California’s Offshore Drilling Nightmare

Summary

Boiling Point – California’s Offshore Drilling Nightmare (July 30, 2026)

Episode Overview

This episode of Boiling Point, hosted by Miranda Green, explores the high-stakes battle over offshore oil drilling off California’s Santa Barbara coast. Focusing on the controversial reopening of the Sable Pipeline by Houston-based Sable Offshore Corporation, the story highlights the tense intersections of climate policy, state/federal authority, environmental activism, and economic interests. Through conversations with LA Times reporter Grace Tuohy, business professor Severin Borenstein, world champion surfer/environmentalist Sean Thompson, and local voices, the episode illustrates why this local saga has national, even existential, significance.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Beauty and Risk of California’s Coastlines

• [00:09] Sean Thompson, champion surfer, describes surfing at Rincon Beach – an iconic Santa Barbara surf spot, sharing the “sublime feeling” of dolphins surfing alongside.
• [01:11] Thompson: “I'm not anti oil. I'm anti oil in the ocean. Simple.”
• [01:22] Surfrider Foundation organized a “paddle out” at Refugio Beach, rallying hundreds against new offshore drilling.
• [01:46] Personal recollections of the 2015 Refugio oil spill, when a corroded pipeline dumped 135,000 gallons of oil into the area.

2. Santa Barbara’s Oil Spill History as Motivation

• [02:09] Context: Santa Barbara suffered the U.S.'s first major oil spill in 1969 (4.2 million gallons), spawning Earth Day and inspiring landmark environmental laws.
• [03:16] Sean Thompson shares firsthand reports: “Surfers are canaries in the coal mine … today was my worst tar encounter ever at Rincon. The guy got covered from head to toe.”
• [03:39] The Sable Pipeline fight is seen as a “litmus test” for whether a pro-climate state like California can resist federal pressure for more oil and gas drilling.

3. The Legal and Political Battle over Sable Pipeline

• [05:28] Miranda Green interviews Grace Tuohy, LA Times reporter covering the Santa Barbara saga.

• [06:18] Tuohy outlines the operational shutdown after the catastrophic 2015 Refugio spill, leading to the onshore/offshore infrastructure sitting dormant for nearly a decade.

• [08:56] Sable Offshore Corporation, a new company spun off from Exxon, aggressively pursued restarting the pipeline soon after the Trump administration’s return in 2025, seeing a regulatory opening.

  • “It kind of fit into this new platform that the Trump administration was bringing back.” (Tuohy, [09:41])

• [09:57] National ramifications—Trump’s executive orders prioritized oil/gas over renewables, leading to a reversal of decades-long bans on new offshore leasing in federal waters off California.

• [11:16] Divergence between California’s pro-renewables stance (Newsom’s administration) and the Trump administration’s oil-centric agenda.

4. Local Sentiment, Activism, and Historical Memory

• [12:12] Santa Barbara’s identity is tied to both oil and environmental consciousness due to repeated spills and the legacy of Earth Day.
• [13:28] Tuohy: “That [1969] helped create Earth Day … and California’s Coastal Act, which has become this monumental environmental law.”
• [15:54] Vivid scene at the California Coastal Commission hearing—hundreds in opposition, from environmental clubs to “the Society of Fearless Grandmas.”
  • "Don’t enable Sable" was a key slogan.
• Sable claimed it was performing minor repairs; the Coastal Commission and locals insisted the work required proper environmental permits.

5. Escalation: State vs. Federal Showdown

• [17:01] Sable began to pump oil after the Trump administration issued an emergency order overruling local and state objections under broad executive powers.
  • Ongoing criminal charges and lawsuits from Santa Barbara County and environmental groups.
• [18:19] Sable fined $18 million for violating stop-work orders; in response, Sable sued the Coastal Commission claiming overreach.
• [19:16] Tuohy: “Sable would not be pumping oil … without the Trump administration’s help.”

6. Unprecedented Federal Intervention

• [19:57] Sable’s executive James Flores directly lobbied high-level Trump administration officials, resulting in a formal emergency order and personal visits by cabinet secretaries.
  • “Nothing really says we support this project like an in person meet and greet.” (Green, [21:25])
• [22:07] The controversial use of the Defense Production Act—typically reserved for wars or health emergencies—now deployed to force offshore oil production. California AG Rob Bonta is challenging this legal stretch.

