Trump wants oil drilling off the coast of California. But does anyone else?

LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration reportedly has plans to open the waters off California’s coast to new oil and gas drilling for the first time in four decades, drawing swift condemnation from Gov. Gavin Newsom, lawmakers and environmental groups who say it would be disastrous for the state’s environment, economy and clean energy targets.

Whether energy companies would be interested in such leases is another question. Experts say the resources are limited and oil majors may not clamor for leases that could ensnare them in the Golden State’s stringent environmental policies.

Trump has focused heavily on increasing fossil fuel production in the United States, yet some say offering the opportunity to drill in the Pacific is more likely a political move from an administration that has repeatedly targeted California’s green ambitions.

Details of the administration’s plan are still emerging, but maps from the Bureau of Ocean Energy identify four West Coast planning areas, three off the coast of California and one off Oregon and Washington. The administration is planning to propose up to six offshore lease sales off the coast of California between 2027 and 2030, according to internal documents first reported by the Washington Post.

Officials with the U.S. Interior Department declined to comment, citing the U.S. government shutdown. Last month, the administration also announced plans to open the entire 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas leasing, which Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said would create jobs and strengthen U.S. energy independence.

California has about two dozen operating oil platforms in state and federal waters, some of which are visible from the shore in different parts of Southern California. But new leases have not been granted in federal waters since 1984, in part due to strong opposition stemming from a 1969 oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara that spewed an estimated 100,000 barrels of crude oil into the water and helped jumpstart the modern environmental movement.

The years that followed saw a string of actions to protect the Outer Continental Shelf from oil and gas development, including bipartisan actions from the state, Congress and presidents including George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama. In January, President Biden signed an executive order protecting more than 625 million acres of the U.S. ocean from offshore drilling, which Trump repealed on his first day back in office.

Oil companies have expressed some interest in new offshore leases. The American Petroleum Institute and other leading oil and gas trade groups encouraged the Trump administration in a June letter to evaluate and consider all areas of the Outer Continental Shelf for oil and gas drilling, noting that “continuous exploration and drilling will be needed” to ensure long-term energy security and meet U.S. energy demands into 2050.

But the opposition from California could be strong. The state has set ambitious climate goals, including reaching 100% carbon neutrality by 2045.

“Nobody really wants offshore oil, except for maybe Texas and Louisiana,” said Clark Williams-Derry, an energy industry analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “In my mind, this is at least in part politically motivated rather than substantively motivated.”

Trump — who received record donations from oil and gas companies during his 2024 presidential campaign — has moved to block clean energy projects in the state and repeal its authority to set strict tailpipe emissions standards, among other challenges.

Williams-Derry noted that offshore oil drilling is a speculative and risk-laden venture for oil companies, and prospects are better in fracking basins in Texas and New Mexico.

The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s most recent federal assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Outer Continental Shelf estimates there are about 9.8 billion barrels of untapped oil off the coast of California — the majority off Southern California — compared with about 29.6 billion barrels in the Gulf of Mexico.

Offshore oil platforms often send oil ashore, requiring pipelines and other infrastructure. California isn’t likely to cooperate with that onshore work, and in fact has built up something of a “blue wall” of opposition to offshore drilling through local resolutions and legislative efforts, according to Richard Charter, senior fellow with the nonprofit Ocean Foundation.

A network of state laws such as the longstanding California Coastal Sanctuary law, the California Coastal Act, the California Environmental Quality Act and a 2025 assembly bill would effectively prevent oil companies from using existing oil and gas infrastructure in state waters to export or bring ashore new production from federal offshore leases, Charter said. State waters are the first three miles offshore.

“I think we have as many layers of protection as it is possible to get — certainly more than any other state,” he said, adding that “the limited petroleum potential is not worth the effort and the risk.”

However, it’s possible that interested oil companies could bypass the state altogether by loading crude onto tankers and shipping it elsewhere, something the Sable Offshore Corp. is now considering for its controversial project to restart oil drilling off the coast of Santa Barbara.

Energy companies have also been making use of floating oil processing centers that dramatically reduce the need for pipelines.

Rumors of the Trump administration’s plans drew sharp criticism from state leaders, including Sen. Alex Padilla, who led an Oct. 30 letter signed by more than 100 lawmakers demanding the administration reverse course to open up the Outer Continental Shelf.

“This is a matter of national consequence for coastal communities across the country, regardless of political affiliation,” the letter said. “It puts our economies, national security, and our most vulnerable ecosystems at severe risk.”

The lawmakers noted that the U.S. already leads the world in oil and gas production, and the industry already holds more than 2,000 offshore leases covering more than 12 million acres of federal waters, but fewer than 500 of those leases are actively producing oil and gas.

“There is no justification for opening vast swaths of our oceans to leasing when existing leases remain largely unused, while imposing mounting environmental and economic costs on coastal communities,” they wrote.

At the same time, any expanded drilling would meet with weakened oil spill prevention and response programs at the the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which have lost about 30% of its staff to layoffs and buyouts and face a potential 50% budget cut.

The Trump administration has caved to at least some political pressure on the issue: The administration largely backed off plans to open the Atlantic Ocean for drilling after reports drew the ire of Republican coastal state leaders.

But advocacy groups say the administration is less likely to give favor to California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom — a 2028 presidential contender — has repeatedly sparred with Trump over energy and the environment. Newsom is currently at the United Nations climate conference in Brazil, which Trump opted not to attend.