The company must make decisions on the 2010 summer drilling by December [2009], Slaiby said. … Janis Hastings, an air quality specialist in EPA’s Region 10 office in Seattle, said a draft air quality permit for Shell’s Chukchi Sea program would be out for public review soon … “We’re working on these as fast as we can,” she said.

Little more than 3 months separate now from December. In that time, MMS needs to file an updated environmental assessment, the Court needs to read it, understand it and accept it, and then, if there’s time, EPA’s Seattle office needs to issue a bunch of air permits – first in draft form, then in draft proposed form, and eventually in final form.

90 days left, 900 hurdles remain in place between the American people and at least 25 billion barrels of American oil.