7. What’s at Stake—State Autonomy & National Implications

• [24:09] Tuohy: “This is not a fight that California wants to lose … it also has a lot of implications for how states will actually be able to have some oversight.”
• [25:37] Green: The battle is a “litmus test” for state rights, echoing fights over vehicle emission standards and gas car bans.
• [26:43] Sable is using federal authorities to “plow ahead,” bypassing typical California regulatory processes—mirroring broader tensions under Trump’s federal policies.

---

Economic Arguments – Separating Fact from Spin

1. Is More Oil Good for California Consumers?

• [28:52] Severin Borenstein, UC Berkeley: “The idea that production of an additional amount of crude oil in any location in California is going to substantially move California gasoline prices is just really not well founded.”
  • Additional oil from Sable is “barely a drop in the bucket” compared to the global oil market ([29:16]).
• [30:00] Borenstein debunks “energy independence” rhetoric—domestic drilling does not insulate consumers from global oil shocks.

2. Oil’s Economic Tradeoffs

• [30:55] Borenstein: Acknowledges oil’s high-paying jobs, especially for those without advanced education.
• The risks—“1968 Santa Barbara oil spill and some more recent oil spills demonstrate their real risks associated with it.”
• [31:45] Borenstein: “We should be comparing the economic value that oil production creates … to the environmental risks that it presents. In some cases, it’s worth it. In other cases, it’s not.”

3. Surfing, Tourism, and What’s Truly at Stake

• [32:15] Sean Thompson: “South coast tourism generates $2.24 billion annually, supports 15,000 jobs, and produces $83 million in local taxes. Now Sable oil, 300 jobs and $5 million in annual county revenue …”
• “No one wants all this, you know, to have black beaches.”

4. Legal and Political Escalation Continues

• [32:53] Updates: More lawsuits, attempts to seize land for pipeline expansion via eminent domain, and congressional maneuvers to support Sable’s interests.
• Community activists remain hopeful and energized:
  • Thompson ([33:46]): “I am so hopeful because people have this fire of goodness burning inside them and we are going to fight this fight. We are not stopping. We are not stopping.”

---

Memorable Quotes & Timestamps

• Sean Thompson ([01:11]): “I'm not anti oil. I'm anti oil in the ocean. Simple.”
• Sean Thompson ([03:16]): “Surfers are canaries in the coal mine … today was my worst tar encounter ever at Rincon. The guy got covered from head to toe.”
• Grace Tuohy ([08:56]): "Sable has become almost like a household name in some areas, especially in Santa Barbara County."
• Miranda Green ([21:25]): "Nothing really says we support this project like an in person meet and greet."
• Severin Borenstein ([28:52]): "The idea that production of an additional amount of crude oil in any location in California is going to substantially move California gasoline prices is just really not well founded."
• Sean Thompson ([32:15]): “No one wants all this, you know, to have black beaches.”
• Sean Thompson ([33:46]): "I am so hopeful because people have this fire of goodness burning inside them and we are going to fight this fight. We are not stopping. We are not stopping."

---

Timeline of Major Segments

• [00:09] – [03:01]: Sean Thompson on surfing, oil’s damage, and the human and environmental cost of spills
• [06:18] – [12:12]: Grace Tuohy lays out the history and stakes of the pipeline fight
• [15:54] – [22:09]: Legal battles, public hearings, escalation with Sable, state, and federal government involvement
• [28:52] – [32:53]: Economic analysis with Severin Borenstein, contrasting administration claims with economic realities
• [32:15] – [33:46]: Community voices, tourism vs. oil revenues, and the refusal of local activists to give up

---

Conclusion

This episode paints an urgent picture of environmental, political, and economic forces colliding on California’s storied coastline. The Sable Pipeline conflict crystalizes larger national debates: state vs. federal rights, the persistent allure and danger of fossil fuels, and the test of California’s climate leadership under intense political pressure. Through vivid storytelling and expert voices, Boiling Point demonstrates why what happens in Santa Barbara may shape the future—for coastlines, communities, and climate policy across America.

