In political contests sure to follow environmental deregulation by the administration of US President Donald Trump, offense will work better than defense for the oil and gas industry. The Apr. 28 executive order on Outer Continental Shelf leasing and regulation, in fact, makes offense imperative.
Assessing Trump's first 100 days in office, the New York Times listed 23 environmental rules, regulations, and other policies of the predecessor administration on which Trump "reversed course." Fifteen of those moves relate in some way to fossil energy. The regulated industries think Trump is just repairing damage done by the zealotry of environmental regulation in the administration of Barack Obama. Mistakes include rejection of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, regulation of methane emissions already in decline, and withdrawals of vast spreads of federal land from oil and gas leasing.
Different interpretation
Fans of the Obama approach interpret Trump's moves differently, of course. They see not rational adjustment but rather wholesale retreat from environmental concern. Typical is this reaction to the president's OCS order from Earthjustice Pres. Trip Van Noppen: "In his first 100 days, Donald Trump has pulled out all the stops in attempting to roll back environmental protections at the behest of his fossil-fuel industry cronies." The oil and gas industry must remember it's always one election away from reversion to policy-making that obliges antagonism such as this.
The challenge is to control debate by anticipating two levels of concern and targeting arguments accordingly. One level of concern is the reflex obstructionism typical of climate-change politics. Because hydrocarbons not produced can't be burned, reflex obstructionists oppose all oil and gas work under the fanciful assumption that renewable energy can compensate affordably for the forsaken supply.
In political fights, the industry should identify reflex obstructionism for what it is and refute predictable exaggerations before they appear. Spotting the target is easy. When opponents of a specific energy project give climate-change mitigation as a reason, reflex obstructionism is at work. In his blast at Trump's OCS order, Van Noppen said offshore drilling in undeveloped regions "threatens to harm irreplaceable wildlife, sensitive marine ecosystems, coastal residents and the businesses that depend on them, and our global climate."
The second level of concern is more legitimate and deserves serious, comprehensive response. Offshore drilling and production are risky. The Macondo tragedy of April 2010 imprinted the hazards on public consciousness and wrecked credibility of anyone in the industry claiming accidents can't happen. Macondo happened, and the industry must live with the consequences.
Among those consequences, though, are greatly improved accident prevention and response, toughened regulation, and new technologies for well control and spill containment. A wary public needs to be reminded of the improvement. It needs to be reminded often. Offshore work is safer and more rigidly regulated than it was before Macondo. Industry representatives should respond eagerly to every opportunity to explain why. More than ever before, the industry must continuously earn popular acceptance of its work.
A related challenge is to earn that acceptance despite obstructionist arguments shaped around distorted comparisons. When industry antagonists imply that Trump's executive orders gut environmental regulation, for example, they exaggerate. Environmental regulation was in place when Obama took office. His regulators went too far, testing constitutional limits and in too many cases, such as OCS lock-ups, pursuing the safety of work by precluding work. Trump, in his heavy-handed way, is just pruning the overgrowth.
Similarly, opponents of OCS leasing apply pre-Macondo analysis to post-Macondo operations and regulation. The industry and its overseers have changed. Obstructionists won't acknowledge that. Too few concerned but fairer-minded observers know it yet and need to be told.
Tweets, first impressions
With politics increasingly shaped by tweet storms and first impressions, issue management-for energy as much as anything else-must be preemptive. Especially for the oil and gas business, counterarguments happen too late.
The industry should stress offense in politics and focus aggressive defense against its operational risks.
