MIAMI BEACH, Fla. – Just a couple of days are left to comment on a plan by the Trump administration to undo Obama-era protections for the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. President Trump has vowed to take steps to reopen the ocean territories to oil and gas drilling, saying it would boost the economy and expand America's energy potential.

But, what it will do to wildlife and the environment is causing concern for coastal defender Mike Gibaldi with the Miami chapter of the Surfrider Foundation. He cites the Deepwater Horizon disaster of 2010 as what could happen off Florida's coast.

"Water moves, wind blows, storms come ashore," he says. "Anything that's off or near Florida could potentially bring oil to my family's beach, up the whole coast."

In a poll late last year by the Natural Resources Defense Council and League of Conservation Voters, nearly 60 percent of those surveyed say they would support permanently protecting the Arctic and Atlantic coasts.

The managing attorney for Earthjustice's oceans program, Steve Mashuda, says it's not worth the risk.

"The harm that would be caused by an oil spill, any kind of industrial development of that scale in these waters is counterproductive for the economy that exists along the Atlantic coastline today," he explains.

Mashuda says carbon pollution already is damaging the coastline because global warming is causing the water levels to rise. The threat to wildlife is extreme as well.

"The seismic airgun surveys which are currently proposed for a vast swath of the Atlantic coast, these surveys are incredibly devastating to marine mammals in particular, but also to fish and the zoo plankton that form the base of the food chain," he notes.

Acting Assistant Interior Secretary Kate MacGregor says under the Obama administration, 94 percent of the outer shelf was off limits to development, despite interest from state and local governments and industry leaders. She adds the Trump administration is dedicated to energy dominance.


get more stories like this via email

Several environmental groups concerned about increased offshore drilling have a filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration.

The suit challenges an order by the president to revoke former President Joe Biden's withdrawal of areas of the ocean from future oil and gas leasing. Another related suit wants the court to reinstate a federal ruling that invalidated an attempt by the first Trump administration to undo Obama-era offshore protections.

Christian Wagley, coastal organizer for the advocacy coalition Healthy Gulf, said the suits will not affect current oil and gas drilling in Texas.

"The vast majority of the offshore drilling in the United States takes place in the central and western gulf," Wagley pointed out. "That's Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, and they would not be affected by any of this."

He added if drilling is expanded, it could destroy the ecosystem along the coast.

Devorah Ancel, Environmental Law Program senior attorney for the Sierra Club, which is a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits, said Biden's actions acknowledged the harm expanded drilling could cause in coastal communities and argued President Donald Trump's actions are illegal.

"We are challenging that based on statutory grounds as well as constitutional grounds," Ancel outlined. "The president has violated the property clause of the Constitution, which gives Congress the exclusive authority to regulate federal lands and waters."

Trump said boosting fossil-fuel production is essential to meeting energy demand and maintaining U.S. leadership in global energy markets, but Ancel countered claims the protections would disturb U.S. energy security are untrue.

A 1,086-acre property in Putnam County has been secured as part of the ongoing effort to protect the Ocala to Osceola Wildlife Corridor, a critical pathway for Florida's wildlife.

Located east of Gainesville and midway between Orlando and Jacksonville, the newly protected land will provide vital habitat for species such as the Florida black bear and help maintain the ecological connectivity essential for their survival.

The O2O initiative, a partnership of public agencies and private organizations, aims to conserve 100 miles of natural and working lands forming a crucial link in the Florida Wildlife Corridor.

Lauren Day, Florida director for The Conservation Fund, pointed out the importance of conservation.

"The Florida Wildlife Corridor is critical for so many reasons," Day outlined. "It's protecting habitat for wide-ranging animals like the Florida panther and Florida black bear, especially in the northern part of the state. Even more than that, it's really about protecting our water, our way of life. It's just a really exciting effort."

Day noted Florida's rapid development heightened the urgency of protecting the corridor, which threatens to fragment habitats and cut off wildlife migration routes. According to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the state loses an estimated 100,000 acres of natural land to development each year, putting immense pressure on conservation efforts.

The property will be transferred to the state later this year for permanent conservation under the Florida Forever Program, a state-funded initiative to preserve Florida's natural lands. However, advocates like Day warned more funding and political will are needed to protect the corridor and ensure its viability.

"It's very urgent," Day stressed. "Florida is still one of the fastest growing states in the country, I should say, so, you just have to look around and you can see that things are changing quickly here, so the time to protect this land is now."

Advocates pointed to wildlife data, which show the corridor allows wide-ranging species to roam freely, ensuring genetic diversity and protecting ecosystems to support both wildlife and human communities.

A bill which could approve the injection of large amounts of carbon emissions or industrial carbon dioxide into underground Ohio wells is raising concern.

Currently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency makes carbon storage decisions but if House Bill 358, pending in Columbus, becomes law, companies would be allowed to capture carbon emissions from industrial facilities and bury them underground.

Tom Torres, hydrogen program director for the Ohio River Valley Institute, said U.S. regulators and developers have very little hands-on practical operational experience with the technology.

"This is largely untested," Torres emphasized. "It's an immensely complex kind of operation that is taking place in a very poorly understood geology, and particularly a geology that is also peppered with holes from the oil and gas industry."

In 2020, a CO2 pipeline in Satartia, Mississippi, ruptured, causing 200 residents to evacuate and hospitalizing 45 people. Another fear is carbon injection companies may obtain underground pore space -- empty space between particles of soil, sand, rock and sediment -- without a landowner's consent.

According to the site NationalGrid.com, carbon capture storage removes CO2 emissions, which could help address climate change. But environmental groups note that carbon capture has not been proven at scale and argue that carbon capture and sequestration fails to address dangerous methane emissions from fossil fuel extraction.

Randi Pokladnik, an environmental scientist and activist, said that given the enormous carbon footprint of the entire carbon capture process, it is not a remedy for climate change at all.

Under the newly amended bill, liability for cleanup, disaster response and repair costs would fall to taxpayers.

Pokladnik sees a lack of experience and knowledge in maintaining CO2 transport and injection wells on the part of Ohio regulators, which she called dangerous.

"I think the biggest issue for me, being a scientist, is the fact that the legislatures will only listen to what the oil and gas industry tells them," Pokladnik stressed. "They do not have the science background to be making decisions like this."

Critics said injection wells are not maintained properly and pressurized carbon could affect groundwater supplies businesses and homes depend on.

Carol, Jefferson and Harrison counties are targeted for the storage wells by a Texas-based company, Tenaska. Under the measure, companies would receive extensive tax credits for storing CO2.

More than a dozen groups in Ohio wrote a letter
to legislators outlining the risks that carbon capture and sequestration poses and how the projects could impact Ohio communities and underground sources of water.


get more stories like this via email