Transcript

[Grace Tuohy]

This is an la times studios podcast.

[Sean Thompson]

Oh, that wave is so beautiful. It's one of the greatest waves in the world. When the surfer is good at Rincon, you can link up all these different breaks. There's different names for the different breaks. Right up at the top, they call it the indicator.

[Miranda Green]

Sean Thompson is a world champion surfer from South Africa. He's describing what it's like to surf at Rincon Beach, a famous surf spot along the coast of Santa Barbara where he currently lives.

[Sean Thompson]

And the wave comes sort of out of deep water, and then it just bends around this point. It's like a geographic fluke. And it has these beautiful cobblestones. And then sometimes on some days, you'll have a school of dolphins will come through. So you'll be padding for a wave, and these dolphins will be coming towards you, and you jump to your feet and you ride the wave, and then the dolphins are riding with you. It's just the most sublime feeling.

[Miranda Green]

Thompson is an ambassador for the Surfrider foundation, an environmental organization that lobbies for the protection of oceans and beaches.

[Sean Thompson]

You know, sometimes people will beg you for being an environmentalist. Ah, the oil industry employing so many people. And I'm not anti oil. I'm anti oil in the ocean. Simple.

[Miranda Green]

This past May, Surfrider organized something called a paddle out. The hundreds who showed up, including Thompson, were calling for no new offshore drilling. They met at Refugio Beach. Like Rincon, it's another famous spot along the Santa Barbara coast. But Refugio's fame comes from a darker moment in the area's history. A massive oil spill that happened in 2015.

[Sean Thompson]

I mean, I cried when Refugio. This is probably one of my most favorite places in the world to go. This beautiful little bay with the most translucent water. It's just. And then you have 135 gallons of oil from a crap corroded pipeline that was poorly maintained, and it just despoils the beach.

[Miranda Green]

This wasn't the first time that the community had experienced a devastating oil spill. Back in 1969, a spill dumped as much as 4.2 million gallons of oil into the Pacific. It's known as the country's first major oil spill. And the impacts led to the creation of the world's first Earth Day. With this history in mind, in 2015, officials shut down the cracked 128 mile pipeline. It laid dormant for a decade until late last year when its new owner, Sable Offshore Corp, Called in a favor to some higher ups. Who did they reach out to?

[Severin Borenstein]

I ended the radical left's war on American energy, terminated the green news scam and signed an order to drill, baby, drill. We're drilling. You see where gasoline, stuff like that

[Miranda Green]

oil does naturally occur in the Santa Barbara Channel. And if residents or surfers notice tar in the ocean or on their feet, officials tend to blame natural seeps. But according to Thompson, the beaches have been suffering worse than before.

[Sean Thompson]

Surfers are canaries in the coal mine. If there's any negative pollution aspect in the water, we're the first to see it. I mean, I got this letter yesterday, a text yesterday from my mate, and he says, in all the years I've lived here, surfing since the 70s, today was my worst tar encounter ever at Rincon. The guy got covered from head to toe.

[Miranda Green]

What's happening right now with Sable Pipeline may seem like a hyper local story, but it's also becoming a litmus test for how communities can resist the federal government's push to increase oil and gas drilling across the country. Already, a major battle is brewing here between environmentalists, the California Coastal Commission, the State of California, and Sable here in Santa Barbara.

[Sean Thompson]

You know, we, we couldn't understand how local regulations were being subverted. It was just stunning.

[Miranda Green]

On a deeper level, the current battle is highlighting a more existential question. If the nation's self proclaimed pro climate state can't ward off the Trump administration on its own coastline, can anyone? From LA Times Studios, this is Boiling Point. I'm your host, Miranda Green.

[Sean Thompson]

When you hear the name Cheech Marin, you probably think, one thing I made

[Severin Borenstein]

my first record when I was five

[Grace Tuohy]

was

[Severin Borenstein]

it was a Mexican song.

