Washington, DC– A new study released today takes a deep dive into what energy exploration off the Atlantic coast would mean for South Carolina. The study’s findings: more jobs, more investment, and more revenue. If the federal government would allow South Carolina to pursue energy exploration off its coast the state could expect over 35,500 jobs, $2.7 billion in annual economic activity, and potentially $3.7 billion in cumulative state revenue by 2035. The findings are even more optimistic than a 2012 report by the Palmetto Agribusiness Council which projected 7,500 new jobs, an annual $2.2 billion statewide economic impact, and an estimated $87.5 million in new annual state revenue. The study was prepared by Quest Offshore Resources, Inc. for the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the National Oceans Industry Association (NOIA).
Earlier this year, Congressman Jeff Duncan’s legislation to open South Carolina’s coast for production passed the House as part of the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act. Today, Congressman Duncan cited the study’s findings as further evidence of the major economic benefits of pursuing North American energy independence.
“The findings by Quest Offshore Resources really put in perspective what I have been fighting for in South Carolina. Energy exploration and production is a win, win, win for our state. It creates economic opportunity and jobs, propels our nation towards energy independence, and could help pay down our national debt. South Carolina energy production is not only an economic boon for our state, it also creates a path forward to improve our infrastructure, roads, and bridges. The critical next step forward is to complete the long-delayed Environmental Impact Statement to allow seismic testing in the Atlantic. This will allow us to make science-based decisions on future activities with accurate data.”
“Today less than 3 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) is leased for production. The impact of expanding production to the Atlantic OCS is too great of an opportunity to pass up. Pursuing energy independence in our own backyard, instead of relying on foreign sources of energy, will make South Carolina a safer, more prosperous state to earn a living and raise a family. If the Atlantic OCS is opened by the end of this decade, South Carolina and the country as a whole will benefit greatly.”
###
(Editor’s Note: The above communication is a news release from an elected official and does not necessarily reflect the editorial position of FITSNews.com. To submit your letter, news release, email blast, media advisory or issues statement for publication, click here).
20 comments
Yeah, can’t wait for SC’s own Deepwater Horizon. Great idea there, Duncan. I’m tired of finding sea shells and sand dollars on the beach, tar balls are where it’s at!
While I’m not saying another DH accident couldn’t occur, your statement is akin to stopping all airline travel because a 737 crashed.
The risk-reward analysis falls heavily towards drilling as being the way to go.
Bad analogy. An airline crash hasn’t the enviromental impact of a DH accident.
There is no oil off the coast. That’s been established already. This sounds more like a giant blow job to oil companies to show them little ole South Carolina has their back against those environmentalist meanies.
This study tells the story. You are right. http://www.law.sc.edu/environmental/papers/200841/eas/hill.pdf
The oil industry has owned the Republican Party for years.Hes a Republican.They gave him his orders.He said,”yes sir.”
Thats pretty much the story.
Not in my backyard says SC’s 1st and 2nd District.
And 7th.
Not in my backyard says any South Carolinian with a modicum of sense.
As all the usual suspects come out against Rep. Duncan’s sensible proposal, TBG makes one request….
You can run with:
“There is no oil of off SC’s coast…”
OR
“The risk of a catastrophic oil spill is to great…”
BUT NOT BOTH!!!
Maybe this will help:
Rachel borrowed a pot from her neighbor. When she returned it the neighbor noticed it had a crack. The neighbor asked Rachel to pay for a new pot. Rachel refused, and gave four reasons why she won’t pay for a new pot.
#1. She never borrowed a pot.
#2. She returned the pot without a crack.
#3. The pot was cracked before she borrowed it.
#4. It was an worthless pot anyway.
His proposal faces the usual suspects. There is no desire to turn Charleston into a LNG Terminal piping into the Patriot II and America does not have the refining capacity to handle more oil. I suggest casino gambling for new revenues coupled with consumer durable manufacturing.
Right now the US is producing twice as much natural gas as we consume or export. So why drill now. Why not wait until the gas fields in the other states are depleted then explore the SC coast. The price of natural gas will be higher and the exploration would be worthwhile. Plus it kicks the can down the road another 150 years. so I will not have to see the tar balls on the beach along with the cigarette butts.
That would make too much sense. Never-mind…..
Refineries are more efficient and have achieved higher efficiency, but total domestic capacity has not increased in 30 years.
Number and Capacity of Petroleum Refineries
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_cap1_dcu_nus_a.htm
Total Number of Operable Refineries
1982: 301
2013: 143
U.S. Refinery Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Calendar Day)
1982: 17,889,734 (Highest)
2013: 17,823,659
Yes Sir,drill baby drill,FOR WHAT? SO THE OIL COS. CAN RIP US OFF SOME MORE! All these politicians have been bought off,plain and simple.Look at the price of gas ,heating oil, power bills out the roof,grocery prices, Roads that you need a back brace to ride on! Boy, If these politicians help us anymore, I don’t know how we are going to stand it! So now we are going to let them ruin the beaches too!!!
Not in my back yard is not a cogent argument. Every undertaking has risk and rewards. Mitigation of that risk has a cost. If the cost of mitigation is less than the rewards, then you undertake.
If the cost of mitigation of oil spills, and the frequency that it happens were not less than the mitigation cost, people in Louisiana would have stopped drilling years ago.
Now the question is: is there oil of the coast of SC or not. If there is, and we don’t drill it, someone else will, because we cannot stop drilling outside certain international limits.
But, if you recall, when something happens in the Gulf, the small government LA types expect the federal government to swoop in and save them.
There’s an oil slick on my driveway, but I don’t have mineral rights. I hope they don’t get an easement.
I agree, so long as the wells are located right off Sullivan’s Island, Isle of Palms, Kiawah and Hilton Head. Because the best test of whether this is really safe is whether the rich and connected will run the risk of screwing up their beach house.
Well, I want ’em to start fracking right next to the city wells in Duncan’s home town.