[Sean Thompson]

Welcome to season two of Making Los Angeles the show where we get to know the people who helped define this

[Miranda Green]

city, like Alex Cohen. And I vowed, I'm like, I'm never coming back to this godforsaken city. And then, sure enough, here you are. Yeah, and here I am. I'm Glenn Gritzner.

[Sean Thompson]

Tune in to the latest episode of Making Los Angeles. Wherever you get your podcasts.

[Miranda Green]

Today I'm speaking with Grace Tuohy. She's a reporter at the Los Angeles Times who's been following the Santa Barbara Sable saga. Hi, Grace. It's so great to have you on the show.

[Grace Tuohy]

Thanks so much for having me. Happy to be here.

[Miranda Green]

So, Grace, you've been covering the ongoing battle up the coast in Santa Barbara for a couple weeks now, or a couple months now, and it's all over the fate of this pipeline. The heart of the argument seems to be that the owner of the pipeline, Sable Offshore Corporation, which is a Houston based company, wants to start start using this pipeline that's been out of service for over a decade now to bring more oil from offshore oil rigs to the mainland. But the county and the state seem to be fighting back against this. Can you explain to me how this entire fight got started? Why did the pipeline stop working to begin with?

[Grace Tuohy]

Yeah, so there's a lot of history here, and this recent battle that we're in has really been more than a year now, which is kind of crazy to think about. There's been this back and forth between Sable and the state, and as you said, it's escalated to include the federal government as well. But this really goes back to, I want to say, 2015, but it's even before that. So this offshore operation had been in effect for a while, but in 2015, there was this pipeline burst and oil exploded from this pipeline. It was actually a portion of the pipeline that was onshore and near Refugio State Beach. And so it's actually known as the Refugio Oil spill. And so, you know, hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil came out of this pipeline in 2015. It was onshore, so it's kind of a confusing situation. It was an onshore pipeline, but it was so close to the beach that most of the oil spread into the ocean. It was devastating for the local region, but also for the environmental impacts that it had. You know, there was a lot of impacts to animals and to just the beaches and to water quality, things like that. Millions were spent to try and clean up this oil spill. And so after this happened, the companies that own the pipeline and the offshore oil closed down the whole operation. And so it includes three offshore rigs, so where they were actually pumping the oil and pipelines that sent that oil onshore, a big processing plant onshore in Santa Barbara county, and then two pipelines that would transport that oil. And so that whole thing shut down after the 2015 spill, which is really where this all starts. And for a decade, it kind of sat there idle. The companies were monitoring it, but there was no oil being pumped, no oil being transported.

[Miranda Green]

It. Yeah, I kind of remember this fight because I'm actually from the region, and so I was following this pretty closely. And it was about 11 years that this pipeline wasn't being used. And at the time, there were conversations about how to transport this oil. There were conversations about maybe there being trucks doing this instead, ways to circumvent the pipeline. But the pipeline kind of stayed idle. And the owner of the company at the time was Exxon mobilized, and it wasn't really pushing back a ton about this, this pipeline staying this way. So what. What changed? Why all of a sudden, has this pipeline come back into the news more than a decade later?

[Grace Tuohy]

Yeah, so Exxon, like you said, was the owner at the time. And what happened was this new company formed, and Exxon made this transfer of most of the infrastructure over to this company called Sable Offshore Corporation. You'll hear that name a lot. So Sable has become almost like a household name in some areas, especially in Santa Barbara County. And so Sable, they really wanted to spend a lot of money to bring these pipelines back online, do repairs, do restorations. You know, they didn't explicitly say this, but Trump was coming back for his second term and was much more open to, you know, using these greenhouse gases and kind of bringing them back to life, especially ones that maybe were shut down or not used anymore. And so it kind of fit into this new platform that the Trump administration was bringing back. And so that was end of 2024.

[Miranda Green]

I think that that's a really great segue to get into kind of what has been happening nationally. I think it's important to note that there has been a lot playing out in the federal government in terms of its positioning on oil and gas. As you mentioned, the Trump administration. When Trump came into office, one of the first executive orders that he put was about reestablishing energy and national security, and oil and gas was definitely at the forefront of one of his plans about having more access to energy and kind of eschewing offshore wind and solar as a result of that. And I think the Trump administration made it very pretty clear that it was doubling down on offshore oil extraction. As a result of that, the Interior Department announced last year that they'd be opening up new lease sales in federal waters, including off of California's coast, which be the first time that they've done that in decades. And just this spring, the Interior Department followed up with a proposal to open up leasing in federal waters off of California's coast for the first time since 1984. So it seems like Sable almost saw a little bit of the tea leaves here when it decided that it was going to push to restart this pipeline's use.

[Grace Tuohy]

It is this really interesting juxtaposition because California, for the last few years, if not decades, has been moving into this more green energy agenda. We've seen Newsom's administration really embrace that in a lot of ways. And so it's been kind of this diverging paths We've seen from California and now the Trump administration. And I feel like Sable has actually really become this almost sticking point of this issue where you see California really trying to be moving away from oil. If there is oil, there's a lot of regulations and a lot of safety requirements that California wants to see. Where the Trump administration, I would say, is going the other way completely. And Sable has capitalized a bit on this moment with the Trump administration, you know, being so friendly towards oil.

[Miranda Green]

You hit on such an important point and such an interesting distinction here, too, is we have to think about this. As you know, Santa Barbara is a small seaside town. It's located about an hour and a half to two hours north of Los Angeles. It's kind of known for its tourism. It's got some wine. It's got tons of beautiful beaches. It's got a lot of surfing. And so, obviously, what happens to those beaches is really important to the economics of the town. And the history of the town actually has a lot to do with oil and gas drilling. Like the rest of the state, you know, black gold has been an important part of some of its early economic driving, and some of it's a lot of the money that has been found in the area. A lot of the. The oil is still pumped onshore and offshore. But an oil spill is actually, you know, a major history of the town. And I think that that might be one of the reasons why locals, you know, still think about oil as something to be concerned about. 1969 was the first historic oil spill that ever happened in the nation's history and actually led to modern day Earth Day because of how devastating it was. You know, Grace, you've been doing reporting on the ground there. I wonder, is that sentiment still something that people think about when they think about what stables trying to do?

[Grace Tuohy]

I think 100% you talked about that oil spill in 1969. I mean, that helped create Earth Day across the nation, but it also helped usher in California's Coastal act, which has become this monumental environmental law that helps protect California's coasts, helps keep them available for the public to use. It does a lot of different things. It also, you know, helped establish, you know, a lot of the laws that do regulate what industries and how industries can operate along the coast, including oil and gas. And so I think that really looms large in a lot of locals who live in this area. I was able to attend the California Coastal Commission hearing, which was one of the only public hearings that has really reviewed what Sable was doing before it started pumping Oil again. And the California Coastal Commission was really concerned about what Sable was doing with its either repair or, you know, major restoration work along the pipeline. They were arguing that this was pretty transformative work and the repairs and the repair work they were doing was. Was much more than. Than minor repairs. And, you know, representatives from Sable were there. There were also workers from Sable who, you know, there are people working out on these offshore wells and working on the pipelines and the processing plants. And so there were people like that, but there were hundreds who came out against Sable. There were signs. I think one of the slogans that has continued is don't enable Sable. And people holding up red shirts, you know, saying, you know, no oil in Santa Barbara. Most people there remember 2015 really prominently in their mind in that oil, the Refugio oil spill, and they do not want to see that, that happen again.

[Miranda Green]

So it sounds to me like Sable's plans were kind of met with opposition from the get go. And there's a kind of important distinction here that you keep on bringing up about the extent in which the repairs were. Because I believe it's because if they were to do more than simple repairs, they needed a permit to do. So what has happened since these. The contentious, small repairs have happened? Has there been pushback from the local government and the state government about this?

[Grace Tuohy]

Yeah, so this hearing that I was at where hundreds came out and it was. I like to mention this because there was also a middle school that brought, you know, their environmental club. And, you know, so there were like these 11 and 12 year olds who wanted to speak about this. So I think it just shows. And then I think there was a group called, like, the Society of Fearless Grandmas who came out to this meeting. You know, there was every, you know, age, every demographic was really out at this hearing, but this was really the start of it. And this was when Sable was saying, you know, we are following the law. We're doing what we need to. And the Coastal Commission was saying, you are not. And it really has escalated from there. So that was April 2025. It's been more than a year since then. The Santa Barbara county has filed criminal charges against Sable, saying that they have not followed, you know, air quality laws.

[Miranda Green]

So the. The battle between Sable and Santa Barbara has been contentious. And Sable actually, after it did these minor repairs, went ahead with starting to pump some of this oil, correct?

[Grace Tuohy]

Yes. So they essentially claimed that the Coastal Commission didn't have jurisdiction over what the Coastal Commission said they have jurisdiction. And so it's become this really long legal battle. The Coastal Commission continues to say that they should have stopped the work when they didn't have the right permits. Sable feels differently. And it's escalated to several different legal battles. There's criminal charges in Santa Barbara county that have been filed over environmental laws that were violated by sable. There's also been environmental groups have filed lawsuits saying that they haven't followed the right protocol, both the state and Sable. And now it's really escalated to the federal government getting involved. And they started pumping oil because the federal government got involved. The Trump administration issued this emergency order under some really interesting legal framework saying that this was necessary. And so, yes, they are now pumping oil pretty much using the framework that the federal government can supersede any state or local laws that might have been stopping them previously.

[Miranda Green]

Yeah, it sounds pretty messy. Sable was fined back in April the $18 million for defying the Coastal Commission's, I think, two of their stop work orders. And then Sable actually has since sued the Coastal Commission, basically claiming that they don't have jurisdiction and that they are stopping them from operating their business, which, you know, the pipeline is a major componen to get that oil from the offshore oil rigs to the markets. But I think what is so fascinating about this specific instance that makes it a story that's not just about a town fighting against an oil company is that there has actually been direct involvement from the White House here. So I wanted to talk about, how did this happen? How did Sable get, as you mentioned, these kind of emergency orders from the White House? What role has the Trump administration played in helping Sable directly?

[Grace Tuohy]

Sable would not be pumping oil, I don't think, right now, without the Trump administration's help. And so when SABLE continued to not reach the requirements that California said were required to restart this pipeline, they started appealing directly to the Trump administration, to the Secretary of Energy. And you talked about that emergency declaration, energy declaration, when Trump first took office and just talking about how oil was a big priority. They said this would really help California's oil market, help US Oil markets, and pitched this as kind of like a priority that they should jump on board with.

[Miranda Green]

And this was, I mean, this was pretty direct, right? The Sables. Sables executive James Flores, he actually wrote to Secretary Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum asking them for help, and it was done. And he has been pretty open about this, almost like saying, I asked them for this because I felt like there was no other direction I could go. And he knew that they were pro offshore oil drilling and development. And they also were heading this new National Energy Dominance Council, which specifically is tasked with expediting priority projects having to do with oil and gas. And the council made it pretty clear as of this winter, this February, that it was taking this on as essentially a project of theirs. And then the Trump administration this year announced that he was going to be expanding and rewriting the Defense Production act, essentially extending that so that more areas could be opened up to offshore oil in federal waters. And not long after that, Secretary Wright essentially announced that Sable should begin pumping. And so it did. And then I will say in a really personal way, just this past June, Wright and Burgum, they visited Santa Barbara and they actually toured Sable's offshore oil rig. So nothing really says we support this project like an in person meet and greet.

[Grace Tuohy]

Yeah, I think that was a really big deal for them to fly out here. As much as Sabol wants to say this is a massive operation, it's a relatively small oil operation off a small area of Santa Barbara. And I think it shows a lot that these really high level Trump officials came out here and they were able to use. You talked about that Defense Production Act. It's never really been used in this way before. I talked to some experts who, you know, it's, it was used in COVID 19 to help get. It's really about, you know, producing more face masks.

[Miranda Green]

Right, exactly.

[Grace Tuohy]

Face masks that helped with, I believe, vaccines as well. You know, these, these things that like big factories are helping produce. And I believe it has a, it has a big history in our country, but it's usually used in these, like, emergency situations, you know, major wars. Covid19 and so for it to be used in this way to help start Sable back up and help them begin pumping oil was really different. And that's also been challenged by the California Attorney General. Rob Bonta has filed a suit, you know, questioning that authority, questioning how the law can be used in that way. And so just to like paint a picture of kind of where we are, I believe there's 14, 15, maybe 16 lawsuits right now related to this Sable case from, you know, local Santa Barbara county up to state, you know, appeals courts in California and in federal court as well. But we haven't really gotten a big enough ruling to really change where they are right now. I think Sable has continued to rely on that Trump order. You know, a presidential order is a big deal. And they have that emergency order from Trump and from the Secretary of Energy that really jump started this. And that's what they continue to rely on.

[Miranda Green]

We'll be right back after a quick break. So I know this is a small town fight, but it really does seem to have national implications here. How are people viewing this battle between local leadership and state leadership, the oil industry and the Trump administration? Do they believe, like, the fate of the Sable pipeline can be perceived as a sign of what could come elsewhere nationally?

[Grace Tuohy]

I think there's a reason that California has really, you know, thrown a lot of its defense behind this. This is not a fight that California wants to lose. They do find it. I think a lot of officials see this as significant for it. You know, it might not be offshore oil, it might be onshore oil or it could be, you know, fracking or it could be, you know, we've seen it in wind development and things like that. So I think it's a big question how Sable will play out and what it will mean for the nation's energy policies and energy projects. I think it also has a lot of implications for how states will actually be able to have some oversight. You know, we still use a lot of oil in the United States. It's not like we have transitioned away. We have not completely transitioned away in California either, despite a shift in policy and a shift in platform. And so oil is still needed. But something that I continue to hear from state regulators is that there are laws in place and there are processes in place to make it as safe and as clean and as minimizing harm as much as possible. And so I think there's a lot of concerns about how California and other states will have a say. Yeah.

[Miranda Green]

And I think beyond the offshore oil conversation too, it almost feels like this is becoming a bit of a litmus test about state autonomy. You know, the Trump administration has challenged California in a lot of ways, including its policies about having electric vehicle sales and phasing out gas powered cars. It's challenges its rights to set emission standards. And this is just one other example of how it's challenging its policies, which have essentially stopped any sort of offshore oil, new offshore oil drilling and rigs from being established for decades. And it's throwing that kind of identity and those policies into question here. So it feels to me like this is opening up a bigger kind of can of worms about what the federal government can do over states rights. And I can see why California, and especially the leadership, as you mentioned, AG Robanta and Gavin Newsom, who may or may not have political presidential ambitions going forward. This is not a fight they want to lose for various reasons.

[Grace Tuohy]

Yeah. And it's been interesting to see how it plays out, because I think initially this was a fight for environmentalists in California. When it first started and California was working with Sable, they were trying to make sure that they had the coastal permits they needed. They were trying to make sure they were meeting the fire marshal standards for pipelines. And it was kind of an ongoing back and forth process. And then it really felt like something shifted and SABLE was like, we're going to go straight towards the federal government and kind of want to almost ignore California and the regulations and the laws here. And it's really interesting because offshore oil, these rigs are in federal waters, and that's why there is some real federal oversight here. But the pipelines are in, you know, state waters and on state land, and the processing plant is in California. But really seeing how there's been this shift and how Sable is kind of just plowing ahead with this project and the lawsuits are just piling up behind it has been really fascinating and I think is what we've seen in a lot of how the Trump administration has operated in some of its policies and some of its decisions, almost like a act now, ask for forgiveness or permission later. And that's not how California has usually done things.

[Miranda Green]

Grace, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate your great reporting on this issue, and I look forward to having you back.

[Grace Tuohy]

Thanks for having me.

[Miranda Green]

There's been a consistent thread in the White House's messaging when it comes to increasing oil and gas development. They argue it's for national security and the economy. The administration says one of the most obvious ways that Americans will see the benefits of increasing drilling is at the pump. I wanted to investigate how legitimate those claims are, especially in the context of the Sable pipeline.

[Severin Borenstein]

The idea that production of an additional amount of crude oil in any location in California is going to substantially move California gasoline prices is just really not well founded.

[Miranda Green]

I asked Severin Bornstein, a business professor at UC Berkeley, whether reopening the Sable pipeline would have any kind of economic impact for Californians with gas prices.

[Severin Borenstein]

Well, it's not going to be a significant amount because we need to compare it to the entire world oil market, because that's what sets the price of oil. And compared to the entire world oil market, it's barely a drop in the bucket.

[Miranda Green]

But what Borenstein is saying runs counter to the claims made by the Trump administration. When two of Trump's cabinet secretaries visited Sable's offshore oil rigs this past June, they spoke specifically about how Trump was 100% right in using an emergency order to increase oil production to help in wartime needs. So when you hear these two different perspectives, who is telling the truth, which is right?

[Severin Borenstein]

It's clear that this is not for the benefit of US Consumers. It is benefiting the producers. It is benefiting workers in the industry. But the idea that energy independence, even if this was needed for it, protects Americans from spikes in the world market is just not accurate. And the proof has been the last four months the US has been exporting oil. And yet when the price of crude oil went up in the world market, our gas prices went up just as everybody else's did. So producing more oil offshore in California is not going to protect us from an oil price spike at the pump.

[Miranda Green]

It's important to note that the oil industry does produce revenue, but it also creates risk.

[Severin Borenstein]

Oil production creates a lot of high paying jobs. And particularly for people who don't have a lot of education, they can make much more money in this industry. And that tapping oil from sources that are less expensive than the world price can make the company that does that a lot of money. The flip side is the 1968 Santa Barbara Oil spill and some more recent oil spills demonstrate their real risks associated with it. And we've just seen overall the risk associated with oil production onshore and offshore that people who live in the area are subject to. So that's the trade off we should be making.

[Miranda Green]

That trade off is a central question at hand.

[Severin Borenstein]

Should oil production occur whether it's offshore or in Kern county or anywhere else in California? We should be comparing the economic value that oil production creates, the job creation, the profits for the firm, to the environmental risks that it presents. In some cases, it's worth it. In other cases, it's not.

[Miranda Green]

For world champion surfer Shawn Thompson, it's the latter.

[Sean Thompson]

So south coast tourism generates 2.24 billion annually. Okay. Supports 15,000 jobs and produces 83 million in local taxes. Now sable oil, 300 jobs and 5 million in annual county revenue compared to 83 million from tourism. So once, Bill, you're talking about a negative impact of hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to our tourism industry and also to the well being and upliftment of the people. No one wants all this, you know, to have black beaches.

[Miranda Green]

California's leaders seem to acknowledge this. Last week, California Attorney General Rob Bond filed a second lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging another permit it issued to allow Sable to transport its gas through two other California onshore pipelines. The lawsuit came as Sable submitted a request to the Trump administration last week to seize the land around its Santa Ana's pipeline through eminent domain. Days later, a Texas congressman put an amendment into the annual defense policy budget that would allow the Pentagon to do just that. The House approved the bill on Friday with the new language intact. Thompson doesn't know the fate of the Santa Barbara channel, but he said he's able to stay positive because of the locals like him who are speaking up.

[Sean Thompson]

I am so hopeful because people have this fire of goodness burning inside them and we are going to fight this fight. We are not stopping. We are not stopping.

[Miranda Green]

Thank you for listening to Boiling Point. I'm your host Miranda Green. Special thank you to LA Times reporter Grace Tuohy for joining the show today. My producers are Mary Knopf and Jonathan Shiflett of Studio Phonic. Additional production help from Audrey Ngo. Sound design by Jonathan Shiflett, Monte Morin and Ingrid Lobet are our editors. Director of Post production is Patrick Stewart, senior Sound Record engineer is Nick Norton, our podcast Marketing Manager is Bryn Jora, our senior Media Manager is Kelsey Rodriguez and our Director of Marketing Operations is Nicole Adderholm. Special thanks to LA Times Studios President Anna Migzonian. President and Chief Operating Officer of the Los Angeles Times is Chris Argentieri. Executive at Editor of the Los Angeles Times is Terry Tang. Boiling Point is executive produced and co created by Darius Derek, Sean.